Jurassic World May Be the Most Gonzo Dinosaur Movie Ever

I don’t often have cause to ponder Hollywood gossip on this blog, but how could I resist all the hubub about the next Jurassic Park movie? Much like the weekend’s claims of the biggest dinosaur EVER, the news may not be all it seems, but if the rumors are on the mark, next summer may see the release of the strangest dinosaur film of all time.

The Jurassic World spoilers, courtesy JoBlo.com, promise a completed, functioning Jurassic Park where nervous executives are worried about dinosaurs jumping the shark. (I’m sure that plot point is no way inspired by discussions with Universal studio executives about the franchise.) To spice up the prehistoric attraction, the park turns to Flip-O-Saurus for inspiration and creates a Tyrannocuttlesnakeraptor to draw more dinosaur snacks visitors. Surprising no one, the hybrid abomination starts devouring other dinosaurs and guests alike, the park’s only hope being a team of tame dinosaurs under the command of a dinosaur trainer played by Chris Pratt.

[The Jurassic World plot is brought to you by chaos theory.]

This could all be a diversion. Then again, many of the elements are familiar. The tame, ready-to-rumble dinosaurs are only slightly modified from the dinosaur soldiers in the equally-weird John Sayles script that raised eyebrows a few years back, and having a terrifying carnivore imbued with a cephalopod-like power of being able to camouflage itself against any surface is straight out of Michael Crichton’s depiction of Carnotaurus in The Lost World. Sure, feathery dinosaurs are too much to ask for, but an invisible carnivorous dinosaur that’s able to swallow objects bigger than its own head? Makes total sense.

If the scuttlebutt is on the mark, Jurassic World will be a full-on monster movie. In fact, the franchise itself made this clear in the last, groan-worthy installment in which the fictional Alan Grant reminded us that InGen made “genetically engineered theme-park monsters”, not proper dinosaurs. Fair enough. But I hope dinosaur fans and science communicators keep up on the film rather than roll their eyes at the franchise’s off-the-wall plot. Monster movies give the science-savvy plenty of fodder to talk about physiology, biomechanics, genetics, and other topics that rarely bubble up to the surface of public consciousness. There’s nothing quite like a Tyrannocuttlesnakeraptor to grab public attention, and we should be poised to take advantage of how awesome and awful such movie monsters can be.

13 thoughts on “Jurassic World May Be the Most Gonzo Dinosaur Movie Ever

  1. We’ll see what comes of this. I think Pratt’s role as a “dinosaur tamer” is a little older than this news. I think it sounds a little too far-fetched to work, though. Consider:

    1) They’d have to get all those genetic combinations to roll out an actual animal;
    2) The animal would have to survive;
    3) Long enough to grow to (I assume) adulthood;
    4) Nobody would figure out this is a really terrible idea before then?

    Also, the fact that it’s a hybrid tyrannosaur/raptor is a little too on-the-nose given the franchise. No, I think we’ll see a “new” predatory antagonist, just like JP3 gave us. They could easily Jurassic Park-ify an existing big predator, like Giganotosaurus, and have it start running amok, then Pratt’s “tame” tyrannosaur and raptor buddies have to take it down?

    I’m just spitballing, here.

  2. My issue with the rumor, if it’s true, is there are so many weird and wonderful dinosaurs to choose from, yet the producers felt compelled to go SyFy channel and make up an implausible beast. Worse still, our ideas about dinosaur appearance have evolved since the first film was released, but the director has already poo-pooed the idea of dinosaurs with feathers. Dinosaurs with feathers are ridiculous, but cuttlefishosaurus is not? We already have plenty of other movies with implausible creatures, why are dinosaurs suddenly boring?

  3. This sounds so dumb. I may have to see it just for how dumb it is. XD

    I was wondering if they don’t do feathered dino’s because matching a CG feathered dino to an animatronic one might be a pain in the ass. Like, CG feathers are old hat nowadays, but feathers on a robot or a puppet often look atrocious.

  4. When I was young, monster movies were black and white and it was up to actors and cinematographers to make it look real and scare you. Now I watch just to keep up with computer generated fantasy looking real. Plot? Yeah, right! I really do like the progress they’ve made.

  5. The news is terrifying. I’m a big fan of Spielberg’s movie and I’ve always liked the idea behind the whole project: to show dinosaurs on the screen. Let me be a little childish: to give us a glimpse about the wonderful, weird, alien, Earth of the Mesozoic. I know… scientifically there are so many things wrong in those movies (I’m talking about the first and the second) that is difficult to talk of showing the real dinosaurs (impossible to do): the main point here is the intention of the project. When I was a lad, I was fascinated by the poetry of some scenes, I falled in love with the atmosphere of the movie. With the 4th installment it seems to me that they’re trying to show something totally new just for the sake of entertainment, leaving behind every occasion to show better reconstruction of dinosaurs. I laugh at myself if I think that up to last year I was hoping to watch feathered dinosaurs…

  6. This news to me i take it with a grain of salt guys. Not all rumours you hear are true but lets say if its true this sounds dumb i mean you have tons of dinosaurs you could use this would ruin jurassic park if they do this. It would be the final nail in the coffin killing a good movie series. I mean i want dinosaurs not stupid scfi shit sorry. I doubt the rumours are true but i hope they just bring new dinos and i hope they dont ruin it. This movie could be really good or really bad because of this new director he only made one movie and hes new on the movie scene so and he says he respects the old jurassic park movies but still i have no idea why universal decided to use him as a director its beyond me but im not hating on him we will have to wait and see if he makes this movie great like i said this movie could really good or it could ruin the whole jurassic park series

  7. Maybe it’ll actually be a Motherf**king Bearodactyl?

    Regardless, like Walter said, this sounds like a SyFy Original. Will it star Lorenzo Lamas or Deborah Gibson? It’s too bad when Hollywood just can’t let a franchise die after they’ve jumped the shark and nuked the fridge.

  8. I agree with many of these comments. The Splice-a-saurus sounds terrible.

    However I have also read the quote a different way in places and it stated the animal will merely have the attributes of the animals and not the DNA. For example It is said to have the Presence of the T. rex, the Cunning of the Velociraptors, a wide gape that resembles a snake and the ability to camoflage like a Cuttlefish.

    I am sure Jack Horner wont endorse a mashed up super-freak. And he seems quite chuffed about whatever it actually is.

    When read the way above, it sounds like they are describing the Carnotaurus of the second novel. It also destroys the idea of splicing animals together. (God I HATE that idea!)

    Also a trained T. rex could merely roar for the crowd in return for meat treats and stuff like that? The Rex roar is amazing. You’d want to capitalize on that roar alone…

  9. The man doth protest too much methinks. This film is intended to entertin the great unwashed masses, not a small handful of scientists. To do so, they will require something entirely new, but not blatantly stupid (to the masses, that is).i . The masses understand that Chamaleons can change their color, and Chamaleons are reptiles, just like dinosaurs. So what if these dinos have a more squidlike ability change colors than a chamaleon? It is a small thing really. Swallowing objects larger than their head. Snakes do it, but so some of the largest lizards (varanids), and dinosaurs look a lot like lizards, right? Tyranno-raptors? Larger and larger ‘raptors’ are emerging from the fossil record, some far more formidable looking than early, smallish tyrannosaur ancestors. Tamed carnivorous dinos? Is that really so much of a stretch when there are ‘tamed’ lions, tigers, and even crocodiles…. not to mention piano playing chickens. No reason a some non-avian dinosaurs couldn’t do what their avian dinosaur cousins can. Geez guys, lighten up. They have to make money with this, and none of those things are as ridiculous as you are trying to make them out to be. I would cover my raptors in feathers either if the last three films of the franchise had them covered in scales. There is no proof ALLl raptors must be covered in feathers anyway.

  10. Sounds like “Predator”(1987) – Hollywood’s sequels tend to be more and more like rehash after awhile.

  11. Actually, with the new evidence that has been around for quite some time now, we see that most prehistoric animals were covered in feathers, otherwise how would a chicken be the closest relative to a massive reptile? The scales were beneath the feathers for protection and the feathers kept them them warm during colder seasons. I agree with Dan Peterson’s post, but I understand where everyone else is coming from, honestly, the rest of you just need to chill out, gene-splicing has been around for years, we’re not that far behind from most of the “:SyFy” movies we see these days. Just watch the movie if you want to watch the movie, don’t watch it if you don’t want to. End of story.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *