[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.

David Krentz


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 out?!


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.


- Chris

-------