Media Showcase: Jurassic Park (Dinosaurs)

           

            Easily one of the most recognizable film series of all time, with which it shares its title with other titles like Jaws, Star Wars, and Terminator, Jurassic Park continues to inspire the wonder that Dinosaurs and other prehistoric animals brings to the minds of humans and the silver screen. Jurassic Park was originally written as a novel by well-known author, Michael Crichton, in 1990 and told the story of the foolishness in recreating animals that have been extinct for millions of years without taking the proper precautions. The original Jurassic Park was directed by the esteemed, Steven Spielberg, and was released in 1993. Just going on the title, you can probably guess what the movie is about, dinosaurs! To be more precise, the film and pretty much all of its sequels follows the folly of man in the creation of living breathing members of Dinosauria through the art and magic of genetic cloning (We will disregard the statistical impossibility of this feat, and perhaps leave it for another episode). The first film follows the disaster of a hurricane that wrecks the power of the park, letting the animals go. The main characters, Dr. Grant, Dr. Sully, Ian Malcolm, John Hammond, and his grandkids survive the incident and escape. On this episode of Palo Media Showcase we will take a look at the inaccuracies and inconsistencies of the animals showcased in not just the first film, but the three sequels it has spawned: Jurassic Park: The Lost World, Jurassic Park three, and Jurassic World. We will be going down the list of dinosaurs alphabetically and then analyzing each one to clear up any misconceptions you might have!

Number one: Ankylosaurus

This should show the Ankylosaurus Scene

               Ankylosaurus was only shown in Jurassic Park 3. It can be seen moving through the forest and moving towards a watering hole both in transitional scenes. The way this animal is presented is rather accurate. However, there are still inaccuracies. One thing wrong here would likely be the thickness of the animal. The proportions are a tad off. The real animal would have been extremely wide, rather like a turtle. Another would be the animal’s armor. Throughout most of the 1900s Ankylosaurus was portrayed with spiky armor along its back like that of a porcupine, but this is incorrect. Ankylosaurus would have had very round and flat bony armor embedded in its skin.

Part 2 will come next