.
Yes, it’s true: until now, I had never seen Jurassic Park. Somehow, the combination of later-career Spielberg with later-career Crichton was always a bit too much for me. Then, too, I was afraid that the film’s science might provoke me into one of my Dull Thudding Rants.
Yes. Well.
However, on the bright side…the dinosaurs are frickin’ awesome.
.
Liz Kingsley is the insane genius behind And You Call Yourself a Scientist!
#1 by Mark on August 20th, 2009
I have absolutely no scientific knowledge whatsoever, so this may be a stupid question, but if you decided to create intelligent life (as in Species or Frankenstein’s daughter), wouldn’t it make more sense to make the subject female?
Just going by homicide rates, aggressive behaviour, etc. it would seem to me that chances are a female subject really would be a better, resp. “safer” choice (of course things might be wholly different if we’re talking about a non-human subject).
#2 by The Mud Puppy on August 20th, 2009
Not really, Mark.
I mean, considering dinosaurs are closely related to birds you’d need to take into account that in several species of bird–raptors (ha!), particularly–the female is larger, more powerful, and sometimes even more aggressive than the male.
Besides, as Lyz suggests, not only might it be easier to guarantee no breeding with males, but in the majority of reptile and bird species, the males are much more colorful and have more impressive crests and plumage. So your specimens would likely be more aesthetically pleasing and dramatic.
#3 by lyzard on August 20th, 2009
OMG – page two!?
Dav – yes, thank you; that would have been my answer. Attenborough was quite capable of playing it either way.
Will – have I told you lately that I love you??
Mark – just to add my two cents to MP’s response, it’s a question of divided motivation. In Frankenstein’s Daughter and Species, while it is overtly an issue of behavioural control, it’s really a comment on male/female human relationships and above all a rude joke at the expense of the (male) scientists, who of course are depicted as socially inept and clueless about women; when that line is spoken in Species, Mr Action Man Hero replies, “You guys don’t get out much, do you?”, or words to that effect.
In Jurassic Park, it’s about biological control, first and foremost; they don’t seem to consider the question of behaviour but, as MP points out, females are just as likely to be larger and more aggressive.
#4 by DaveCausey on August 20th, 2009
Awesome limerick, Will!
I was thinking earlier, if you had InGen’s DNA extraction-and-cloning tech, wouldn’t there be about a billion uses that would be more lucrative then a Dinosaur Theme Park? I:E: organ replacement, limb replacement, blood product, and-since they are eeevil scientists, cloned cybernetic Smilodons and Utahraptors for Weapons Division? ( InGen must have a weapons division!)
#5 by lyzard on August 20th, 2009
Actually, Dave, there’s a beautiful moment in the novel where Crichton shoots himself in the foot by having Hammond explain that he applied his technology to “entertainment” because it wasn’t government-regulated, unlike all the other possible applications. And there was me thinking the scientists were just running wild like the dinosaurs!
#6 by DaveCausey on August 20th, 2009
Hahaha…………..it’s been too long since I’ve read the novel, Lyz.
Just once, back in 1995. I guess I should give it another look.
*thanks for fixing my formatting, too*
#7 by The Mud Puppy on August 20th, 2009
since they are eeevil scientists, cloned cybernetic Smilodons and Utahraptors for Weapons Division? ( InGen must have a weapons division!)
Well, supposedly, had Jurassic Park 4 ever gotten off the ground, it would have centered around the government using Raptor Commandos to fight drug lords.
That’s one of those ideas that’s so ridiculous and stupid that it goes right back around to being awesome.
#8 by DaveCausey on August 20th, 2009
OMG! Raptor Commandos?
Think of the TOYS!
#9 by Braineater on August 21st, 2009
Ridiculous and stupid, perhaps. But how much dumber is Raptor Commandos compared to, say, Guinea Pig Commandos? Because in case you hadn’t noticed…
#10 by The Mud Puppy on August 21st, 2009
Yes, but unlike Guinea Pig Commandos, Raptor Commandos is so ludicrously silly that it becomes awesome. Guinea Pig Commandos are just silly.
#11 by Braineater on August 21st, 2009
That’s my point, Mud Puppy. The stupid cuy* movie got made. Whereas the Raptor Commandos movie remains a tantalizing dream.
cuy (kú-wi) n., from Quechua quwi; Guniea pig, esp. when used as food.
#12 by The Rev. D.D. on August 21st, 2009
That sounds more like a plotline for Carnosaur 4. They’ve mostly had commandos fighting raptors…why not make commandos fighting commando raptors?
And, and, the raptor commandos can have specially designed guns so we could have RAPTOR COMMANDOS WITH GUNS!! And grenades! And kung-fu grip!
As Calvin might say, “This is so cool I have to go to the bathroom!”
Or, instead of all that, they could just let me film that DinoRiders film we’ve all been waiting for…
#13 by The Mud Puppy on August 21st, 2009
Speaking of raptors, Lyz, I’m surprised you didn’t pick up on one of my bizarre little nitpicks, and that has to do with that still of the empty egg shells with the footprints of the hatchlings next to them.
Ever since i saw the movie (at 9, I remind you) it’s bothered me that the footprints unambiguously identify the eggs as belonging to the Velociraptors. Clearly this is a reference to one the deleted subplots from the book, but it’s impossible in the film.
In the book, there were nine raptors so it’s possible — if unlikely — that a breeding pair could have escaped without the keepers’ noticing. (And given that the park is apparently run by idiots, it’s actually quite probable) But in the film we’re told that the “Big One”, a dominant female, killed all but two of the original nine raptors. Considering that all three are well accounted for throughtout the film and don’t even escape until the protagonists try to reboot the entire system, it’s impossible that any of them could have laid those eggs and tended to them — and we never see any hatchlings tagging along on their kills, either.
Thinking about it now, I find it highly amusing that the original novel ended with the looming threat posed by the fact that, as Grant and Gennaro discuss, several of the wild raptors made it off the island. Yet that comes to absolutely nothing in the second novel. Hmm, could that have anything to do with the fact that the film so unambiguously kills off all its raptors? (One by freezer, two by T-Rex) I mean, surely Crichton wouldn’t have sacrificed his professional standards just for a quick buck that way!
Also, I’ve never been able to figure out which of the film’s raptors is supposed to be the “Big One”. I’m guessing She’s the “Clever girl” who dines on Muldoon, and the one who relentlessly pursues our heroes through the control room — but we’re never really given any scene where we’re able to tell that she’s noticably larger than the other raptors.
Lastly, I hate to keep spoiling the surprises that The Lost world has in store for you, Lyz, but if you thought that the T-Rex side-swiping a moving jeep was unbelievable, I can’t wait to read your reaction at seeing a T-Rex do the exact same thing to a city bus.
#14 by Rjschwarz on August 21st, 2009
I always thought they were Compy eggs.
#15 by The Mud Puppy on August 21st, 2009
I always thought they were Compy eggs.
No, if you look closely you can see the footprints have only two toes, and they look exactly like the raptor footprints we later see in the film after Ellie and Muldoon discover that they’ve broken out.
#16 by lyzard on August 21st, 2009
Yes, they’re definitely meant to be velociraptor tracks. I feel doubly aggrieved, being robbed of a swarm of baby ‘raptors both in the facility and in the wild.
What, not with all the stringent security measures in place, surely?
No, you’re right, that whole subplot is impossible.
I love the novel’s subplot about the velociraptors escaping, which involves a pair of them sitting on the deck of the cargo ship in plain sight.
#17 by B. Wood on August 21st, 2009
I do so hope you do the other two Liz.
#18 by Braineater on August 21st, 2009
… on deck chairs, with zinc oxide smeared on their noses and a cheap paperback in their claws, wondering when the waiter is going to bring them their Mai Tais. Silly raptors — it’s a cargo ship!
Muted trombone: Mwah mwah mwaaaah!
Stay tuned for more of Up Your Raptor, the wacky new comedy series from Micheal Crichton! Only on SyFy!
#19 by lyzard on August 21st, 2009
I’d pay good money to see that.
#20 by Dav on August 22nd, 2009
Are we sure they could be seen sitting on deck? All the evidence from The Lost World (movie) suggests they are invisible on board ship…..
#21 by The Mud Puppy on August 22nd, 2009
Well, in the book Tim sees them through his nightvision goggles. From near the T-Rex paddock, I believe.
So, apparently the deckhands on the cargo ship are just really not very perceptive. Of course, it’s rather amusing that the captive raptors attack anybody they see — but the wild-bred raptors seem to have mastered the art of not running around like a rabid dog on PCP.
#22 by DaveCausey on August 28th, 2009
Lyz, I just watched “Jurassic Park” again. As always, the dinosaurs give me goosebumps.
But something occurred to me. Ian’s little ethics speech: “Nature SELECTED dinosaurs for extinction,” isn’t that like saying: “Dave, you’ve got several illnesses that, even though they are managed by meds and therapy, PROVE that Nature does not intend for you to survive or reproduce.” In other words-dino dung.
#23 by lyzard on August 28th, 2009
Yes, it is fascinating watching the line between “taking action” and “interfering” shift according to the philosophies of the speaker.
I also have to wonder how a proponent of the Michael Crichton school of chaos theory can even talk about “interfering with Nature” and “the natural order”, since presumably there *are* no such things, in a world where everything is random and unpredictable. And if everything’s a crap-shoot, then what does it matter what anyone does?
#24 by DaveCausey on August 28th, 2009
LOL. Indeed. Isn’t “Nature” just the flapping of a Butterfly’s wings, or a broken toaster that can send me back in Time? Same-same, right?
Oh, one more criticism: when Alan and Ellie are trying to hold the door against the Raptors, and Lex is rebooting the computer, why in the name of all that is reasonable doesn’t Timmy hand the shotgun to an adult? Oh, that’s right. Spielberg.
#25 by ProfessorKettlewell on August 30th, 2009
All that Nature-As-Agency stuff is creepy…..it’s about a step away from Intelligent Design.