Evan123
MemberCompsognathusMay-10-2014 5:45 AMDo you think that some creatures in the upcoming film will be from a time before dinosaurs? Some pretty nasty little beasties lived before the dinosaurs, creatures such as Anteosaurus, Dimetrodon, scutosaurus, Mastodonsaurus, Erythrosuchus and a whole pile more! Do you think we could possibly see any of them make an appearence? I don't know would it be too out there and completely and utterly impossible to clone these animals given their age but if not, I think they would make a fantastic addition to the "park"! What are your thoughts on this?
GhostRodan100000
MemberCompsognathusMay-10-2014 6:01 AMI think they can do it because pteranodons aren't dinosaurs and they appeared in the movies, and I would love to see other prehistoric creatures in the park.
x_paden_x
MemberCompsognathusMay-10-2014 10:30 AMWell, Seeing how Cloning dinosaurs alone is a HUGE Stretch... I doubt Earlier Life forms would have much DNA Surviving... The dinosaurs didn't have much, And most of them were from the Creatacous (The dilo came from the early Trassic, And because of how little Dilo DNA was recovered, The frog DNA Mutated the few Dilo Strands)
I feel that other Prehistoric species, would wreck the Jurassic Park Franchise...
Man fears Reptilian things, Not warm blooded Mammoths...
Life cannot be contained, it breaks walls, crashes through barriers sometimes painfully, but uh... Life uh, finds a way
Carnosaur
MemberCompsognathusMay-10-2014 10:51 AMi agree with paden, we might see animals that lived along side the dinosaurs (mosasaurs, pterosaurs, giant prehistoric sharks, etc.) but the Triassic animals, the DNA just isn't there.
Nature doesn't deceive us; it is we who deceive ourselves.
DegasStudios
MemberCompsognathusMay-10-2014 12:35 PMJust poitning this out, Dilohposaurus was from the Jurassic period. The Early Jurassic period. It would make alot more sense scientifically for the sceintists of Jurassic Park to have recreated recently extonct mammals and birds. But I dont think the movies were going for realism.
Evan123
MemberCompsognathusMay-10-2014 12:42 PMUmm, yes but what then is the deal with those giant dragonflies in the first novel? The common movie goer would not be really capable of making the distinction between dinosaurs and earlier large reptilian life forms, they would just call all of them dinosaurs, same goes for pterosaurs, pliosaurs etc. but yes I respect that it would be a new and maybe not universally popular turn for the franchise, I was just wondering. Thanks for your thoughts on it guys! I still do think some non-dinosaur horrors would be incredible though! Giant amphibians such as Prionosuchus or crocodiles like deinosuchus. I do hope they introduce the larger pterosaurs that existed aswell and do not just focus on the common pteranodon. Regardless, it's looks like the movie is heading in the right direction so it's all good!
Lord Vader
MemberTyrannosaurus RexMay-10-2014 12:48 PMIt is most likely to have creatures that lived along side the dinosaurs, maybe a few from before. Anything is possible though. What I really want to know is what the scary new dinosaur is going to be. I mean, it can't be replacing Tyrannosaurus Rex since it's on the logo for the movie.
Jack of all trades. Master of none
Something Real
MemberTyrannosaurus RexMay-10-2014 4:17 PMJohn Morrison
MemberCompsognathusMay-10-2014 8:39 PMAs long as they explain how they did it realistically then I don't see why they can't include creatures from the late Paleozoic era.
Ian Malcolm: No I'm, I'm simply saying that life - uhhh - finds a way.
Evan123
MemberCompsognathusMay-11-2014 1:19 AMThank you SOMETHING REAL and yes John Morrison, if it was explained well I think it could be very promising!