MovieChat Forums > Jurassic Park (1993) Discussion > TOTALLY STUPID sci-fi : Dino-sized plot ...

TOTALLY STUPID sci-fi : Dino-sized plot hole!

posted 5 years ago by Heisenberg (6443)
108 replies | jump to latest

This movie plot has a giant, brachiosaurus-sized gaping hole in it.
Ok, Spielberg is not the brightest one in matters of sci-fi (or action, or directing in general). But WTF. Nobody else noticed this when they greenlit this turd?

They invented a cloning procedure to recover million years old dna, fix it with frogs, and re-create a dinosaur egg. Ok, I can go with this.
Now, from those eggs, they grow dinosaurs. ADULT dinosaurs. That look like they range from at least 30 years old, to 80/100 years old.
But this park in the nineties is filled with them.

So, what's supposed to fill this gap? They developed this dna tachniques in 1920 and secretly started growing dinos up to have them ready by 1993? Or did they also invented a bunch of dino-vitamins to magically grow them that big in less than a year?
Nobody stopped to think about this for one minute and realized how the whole premise doesn't gel in this idiotic production???

[–] strangenstein (683) 2 years ago

Sorry, but you lost me when you dismissed Spielberg’s directing skills.

[–] Heisenberg (6443) 2 years ago

Spielberg’s a good director. He certainly is not a brilliant one.
He can do his homework and has a great istinct for popular themes for kids and grownups. He is an awesome commercial producer.
I have not seen him direct an outstanding scene or performance in decades, if ever. The vast majority of his films would vastly improve in the hands of a great director (ie AI, JP, SPR,etc).
His movies, other than fun and a family oriented fantastic element, bring little to the table, specifically in terms of cinema or art in general.

[–] Who (5146) 2 years ago

Yeah, it’s a mess but still a fun film. Feels like a Disney ride. Go too slow, you see the wires. Zip on by, you feel the magic.

Maybe Hammond’s flea circus metaphor was aimed at us, the discerning-eyed audience, to remind us to just enjoy the illusion and not dwell on the detail.

[–] Heisenberg (6443) 2 years ago

I guess that's the only way to approach this kind of sci-fi.

But, couldn't they just try and be more careful with the logic of its writing?
Just because we are not the morons they think we are.

[–] StinkyPoopyPants (2775) a year ago

I may be wrong and thinking of a different book / film but didn't the scientists say they did something to their DNA that sped up their growth?

Again, I could definitely be mistaken but if not that might explain it?

[–] Heisenberg (6443) a year ago

Yes, that would explain it and yes, you are mistaken, it was not this book/movie.

But also, it would make the whole sci fi even lamer (like it happens in this shithole franchise later on, with invisible dinosaurs etc).
I mean, it's about bringing back dinosaurs with cloning (which is an interesting premise), not creating anything out of thin air. When anything goes, that's when you know your sci fi has jumped the shark.

[–] StinkyPoopyPants (2775) a year ago

Ah ok, it's been years since I read the books and since I've watched the movies. I haven't yet watched Dominion but everyone I know who has says it's the worst of all of them.

I have to be honest, when it comes to movies like this I just enjoy them for what they are, pure entertainment. So, I don't go in expecting perfect science, etc. But I do understand where you're coming from.

I do expect realism when I watch movies based on real life events, like Schindler's List, The Pianist, Gorillas in the Mist. I don't want plot holes in movies like that, if that makes sense?

[–] Heisenberg (6443) a year ago

Yes, your stance is completely understandable.

I guess I take this kind of crap too seriously, but I think what bothers me the most is the lack of care showed in this sort of mistakes: either the authors didn't see it, or they didn't think their audience is intelligent enough to see it.

[–] StinkyPoopyPants (2775) a year ago

"I guess I take this kind of crap too seriously, but I think what bothers me the most is the lack of care showed in this sort of mistakes: either the authors didn't see it, or they didn't think their audience is intelligent enough to see it."

I understand this completely. I feel the same way when I watch a movie based on a real life events that has obviously been dramatized or changed in ways that take so much away from the actual event for the sole purpose of making money.

But even if it's a fictional movie or story I can understand your frustration because when it comes down to it, we are paying with both money and our time to watch them. And leaving a movie feeling like we've been duped is never a good thing.

[–] ADBruno1985 (3331) a year ago

They just developed fast from embryo to maturity, just go with it

[–] Heisenberg (6443) a year ago

No, I will not just go with it. It's total bullshit and awful sci-fi writing.

I am already just going with the main premise of the movie, to bring back dinosaurs with DNA cloning, but they wanted to add this huge plot hole about the dinosaurs being ready full size in 5 minutes.
I will not just go with said plot hole.

[–] enriquesingh (1778) a year ago

Nah... it's fun... easily an 8/10.

Dinosaurs didn't take that long to grow... so even if they are off by a couple of years its alright cause they did have several years in between... maybe they also accelerated growth or something... whatever.

[–] Heisenberg (6443) a year ago

Well, with such a strong analysis as the base of your sound science, who would ever find a problem with anything? With your laser sharp meter, Sharknado is even better!