[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: What do you hate about dino-docs?
I'm curious about how many of you feel about the anthropamorphism
of dinosaurs. That is, turning them into characters who are seemingly
involved in a three act story structure, often with human motives. Is
a "relatable" animal good for science? Could we care for a baby
tyrannosaur who kills a "peaceful" anatotitan? I suppose science has
nothing to do with anthropamorhism, and it may in fact be a dirty
word, but its hard to deny the fact that public interest is generated
by such a concession. Just food for thought.
On Nov 13, 2007, at 7:43 PM, Chris Harris wrote:
Brad McFeeters wrote:
"...If feathers were too expensive to animate, why not avoid
depicting maniraptors in the show? IIRC, they were only minor
"characters" in WWD anyway..... "
Come on, how many kids would jump up and down if they had left them
These are "Raptors!", big scary things with teeth! Kids love that
stuff! How could they
leave them out.
Dino Guy Ralph wrote:
"...the result is that their sequels and
spin-offs perpetuate antiquated stereotypes of scaly coelurosaurs.""
I whole heartedly agree with you there - aside from budgetory
reasons there really is no excuse for this.
JP3 tried to do this while sticking to the original design, but for
continuity reasons they couldn't completely
cover them. Lets face it, while JP's raptors looked very good, the
science for there actual existence isn't very solid. I consider the
raptors in JP a cool movie monster rather than an actual dino.