What's Wrong with Dinosaurs in Modern Movies? 

Saying feathered dinosaurs aren't scary is like saying tigers or bears aren't scary because they're covered in fur.

The problem is not that the dinosaurs are inaccurate, it's that they are so cliche and unoriginal

The irony is Jurassic Park tried to open the public's eyes to dinosaur inaccuracies in modern media at the time, with new more active depictions of dinosaurs, only to just replace those inaccuracies with new ones that current modern media refuses to let go because they don't really care about dinosaurs and their nostalgia for what essentially boil down to movie monsters is more important to them than the actual animals and scientific advancement. Jurassic World Dominion is probably going to be the last "dinosaur" movie I will ever see as I am just too tired of all this. I still love _real_ dinosaurs and paleontology but I have been disappointed too many times and have become apathetic to dinosaur media.

The v Rex and other dinosaurs in King Kong are a good example of inaccurate dinosaurs working in a film. They don’t ruin the portrayal of any real life dinosaurs. As they’re completely fictionally created.

"What's wrong with dinosaurs in modern movies?" Me: Oh boy... (Pulls out a list so long even an argentinosaurus gets self-esteem issues)

I like how every paleotuber uses that same raptor animation to depict how horrifying feathered dinosaurs were. Another thing I think that Jurassic World Dominion did very poorly was it's handling of the Giganotosaurus. While it was the most accurate antagonist behavior-wise, it was given no reason to be such a large enemy in the film. It killed only a little bug, and got one of the most brutal deaths in the series.

It's not how you make the dinosaurs look, it's how you treat them.

I also have an issue in the lack of colour in dinosaurs. Most are brown or grey which isn't bad but imagine seeing a flock of vibrant ornthomimids running in a lush forest

I personally think part of the issue of "FEATHERS MAKE DINOSAURS LOOK STUPID" argument is because they think of giant parrots and other cute birds they don't think of a 6 ft tall ground hawk. they don't think of a 16 ft eagle with sharp teeth they think of lizards with feathers haphazardly thrown on like a slurpasaur, they think of turkeys and chickens Poltra was downright terrifying because it was giant ass carnivorous chicken, it didn't lose fear point because of the down

The main issue with dominion is that if you remove all the dinosaur scenes, every single one of them, you end up with exactly the same movie. The dinosaurs have zero impact on the story. As for claire outrunning the rex, she doesnt. The rex isnt chasing her, it's following the flare, which was previously established in the movie. The flare means food is coming. So I never really had a problem with that.

65 was going to have a triceratops and three legged ankylosaur as antagonists but they were told by a test audience to remove them. They weren't scary enough they said. Imagine if they had kept the two in the film

Another point I would make is that by ignoring how different dinosaurs had different adaptations they make them boring. All the big theropods being generified as “tyrannosaurid clones” is the worst offender (and leads to them being badly underestimated in pop culture because their actual predatory behaviours aren’t highlighted, so they’re often assumed to have been “inferior tyrannosaurid ripoffs”)

I think one of the most overlooked an underrated dinosaur media was primeval, simply because of the anamzing pairing of creature and location, most noticably deinonychus in the bowling alley and arthropleura in the abadonded subway tunnels.

Finally someone who agrees that you don't have to always think about accuracy when it comes to dinosaur projects I feel like u need uniqueness when it comes to dinosaur projects and just because the Jurassic world sequels do something wrong doesn't mean others should be criticized for inaccuracy and to always remember to make dinosaurs interesting traits rather than just being a stylistic antagonistic monster to make them unique or something never seen before, great video 👍

I remember a scene in walking with sea monsters, Nigel was in the water with something and was wearing a vest that would release a foul liquid if it got too close. I'd like to see more of that. Not just a running simulator but using the Dinosaurs specific adaptations against it. Perhaps they can't see a certain colour, complex patterns confuse them or they're driven off by chemical smells, just a bit more respect for the animal. It would work especially well in Dinosaur horror. Because what if you've spent time learning about this Dinosaur, it's strengths and weaknesses and when the time comes for you to face it, you're no longer sure if what you've learned will work or not.

This video practically sums up every complaint I have with newer dinosaurs in media. Nothing is really all that unique anymore, which is why Second Extinction is a bit of a guilty pleasure of mine. The dinos aren't accurate, but they're pretty cool video game monsters with unique characteristics that set them apart from any other dinosaurs in media. (with the exception of the Indoraptor knock off but that's just one bad apple)

So in order to make a good dinosaur movie (to sum it up) I have to: 1. Make them accurate (basically mostly). 2. Give them more unique features instead of just background creatures passing by and eating people. 3. Give the human characters other ways to topple the dinosaur (mostly) instead of just running away (and using other simple solutions to get away from them). 4. Don't put each of the dinosaur's screen times in a rush. (Set it in a good pacing) 5. Show the audience the dinosaur's true nature and personality (characterization) (not all dinosaurs are mostly monsters, just animals figuring out and doing whatever they must to survive). Correct me if I'm wrong. You can help and give me more tips (as understandable and not confusing, and not too long as possible) if you have any more ideas.

people said "giant Chicken" aren't scary never seen a large birb before. Kasowari is literally a giant turkey and they're scary af

Well, with King Kong (2005), Peter Jackson stated that he wanted to have skull island be a horror show and have the animals not be entirely scientifically accurate because these weren’t dinosaurs from 65 million years ago, but what they evolved into by 1933. He even referred to the one creature as being a throwback T. Rex (dubbed Vastatosaurus Rex in the spin off book The World of Kong) having crocodilian skin and three fingers as a means to compliment the creatures from the 1933 version. In my opinion, it was a smart choice for that film. On a side note: I’d recommend to everyone else to look into the works of artists like Dougal Dixon and Wayne Barlowe.

Of all the talks I hear about 65, this is the one I needed to hear. I don't mind inaccurate depictions of Dinosaurs or any prehistoric animal in general as long as they are handled or depicted well (Primal, as you mentioned, is a great example of that for me). As for 65 itself, outside of the Dinosaurs looking really bland and doing nothing interesting, the film almost looks like a remake of M. Night Shyamalan's After Earth with prehistoric creatures in it and that's not a good sign. But if it turns out to be decent, I might give it a chance, especially if Bruce Campbell makes a cameo given who's producing it.

It pisses me off that the Jurassic world films pretend they care about making their dinosaurs as animals but they really don’t care

“Why wasn’t theri the main bid bad” it’s a herbivore and has feathers two huge nonos from universal

Think the main problem modern dinosaur movies have is they always try to make them look either scary or “cool” looking and use JP1 as a basis. Also, people that say feathered dinosaurs aren’t scary apparently can’t imagine an eagle the size of a Suburban looking at them like a tasty meal.

Joking the Dilo was the most disrespectful scene I’ve ever seen in a Jurassic Park film, and I’ve watched Jurassic Park 3.

I hope we will one day see dinosaurs depicted as animals with scientific rigour in movies, just as Apple TV's Prehistoric Planet showed, in one of the movies.

I feel like people overlook how out of date the Jurassic Park Triceratops is, even for the time. It's basically straight out of a Charles R. Knight painting.

Prehistoric Planet 2 will show em how its done

What's not wrong with modern Dino movies

Bro, the moment the words 'How to train your dragon' came from your mouth, and I heard the fucking outstanding Theme song: Test Drive, I had the widest fucking smile on my face.

I believe in a mix of both. If all dinosaurs in all films are accurate or innacurate it would be boring. I like the variety of dinosaurs being both in different films

I just want to see a dinosaur film that treats the dinosaurs as animals instead of well movie monsters or generic action movie protags. Doesn’t have to be super accurate as long as they don’t show tiny raptors ganking herbivores so much larger than them and actually show how dangerous herbivores can be. It is a nice potential honestly even as a time travel film. JP does add those elements to the dinosaurs as well.

I think it would have been a cool idea if biosyn created their own version of dilophosaurus that is larger and more accurate, that ended up hunting one of the injen dilos during the dilophosaurus scene. I think that sounds bloody awesome

theory: all of the kids who said "i would've just shot the velociraptors" in '93 grew up and became the writers for the new jurassic world movies

My thoughts are with the dinosaurs we're seeing in modern movies are that theyre cool enough but for sure feel overused in the way they're portrayed. But if I had to go deeper it really has to do with people taking Jurassic Park and using as the basis for making for dinosaur movies regardless if it's accurate or not because Jurassic park did recreate our view in these animals long extinct animals. Though like I said before I don't mind these dinosaurs, I still would love to see more accurate or ones closer to the fossil record while also having a stylisze look besides in documentary such as Prehistoric Planet,NHK,and etc Overall I'll just have to wait until I watch this amazing video,and wish yall have a great day ☺

I've been saying since it came out that the Therizinosaurus was the best part of the Dominion. That scene was honestly fantastic, and the blindness added a unqie touch to it too. I'm trying to become a writer and one thing that's important to me is making my dinosaurs unique. I do personally have some high hopes for 65, I just want a fun ride from it, inaccurate dinosaurs don't really bother me but I agree with comments saying the designs should be less...bland? That's one way I've heard it described. I suppose more color and unique patterns would've added something. Heck fully speculative animals running around would've been really cool to see since not every animal fossilized.

I could understand the hate on 65 and other recent media, IF Walking with Dinosaurs, Prehistoric Planet, and other shows and films didn't already exist for years now. It's much like Batman discourse, with there being both Golden Age/Adam West lighter takes on the character, vs. the noir/darker interpretations that picked up again in the late 70's and early 80's. They both have their place, and this goes for many fandoms. Why can't we just be happy that there are so many people that like different aspects of the thing you like? It's silly to me, let people enjoy what they enjoy.

funny how the one and only herbivore antagonist was a good one

I think it also doesn't help that the dinosaurs have become universally grey. Compared to Walking with Dinosaurs, that found all those iconic pattern and colours for each species. Also, I agree on that Therizinosaurus - that was a great scene!

The original JP raptors were trans, don't tell Tucker he will lose it.

While Primeval was also very inaccurate, I remember it used to feature obscure animals like Inostrancevia, had interesting ideas (like dromaeosaurs with rattling feathers, most future creatures) or the rare accurate gem (Pteranodon or the dodos).

65 feels a lot more like a fun "speculative evolution" type of film which is awesome. This movie looks promising and fun. I feel like inaccurate/fan-made depictions of dinosaurs are just as valid as the paleo-accurate ones. Dinosaurs, regardless of their portrayal, inspire the minds of those who create. I feel like it shouldn't be taken down for being inaccurate, 65 is not a documentary, and Prehistoric planet is not a monster movie.

"We just got prehistoric planet after all." Apple TV-plus: 👀

That music from King Kong game brings so much nostalgia

6:57 yeah that head tilt alone proves that feathered dinosaurs can be just as terrifying as scaly ones.

man i just want accurate dinosaurs...is that a lot to ask for

not only dose Context matter alot in Horror but, Also everything can be scary if done right, i mean one of the biggest Horror franchises these days is Five Nights at Freddys, a Game franchise about animatronic animals, That in itself is a Big F-U for the whole "Gotta Look 100% monstrous" or "Feathers are not Scray" thing alongside What you said too.

Excellent work on the video and how well put your thoughts on the subject matter were. I saw that you put my tweet at the beginning of the video, while I'm not proud of how I convey my thoughts on the topic (as you can only do so much with a 250-character limit) and the shallow "feathered dinos are not scary/cool" debate about 65 was sparked from a Halo lore RU-vidr I used to respect, I'm happy to see that a lot of thoughts I had about the topic are explained better than my in-the-moment tweet ever could. While it is annoying that 65 is having lazy, uninspired dinosaur designs are just a byproduct symptom of a problem that started with Jurassic World. (That is a separate topic on its own, especially with how hypocritical writer & director Colin Trevorrow is in his interview statements about the Jurassic World movies. Like how they try to have their cake and eat it too i.e. the dinosaur not being heroes or villains with mortals in one interview then calling Giga the Joker in another interview.) However, 65 is a film that has a lot of problems with it looking a lot like SyFy original movie that's trying to bank one actor's name, IMO, with the marketing problem of Terminator Genisys. That is spoiling the major plot twists, if not the entire movie in one trailer against the filmmakers' wishes which is a bad sign that the film studio has no faith in the movie. From what I researched, the planet the movie is set being Earth 65 miilion years ago, and not an alien planet was meant to be a big plot twist like how John Carter being a Terminator was meant to be the big plot twist for the Terminator Genisys movie, not for the marketing. This is why I find it dishearting that the dinosaur design topic is overshadowing what is I feel is going to be a movie that most likely going to be forgotten by most in a few weeks. That being said, I am perfectly ok with stylized dinosaurs as either over-the-top movie monsters like the old Dinosaurs Attack cards or as actual animals like Prehistoric Planet or the early Jurassic Park films as long as the intention is clear, it fully embraces its direction, and is not done lazily or half-assed. Dinosaurs are amazing creatures that inspire so much creativity and imagination. Such as how the Halo video games have both feathered and non-feathered dinosaurs as the Jackal and Elite aliens, creating one of the most interesting and recognizable alien races in all of sci-fi. However, it is a great shame to see the great potential of dinosaurs being wasted by careless Hollywood execs as fodder for disposal shlock/shovelware.

7:15, I'm so glad that you pointed out the use of context making something scary.

Here's hoping for the primitive War film adaptation will be a mold breaker for once and for all on Paleo media

3:55, I like The Land Before Time (1988) since I was a toddler and younger ages in the 2000s era after I was born on September 23rd, 1997. One of my favorite 2-D animated movies from Universal Studios.

feels good to see my favorite dinosaur (therizinosaurus) get a highlight! amazing video man, this is my first time running across your content and i think I'll stick around

People who think feathers aint scary have clearly never raised chickens. Them things are vicious

Scanova the Carnotaurus, I’d like to say that you have a very well-balanced and mature take on issues with paleo media and I learned things I would never have expected.

What I loved about jurassic park 1 and 2 is that yeah it is mainly horror but it's animal horror, not a monster flick, what do i mean by this? It is horror from the idea that the animal that is chasing you has no motive, no malice towards you, they're either just hungry or feel threatened, animals think differently, to you you may be approaching them out of curiosity, to them it looks like you're chalangeing their terf or you want to kill or eat them, they'll defend themselves. But at least with that you can deal with, you can sort of convince them you are not a threat, but, with a determined predator who has been stalking you for a while there is no reasoning, all you can do is hope it either loses interest or gives up and figures you may not be worth the effort. These aren't cartoon monsters you can looney toons your way out of, this is an intelligent living creature who you may not know much about or may have a lesser known behaviour or brief moment of intelligence that may catch you off guard and cost you your life

6:51 I just got an add of a bunch of birds chasing a terrified woman after you said you said “without any words”.

I just came out 65 and had fun with it. It's just Turok and a Harryhausen movie combined. It's decent.

I think the feathers make them more menacing because you think they won’t harm you because they look fluffy but they are deadly as hell😂😂

The Therizinosaurus has quickly become one of the most popular dinosaurs from the JP/JW franchise and I’m not surprised It’s introductory scene is an amazing mix of creepy,animalistic and interesting. I may be in the minority(Or majority idk) that liked dominion and a big part of it was this Therizinosurus Not to mention that it’s design is a mix of realistic and awesome

The therazinosaurus doesn't have "poor" eyesight, it's suppose to be totally blind.

i never expected him to curse

Faaaaacts, the films just simply suck at integrating the dinosaurs into the scene in a way that results memorable or at least makes good use of the specie in question.

Matpat called the movie dinosaurs that third deadliest Disney movie of all time I would have been agreed with him if it was possible but since they used carnotaurus in it as the big bad they can't because it was on the opposite side of the world at the time

Thanks for the clip of THEM! One of my favorites!

Love the music choices you made for this vid!

People who still afraid with bird like Goose and Seagull doesn't have right to say "Dinosaur with feather is not scary" 😂

imo, it's simple - Designs: they aren't just inaccurate but generic. They try so hard to do the awesomebro scaly bipedal crocs thing that he designs are all indistinguishable from one another. Show your average Joe a photo of the JW and 65 rosters and he won't tell sh*t appart. Prehistoric Planet did this right, even with dinosaurs as similar as Tyrannosaurus and Tarbosaurus(it doesn't matter that PP is a documentary, it's equally capable of doing the same mistakes), they're anatomically similar but still look different and do different things in different environments - The behavior: it's another thing that makes them generic and boring. Dinosaurs spark the imaginations of people because they make us wonder what would such creatures have been doing when they were alive. the original JP dinos weren't memorable because of how they look but because of how they behaved. We see brachios grazing the highest trees and being described as "big cows", gallimimus flocking like birbs, raptors pack hunting, solving problems and leaving nests behind, tyrannosaurus playing with a car and ambushing, a triceratops being sick. Instead, now dinosaurs only kill people (when they're not in the background), they're just like stormtroopers firing at the protags - Bullshit writing: Writers and companies tend to do the absolute minimal effort because they think that the mere presence of "dinosaurs" in the screen is enough for their stupid audiences (according to them) to consoom no matter what. The dinosaur scenes don't have relevance, repercussions or even coherency with the plot Edit: Ok, it wasn't that simple

Very nice. Your video helps me develop my writing!

Bro used espinas’s theme from monster hunter for the beginning of part 2 and I love it lol

The Lost World is the BEST sequel in the Jurassic Park series. Fight me.

The thing with 65 is yes while it’s in a different universe and not accurate by any means that’s kinda the gimmick and the fact it’s focused on the survival of the humans and sci-fi instead of total accuracy and these things are way in the future anyways but I do agree and completely understand why people are mad/upset and that’s completely acceptable by just looking at the designs and there inspiration

Imagine accurate Utahraptor horror like that short clip That's scary af

I personally don’t mind some inaccurate dinosaurs here and there, it’s just when they are depicted as monsters rather than animals.

So, let me get this straight-the reason most dino media flops is because dinos just aren't interesting enough? Overall, this is a great analysis.

The 'dinosaurs" in 65 don't look even like dinosaurs, sure they're lizards but I would call them monsters instead since Im pretty sure a 20 foott tall and 60 foot long quadrupedal T-rex didn't existed in the Cretaceous.

do I hear peter jacksons king kong official game of the movie soundtrack being used? wait YOOOOO DINO D-DAY REFERENCE or am I mistaken

3:06 this is really funny because it looks just like Secodontosaurus

Dinosaurs are scary because they were real they existed, and portraying them as animals keeps that thought in mind. Jurassic Park is more intense then Jurassic World simply because the animals felt real even when they were inaccurate for the time, Jurassic World and other modern dinosaur media missed that important part which is why it blends in with every other monster movie out there. I'm not saying dinosaurs have to be accurate outside of Jurassic World they just need a sense of realness of which Jurassic Park had and modern dinosaur movies don't.

6:51 that raptor is creepy with or without feathers, its all in the shadows, lack of lighting, the eyes glowing, the weird cocky movements the raptor does, feathers do nothing. you can say a pack of naked wolves or a giant naked bear is equally scary as the fuffy ones because they're still dangerous predators. so just saying feathers = scary is factually non-sense.

The use of the Dino D-Day music is an automatic W

this video had my two favourite movie franchises in it. amazing

Ok, my issue is the lack of color Primal may not have had much accuracy but it had various colors and environments and unique designs, But everything in the trailer for 65 is the same bland boring grey, How is this an ecosystem when everything looks dead? Which I think is itself an extension of your stated problems All the creatures in primal have unique characterization and require a new and unique plan or strategy to stop them

I personally hate how dinosaurs are in big movies, I think the other major problem is the fact how they are designed themselfs, they look cartoony and not like something that was real, and it makes watching them on screen extremely boring, I kid you not I couldn't even make it half way watching dominion without having to leave every min hoping something good might happen, not only that but I've noticed how every single dinosaur sounds exactly the same, its so boring, to top of it off they don't even act like animals, they act like they have a human consciousness. I'm just saying they don't need to be realistic, and they don't need to be pretty but they lack any uniqueness, they just feel like copy and paste, and there only portrayed as nothing but killing machines, this is bit off topic but if you know the movie avatar, (not the airbending one) the movie was extremely unique giving us a diffrent perspective of culture, animals, and in genreal life. The animals in that movie were absolutely beatiful and memerizing, but also terrifying it was something completely new and out of this world. In conclusion modern movie nowadays only seem to care about Makin fast money instead of giving us actual work of art and giving us good entertainment to make it worth our time and money.

22:02 as you can see here, the theri is raking its claws to teh ground, it could be that the theri really is blind, the similarity of it raking it claws on the ground as if to detect the surface and how blind people used elongated sticks to tap on the ground

The part of the Dino’s being animals, I think did an ok job with blue, because blue does flip flop around between bad and good

Honestly this essay is pretty good because it actually goes in depth why dinosaurs in modern movies don't work besides using the overused Innaccurate = garbage 🤢🤮 argument. Even if I was one of the few people who enjoyed and liked Fallen kingdom, even I have to admit that some dinosaur scenes could have been better executed

I think paleo media that doesn't want to be accurate should lean more into fantasy/horror elements instead of this weird middle ground that's not gonna please people who want movie monsters but also not gonna please people who want the them to look and feel like real animals As much as I wish Ark 2 were going in a more accurate direction, at least they're going out of their way to make much more fantastical versions of the dinosaurs by accentuating their main features (like their new carnotaurus having almost bull-like horns) Either way, loved the video and I'd be super happy to watch more videos from you about paleo media content other than just games

Extremely well thought out and put together summary of this whole debacle. Couldn't agree with you more on the lack of characterization being a big problem with the portrayal of dinosaurs, and how most that fail also happen to just copy Jurassic Park without learning what it did well. It's hard to say what's going to happen within mainstream depictions of dinos after 65, but with another season of Prehistoric Planet to reaffirm that accuracy CAN sell, hopefully the message breaks through in regards to why dinosaurs, and other prehistoric animals, are important and should be treated with care in how they're depicted.

I thinking about creating a survival horror story with fictional dinosaurs, similar to primal but without fantasy aspects. If the dinosaurs are fictional, and only partially based on real dinosaurs, there is a lot more room to play with. But I still want to them to be portayed as realistic animals. Here are some ideas: A giant 11-13 meter long theropod which is a mix between a Tyrannosaurus and a Carnotaurus. They have horns but the horns of the males are massive and point forward. Most of the time they don't even use them to fight against other males, but they mostly just use them to show their age, size and strenght. The females are slightly larger. Once a female has chosen a mate, they stay together for their entire life. Extremely protective towards eachother, their young and their territory. If they have offspring, one parents (regardless of gender) will hunt and the other will stay at their young. They even tolerate their grown up independent offspring within their territory, but only as long as there is enough food. They are about as smart as a Tyrannosaurus was. The second animal is similar to a Deinonychus. Similar in size as well looks. The males have striking colored feathers. However, there are certain regional variations in color, they could potentially be subspecies. They show similar mating behavior to the previous animal, but they sometimes cooperate with other individuals to hunt down bigger prey. But sometimes, if there are enough resources, a couple will allow their offspring, as well as their partners and offspring to stay within their territory, basicly forming a pack-like family. In those families they are social, care for eachothers offspring and hunt together. But only as long as there is enough food. They can be quite curious around humans and new things, however, they do view humans as prey. They also have a special ability, this beeing venom similar to that of a komodo dragon, which causes animals to bleed out, helpful for bigger prey. But they also eat smaller prey, including fish and large insects. They are about as intelligent as a wolf or a crow. They can be tamed but only if a human cares for them since they're young. The last animal is a tall 2,5 - 2,8m (height, not lenght) theropod dinosaur. It has many characteristics of avian and non avian dinosaurs. It's body is similar to an ostrich, but way more bulky. It has a large, sharp beak without teeth, similar to to Terror birds. It has long arms with claws and a long tail. They have feathers all over their body, except their lower legs. The males have beautiful feathers in beautiful colors and combinations (regional variations exist). They are also much bigger than the females. The females often live alone but are not territorial. They are omnivorous, but mostly just eat fruits and large insects as well as some small animals. But they sometimes scavenge. Rarely they hunt larger prey (but still smaller than themselves). They even hunt fish in some areas. Altough the females can be dangerous, they mostly run away if there is danger. The males on the other hand are extremely aggressive and territorial against anything that aren't females of it's species. Their kicks are deadly. Their feathers and thick hide protect them from most attacks, like arrows or sometimes even bullets. This also protects them from the venemous bites of the previous Deinonychus like animal. They are extremely fast and will chase anything it seems as an intruder for a large distance. The males will mate with any female within their territory, but they still mostly live alone, similar to the females. The males also show no parental care. You could say they are similar to deer. The males fight against eachother by kicking and jump-kicking. They are not that intelligent. They behave very primitive and show no social behaviour.

I showed the Wobbly Works "Creature of the Night" video to some people over on Discord and one of them responded "all I see is an adorable dinosaur." I'm sure they were just a kid trying to be cool and edgy, but while likely a flimsy example, it does show the perpetuation of the mindset that "feathered dinosaurs aren't scary". For the record though, people I showed the video irl were actually disturbed by it, so that's good.

Accuracy doesn't make a dinosaur or hitstoric movie great what it count is everything else. Great story solid characters and cinematography. 300,the ghost and the darkness,Primal,King Kong 2005,And all those Vietnam war movies we all love. Are great examples of this. Much like Hoopsanddinoman said in his vintage paleoart video there is still great artistic value with in them. even now a days we can make fun with all their inaccuracies and flaws.

Love the way you just had to let Test Drive end before finishing the segment. Anyways yeah, 100%, you're completely right.

I like the way in httyd 2 they didn't shy away from showing toothless kill someone

For me, it's not really about the inaccurate designs in 65. In the end, it is "just a movie" and the directors do not claim the depictions are accurate. The problem with 65 for me is that the Dino designs are incredibly uninspired and lame. Modern mainstream movie monsters do all the same since Cloverfield. Grey skin, dangly arms and legs and completely shrink-wrapped (Quiet Place, Jurassic World (ok, the skin on one is white and on the other it's black), Stranger Things, Tomorrow War, 65, to name a few). As long as a movie is not boasting itself about its accurate depiction (looking at you, JW Dominion) inaccurate designs are fine by me. It starts to bother me when the Crocodilosaurus on screen is supposed to be a Baryonyx, or the Giga-Joker-Saurus edgeii is supposed to be a Giganotosaurus. When you do give it a real name, and say in the marketing promotion that the designs are accurate, it is just plain misinformation. When Trevorrow is talking in interviews about how he does not want to show kids Dinos that are not real but then goes on and does it anyway and then lies about how the first film did not try to be accurate either, it is just dishonest. At the end of the day, misinformation is still misinformation. And to all the people who say "getting mad about it is embarrassing" or that "it does not matter". Well, it matters to us, because we care about this topic. And I am sure that there is some topic that matters to you, and you'd be bothered if a movie would do the same thing to that topic. For example, imagine being a history nerd, and a new, supposedly accurate, WW2 movie just came out. All the soldiers are fighting with modern weapons because they look cooler, and instead of Nazi Germany it's basically just the plot of the movie Independence Day, because it's more wholesome this way. And as you complain about it people just say "come on that is totally fine", "stop making it historically accurate, without aliens history would be super boring". It's just stupid. In the end, just go and enjoy 65, but stop getting mad at people who want better for something they care about, or say that it is embarrassing to even care about it. Maybe just a little empathy instead of ignorance for others. *Edit: I am also ok with projects like Primal calling Fang a "Tyrannosaur", because it does not say it is a certain species, it is just a Tyrannosaur. And in general, I am fine with inaccuracy as long as the movie does not act like the depictions are accurate. **Edit: Fantastic video, couldn't have said it better myself. ***Edit: Another quick example how you can avoid the trap around accuracy is actually the original Jurassic World. They kept the inaccurate Velociraptor design, however, I do believe that in the canon, they changed the species from the real Velociraptor mongoliensis to the fictional Velociraptor montanaii, since in Jurassic Park they did dig up the Velociraptors near (the fictional city) Snakewater, Montana, which in itself is amazingly inaccurate. But I could be wrong about that. ****Edit: The reason why Jurassic Park does not bother as many people as something like Dominion, is that, while trying to be accurate, Steven Spielberg and Stan Winston specifically used the wording "as accurate as possible", saying that they were willing to make changes where changes are needed for the script. Also, just as this video stated, they did more for the modern depiction of dinosaurs as warmblooded, active and intelligent hunters than any other piece of paleo media did up to 1993. *****Edit: Basically, my problem is not really with inaccurate movies. Just with movies, that claim to be accurate. It's mostly "documentaries" like Jurassic Fight Club that I really dislike.

17:10 - 19:48 could never put this feeling into proper words until now, and I think this part really summed up how the Jurassic World sequels was so undoubtedly the worst out of all the other films.

-We will have an completly innacurate dinosaur in our movie. Me : ah.. Uhh well at least its gonna look coo... -It will look like another vastatosaurus/papurex painted in grey. Me: ah.....

Dinosaurs are teaming up like it's a Kaiju movie

Dinosaurs don’t always have to LOOK scientifically accurate they just have to ACT scientifically accurate there’s really nothing wrong with coming up with cool and unique designs for dinosaurs

18:41: Dimetrodon? In earnest? O.k., most of the "Jurassic" animals are actually from the Cretacious but they are still dinosaurs whereas Dimetrodon is a _very_ early (early Permian!) synapsid (much more related to us mammals) to which dinosaurs were basically science fiction.

1:46 no way bro actually used Dino D-Day main theme (or maybe it something else idk). Also great vid

25:25 Granted, this can be partially attributed to the society mostly shifting away from fighting dragons to living peacefully with them, so this aspect might not be necessary. That being said, I do like that you point out the different characteristics of the dragons and how the characters have to think to overcome them, as it's one of the reasons the first film was engaging to me as a kid.