[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

JP & the real world movie go-er

After reading the postings to this list for the last six weeks or so, I'm
convinced I'm probably the least-qualified member of it.  But I'm enjoying
the education immensely.  I actually signed on to get up-to-date because my 6
year old is an avid dinosaur fan, and I like to bring him new information to
pique his curiosity.

At any rate, in following the thread on the JP errors, I think some of you
are forgetting the viewing audience's level of understanding.  How many
average viewers do you think would place chickens closer to T-Rex than a
frog?  For that manner, how many would distinguish between an amphibian and a
reptile?  Far too few, I suspect.  Since the whole DNA thing is extremely
contrived, I don't think Crichton's choice of frog DNA (which was utilized to
explain the metamorphosis of some of the population's  female members into
male members, thereby allowing reproduction) was any more or less supportable
than any other DNA choice.  Crichton himself probably figures that most of
his readers, not to mention Hollywood, perceive frog's as pretty close to
dinorsaurs.  After all, they're all cold-blooded, slimy and green,

I am fascinated, however, with the web - footed T-Rex snagging pteradactyls
from the air.  Maybe this should be suggested for the sequel.  Hell, there
may even be a beer commercial in T-Rex's future.....