Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: A Question about the Hybrids

  1. #1

    A Question about the Hybrids

    So heres a thing

    The Jurassic World reboots have come up with this idea of hybrid monsters liek Indo-Rex and Indo-Raptor and i was wondering what people think about it.

    Personally i have never really liked the idea that they would create these test tube monsters because apparently people are bore with dinosaurs. Im not sure you could ever be bored with dinosaurs or other prehistoric animals. Modern day Zoos dont create genetic monsters to get people back in. They just create new displays and such.

    Given how many species of Dinosaur alone there are (Let alone Pterosaurs, Marine Reptiles or even other prehistoric creatures they could get DNA for) it never seemed likly that they would need to create a Indo-rex to get new visitors in. And so far in the films the two genetic monsters they made are killed off in the same films so they don't even serve a persistant plot element.

    Do people think the hybrids are needed...or could the films have simply cloned a new existing dinosaur species that could have served the same purpose? Or even a different animal? How cool would ap ack of sabretooths have looked hutning down main street...the pack of raptors vs the cats...or why not show us Giganotosaurus in the park...or maybe Utahraptor....its only my thoughts what do others think?

  2. #2
    I think it's an interesting idea because "T-Rex is getting boring now" is maybe the ultimate first world problem?

    I think you only have to look at the gaming community to see just how real this phenomenon is; eg. "JWE is .. but the animations are this, the AI is that, I don't like the map" .. (just be grateful for what you've got already!!!). Western Cultures especially, do this a lot and for me it's interesting to see it pointed out.

    I also find it interesting that hybridisation is used to explain to me why JW dinosaurs don't have feathers and to be reminded that hybrids have been there since the beginning of Jurassic Park (frog DNA). Also, that evolution never really stops ...

    'Evolution in a test tube' might sound very un-natural but in effect it's not different from a random genetic mutation because it's survival (of the fittest) that drives evolution and this is not a self-conscious process.

    "Being scary to humans, therefore you get bred and fed and housed" is only different - environmentally - if you think humans are somehow special. 'What entertains humans' is in reality not different to, 'are you tall enough to eat leaves from this tree'. It is the difference that gives a certain species the right body shape to find a niche, that increases it's propensity (chance) to survive and then to reproduce. (The End).

    So actually I see the JW hybrids as a quasi natural evolution and - although true dinosaur natural history is extremely interesting to me and many others - as Alan Grant said in the Lost World, what Hammond created are actually theme park monsters, like it or not. Although you might get an insight from Ingen's animals, how they move or even how they appear to think, real science is found in the ground?


  3. #3
    When I was at Zoo Lates, someone in front of me pointed at the Galapagos tortoise and say ďI could never even get bored of these, let alone a living dinosaur. Jurassic World got it wrong.Ē

    Iím with them. Furthermore, I would never pay to see an animal that hadnít previously existed - half the joy of seeing any living non-avian dinosaur would be to discover the way they used to behave. With a hybrid, youíre seeing the way an artificially selected animal (like a pug) adjusts to its unnatural anatomy (e.g. struggling to breathe). Whereís the fun in that?

  4. #4
    For me the hybrids were the biggest downer in the franchise (followed closely by the protagonists).

  5. #5
    Yeah i agree with you both there...and lol every time i see Indo-rex now im just gunna see a pug ^^

  6. #6
    Jurassic World could never sell me the whole premise that the public would get bored with dinosaurs. It demanded way too much suspension of disbelief. Modern zoos don't need to splice iguanas with antelopes to draw crowds. People, children especially, will always love animals both extant or extinct. That said, I did like the designs of the Indominus Rex and the Indoraptor. They struck a great balance of being unnatural and distorted while still looking like believable dinosaurs (let's not talk about the Stegoceratops). The bold white appearance of the I Rex really made it a powerful presence on screen. I appreciate how they went for the exact opposite with the Indoraptor, making it dark and slender. Making the animals hybrids was great for their character design as it let the artists be creative in their direction. They couldn't do that with the previous dinosaurs since they were based on actual animals and had to veer towards science (more or less). The character design lends itself to the narrative that these creatures are products for entertainment and warfare that evolution would never make on its own terms.

    The hybrids were the franchises' first shot at making deep characters out of the dinosaurs but they completely wasted the opportunity . The story of the Indominus Rex is basically the story of Frankenstein's monster. Both are about unnatural creatures cobbled together from bits of other things by mad scientists. Frankenstein's monster is a deep complex character that questions the nature of his existence and his place in the world. Wu's monsters are mindless that attack everything for no reason. There was so much potential for these awesome looking hybrids to be actual characters that the audience both feared and pitied. The first Jurassic Park was great because there was no real villain. The true antagonist was chaos and it asked the audience serious questions about man and nature. The Jurassic World trilogy throws that complexity out the window and boils down to "kill the evil dinosaur".

    It sounds dumb that I expected deep characterization from hybrid dinosaurs but the whole concept was already stupid from the get go and having strong dinosaur characters would have made the Jurassic World films great. It's a shame that the hybrids are so one-dimensional because they're the main stars of the show. If you follow the Indominus as the protagonist, Jurassic World is a tragedy about an exceptional but lost individual who suffers for trying to find her place in the world. They could have made her look for another one of her kind, or portrayed her as a scared animal, or shown off her intelligence in non lethal ways. They could have answered the question of "how do we become responsible for our mistakes while respecting this creature as a living, intelligent being" in ways besides "kill it". At the very least the characters should have had remorse for making this one of a kind animal and then killing it for being itself. But they didn't. All in all, hybrids are a dumb concept that could have been great but were completely wasted.

  7. #7
    I agree that they didnt use the hyrbids enough as characters in their own right. The Indo rex could have been much better used. In teh first film we would have seen how it wa smade, get the back story with wu and that...the dino still could has escaped...in film two we could have had the concept developmed more..indfo raptor made to go hunt the now escaped rex...and the thrid film could have been something else.

    But i still wonder why they just didnit use an existing dino species

  8. #8
    Sparing yíall all the details: I think JW would have been better served by having a Giga that was genome-incomplete and driven crazy by the tiny cell they put it in.

    As for FK, I donít know, the movie is a mess but the Indo is unexpectedly growing on me. Jungle skin, Isla Pena, crank Randy Ortonís intro, and press that release button.

  9. #9
    heh i havent played the game for a while...i think ive played it once since fallen kingdom patch came out.

    Im waiting for more substantial updates to fix the issues with the game