Jurrasic Park Flaws

Fire Fly · Post by **Fire Fly** » 2005-01-13 03:56am

Since they've been doing it on tv quite often now, I've rewatched one of my favorite movies again, haven't in a long time. But after rewatching it, I noticed how there were so many little problems with the overall design etc. of the whole place that it boggles my mind who on earth would even do it in the first place.

1) I don't understand why they built those electric fences so close to trees (T-rex pad lock). I mean, what if you had a hurricane or tropical storm came and the wind knocked a few larges trees and suddenly, down comes the fence?

2) If the purpose of going to Jurassic Park is to see dinosaurs, why did they build such large habitats with so much fauna that the chances of actually even seeing a dinosaur was going to be low? Its like they assumed the dinosaurs would just be friendly and walk up to the electrified fences, even though they probably know through experience that the fence will hurt them.

3) If some of the plants in the main building were poisonous, why the hell would the Jurassic Park botonists even pick them? I know..."because they look nice" as Ellie says, but still....

4) Honestly, wouldn't you put some door locks on those cars?

Those are just a few of issues that kinda stick out when I watch it. The whole place was so faulty it seemed like it was destined to fall in the first place, even without Nedry. Had the place been built properly, I think it would have worked.

AMX · Post by **AMX** » 2005-01-13 06:59am

1) To make the trees hide the fences.
If you read the book, you might come across a passage telling that the trees close to the fences are actually secured to the ground with rather strong cables.
(Of course, there were some problems with that, too - at least one of these trees had unisolated steel cables, which were too weak to hold it up in the storm, too, and it shorted out the fence.)

2) "Nature-like habitats".
Remember, they added some fancy stuff to lure the dinos into sight during the tours - the Rex feeding thing, the alert call for the duckbills, etc.

3) They were not picked out by botanists.

4) Maybe it's like this seat belt debate thing.
You know, people being afraid of getting trapped inside the car because the belt won't open?
Someone could think it'd actually be safer if they can exit the car.
Stupid, but there are people like that.

Also remember, the place being doomed was an important part of the story.

Trytostaydead · Post by **Trytostaydead** » 2005-01-13 09:02am

It's been years since I read the book, but in regards to all the fauna and the dinasours themselves, the lead-genetist involved actually wanted to do some more changes on them because the dinasours and the environment were TOO real.

neoolong · Post by **neoolong** » 2005-01-13 01:02pm

Trytostaydead wrote:It's been years since I read the book, but in regards to all the fauna and the dinasours themselves, the lead-genetist involved actually wanted to do some more changes on them because the dinasours and the environment were TOO real.

Dr. Wu I believe. He said the dinos moved too fast and they could make them "better."

Which in hindsight might have been a good thing, considering what happened.

Another problem I could see, was that the whole park could be brought down so easily because of how the computers were set up allowing fences to be brought down.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2005-01-13 01:19pm

That and the fact that the computer problems somehow destroyed all of their communications facilities. They should have had redundant systems to support the telephones like people on the mainland have.

neoolong · Post by **neoolong** » 2005-01-13 06:25pm

Master of Ossus wrote:That and the fact that the computer problems somehow destroyed all of their communications facilities. They should have had redundant systems to support the telephones like people on the mainland have.

It's like the whole story was partly made around Nedry being able to bring it down so easily. So obvious flaws had to remain to allow him to do that.

namdoolb · Post by **namdoolb** » 2005-01-13 06:45pm

I should take this opportunity to point out that the whole reason that the people went to the island was because there were safety concerns and hammond wanted them to endorse it to get the legal people off his back.

The park wasn't in a safe runnable state..... that's the whole idea.

neoolong · Post by **neoolong** » 2005-01-13 09:49pm

namdoolb wrote:I should take this opportunity to point out that the whole reason that the people went to the island was because there were safety concerns and hammond wanted them to endorse it to get the legal people off his back.

The park wasn't in a safe runnable state..... that's the whole idea.

Yeah, but there were some really big problems that should have been caught before that.

Darth Raptor · Post by **Darth Raptor** » 2005-01-13 11:16pm

5) Shotguns and shock prods?

At least they had a rocket launcher in the book.

Post by **weemadando** » 2005-01-13 11:48pm

Lazy Raptor wrote:5) Shotguns and shock prods?

At least they had a rocket launcher in the book.

Muldoon was a fucking brilliant character in the book:

Telling off Hammond for not buying him enough LAWs.

Telling off Hammond et al for not putting locks on the car doors.

Wailing on dino's with all sorts of weaponry.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2005-01-13 11:50pm

One could write a book on the flaws in that movie.

Dennis Toy · Post by **Dennis Toy** » 2005-01-13 11:57pm

i never really like the movie...

You guys know that its the same plot as Westworld right?

Westworld was a badly designed ( Maybe i should forgive because it was designed with 70's tech ) park that had 3 parks which were inhabited by androids who could act out western, medeval and roman fantasies.

SyntaxVorlon · Post by **SyntaxVorlon** » 2005-01-14 01:30am

Trytostaydead wrote:It's been years since I read the book, but in regards to all the fauna and the dinasours themselves, the lead-genetist involved actually wanted to do some more changes on them because the dinasours and the environment were TOO real.

Fauna=animals
Flora=plants

Xon · Post by **Xon** » 2005-01-14 05:22am

Darth Wong wrote:One could write a book on the flaws in that movie.

Only a single book? You could create an entire series dedicated to there weres and hows of the flaws instead of just listing the flaws

Vendetta · Post by **Vendetta** » 2005-01-14 02:21pm

Dennis Toy wrote:i never really like the movie...

You guys know that its the same plot as Westworld right?

Westworld was a badly designed ( Maybe i should forgive because it was designed with 70's tech ) park that had 3 parks which were inhabited by androids who could act out western, medeval and roman fantasies.

What? Michael Crichton only has one plot? Who'dvethunkit?

Westworld had Yul Brynner though. Which makes it exactly one Yul Brynner better than Jurassic Park.

Dillon · Post by **Dillon** » 2005-01-14 02:34pm

Don't forget that the characteristics of some of the dinosaurs were changed as well. Velociraptors were actually two feet tall, not two metres. They would have been better off using Deinonychus which are very similar to raptors, but a bit bigger at 4 feet tall. I guess they felt that "Deinonychus" didn't sound as cool as "Velociraptor". The raptors are thought to be pretty smart, I don't know if the movie exaggerated it, but chances are it did.

They also screwed up the Dilophosaurs, they were actually around 10 feet tall, not 5 feet tall as seen in the movies. They didn't have frills, and the venom spitting ability would have been unnecessary as they were the largest carnivores of their time.

I don't recall any actual theory on T-Rex's only being able to see moving objects. Even if so, it would have smelled Grant and the kid, so their defense of not moving shouldn't have worked.

Still though, it's an enjoyable movie if you turn your brain off, and ignore Ian Malcolm's idiocy. It'll always be special to me, since I was a huge Dino nut as a kid. At 7 years old, I had no idea what Malcolm was talking about, so it was just a movie about Dinosaurs ripping people apart to me. And you have to admit, that if nothing else, it had cool action scenes.

Darth Raptor · Post by **Darth Raptor** » 2005-01-14 03:01pm

observer_20000 wrote:Don't forget that the characteristics of some of the dinosaurs were changed as well. Velociraptors were actually two feet tall, not two metres. They would have been better off using Deinonychus which are very similar to raptors, but a bit bigger at 4 feet tall. I guess they felt that "Deinonychus" didn't sound as cool as "Velociraptor". The raptors are thought to be pretty smart, I don't know if the movie exaggerated it, but chances are it did.

The apologists' explanation is that the raptors in the movie were Velociraptor antirrhopus, which IS Deinonychus. Never mind that in the book Wu clearly states that they're V. mongoliensis. Personally, I'm able to accept the large size and bulky heads better than the floppy tails. Dromaeosaurid tails are fused and can only sway at the base. And yes, the intelligence is greatly exaggerated.

They also screwed up the Dilophosaurs, they were actually around 10 feet tall, not 5 feet tall as seen in the movies. They didn't have frills, and the venom spitting ability would have been unnecessary as they were the largest carnivores of their time.

Frills don't fossilize, so that's neither here nor there, but yes the dilphosaurs in the movie were far too small. As for the venom, I can only think of a single poisonous warm-blood, and that's the platypus. The idea of a killing gimick is not plucked from thin air, however. Despite their large size, the teeth of D. wetherilli were long, slender and relatively fragile. Not fantastic for killing, but it's much more reasonable to assume they relied on their claws instead.

I don't recall any actual theory on T-Rex's only being able to see moving objects. Even if so, it would have smelled Grant and the kid, so their defense of not moving shouldn't have worked.

That's not a tyrannosaur trait. That's a frog trait. If you'll read the book you'll notice that the rex wasn't the only one suffering from that problem either. The movie seemed to insinuate that it was a proper rex trait and that it had something in the way of supporting fossil evidence, which is flatly untrue.

Dillon · Post by **Dillon** » 2005-01-14 03:25pm

Darth Raptor wrote:The apologists' explanation is that the raptors in the movie were Velociraptor antirrhopus, which IS Deinonychus. Never mind that in the book Wu clearly states that they're V. mongoliensis.

Wouldn't matter either way. Deinonychus were still only 4 feet tall.

Personally, I'm able to accept the large size and bulky heads better than the floppy tails. Dromaeosaurid tails are fused and can only sway at the base. And yes, the intelligence is greatly exaggerated.

Yeah I figured so. I didn't want to say anything without knowing for sure, but Raptor's opening doors seemed pretty ridiculous.

Frills don't fossilize, so that's neither here nor there

True, there's no evidence for them not existing, but there's no evidence for them either. They could have put the frill on a T-Rex, and it would have had just as much merit (although it would have looked a lot more ridiculous).

That's not a tyrannosaur trait. That's a frog trait. If you'll read the book you'll notice that the rex wasn't the only one suffering from that problem either. The movie seemed to insinuate that it was a proper rex trait and that it had something in the way of supporting fossil evidence, which is flatly untrue.

Ah ok, I thought I remembered something like that from the book. I guess they felt it wasn't necessary to explain that in the movie.

Something else I just thought of. How the hell likely is it that they found 16 different's mosquito's embedded in amber (since they had 16 different species of dinosaur, iirc)? Could a mosquito's needle even penetrate the thick scales that dinosaurs likely had? Why would being embedded in amber cause the mosquito not to rot?

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2005-01-14 03:34pm

observer_20000 wrote:Something else I just thought of. How the hell likely is it that they found 16 different's mosquito's embedded in amber (since they had 16 different species of dinosaur, iirc)?

Not remotely clear.

Could a mosquito's needle even penetrate the thick scales that dinosaurs likely had?

Probably not. Mosquitoes were bigger back then, though.

Why would being embedded in amber cause the mosquito not to rot?

Actually, being fossilized in amber preserves critters really well. They can even (sometimes) recover small vertebrates from amber deposits.

Post by **LadyTevar** » 2005-01-14 03:54pm

observer_20000 wrote:
Darth Raptor wrote:The apologists' explanation is that the raptors in the movie were Velociraptor antirrhopus, which IS Deinonychus. Never mind that in the book Wu clearly states that they're V. mongoliensis.
Wouldn't matter either way. Deinonychus were still only 4 feet tall.

Yet almost as soon as the movie came out, did they not discover Velociraptors in Utah that were the same size?

Spiritbw · Post by **Spiritbw** » 2005-01-14 04:00pm

Yup, in fact one guy working on the movie got a call from a friend who was working on the dig. When he described the dimensions of the Utahraptor the movie guy laughed and said,"You found Speilburg's raptors!" They had known they were to big for the actual species in hte book but they had not thought it would work for the movie.

Darth Raptor · Post by **Darth Raptor** » 2005-01-14 04:45pm

observer_2000 wrote:Something else I just thought of. How the hell likely is it that they found 16 different's mosquito's embedded in amber (since they had 16 different species of dinosaur, iirc)?

InGen owned amber mines across the globe, and I'm no biology expert, so I don't know how blood of opposing types would react.

Could a mosquito's needle even penetrate the thick scales that dinosaurs likely had? Why would being embedded in amber cause the mosquito not to rot?

Presumably they would bite the softer skin inside the ear and nostrils. And if there's nothing present to decompose something, why would anything decompose?

Uraniun235 · Post by **Uraniun235** » 2005-01-14 06:14pm

How about that ridiculously inefficient GUI?

"It's a UNIX system! I know this!"

Rye · Post by **Rye** » 2005-01-14 06:44pm

observer_20000 wrote: Yeah I figured so. I didn't want to say anything without knowing for sure, but Raptor's opening doors seemed pretty ridiculous.

It's not that ridiculous really, I've had cats and dogs that have learned to use door handles. The pushing of it I'd say was all in the speed at which they found out how to open doors.

One of the things that bugged me most in it was when Ellie, Grant and the kids were dealing with the raptors by that tyrannosaur skeleton and a huge frickin' T-rex comes out of nowhere and saves the day. No booms or anything heard beforehand, unlike before.

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2005-01-14 06:47pm

Rye wrote:
observer_20000 wrote: Yeah I figured so. I didn't want to say anything without knowing for sure, but Raptor's opening doors seemed pretty ridiculous.
It's not that ridiculous really, I've had cats and dogs that have learned to use door handles. The pushing of it I'd say was all in the speed at which they found out how to open doors.

One of the things that bugged me most in it was when Ellie, Grant and the kids were dealing with the raptors by that tyrannosaur skeleton and a huge frickin' T-rex comes out of nowhere and saves the day. No booms or anything heard beforehand, unlike before.

It was NINJA T!

Hell, my problem was also the whole "We don't need any weapons to kill these beast...they need protein suppliments to survive."

Both the book and movie do this. When it comes down to kill them...the thing fails horribly and in fact makes you wonder why it didn't have a more immediate effect. Nope...apparently the Dinos could surive days EASILY before they needed their regular injection...and it could be gotten from chickens.