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 (6730)
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???

[–] pjl69 (2647) 4 years ago

Jurassic Park is Spielberg's lazier efforts anyway. He probably had Schindler's List already in his mind when he was making this.

[–] Heisenberg (6730) 4 years ago

Yeah I know it's not that great, ie the giant plot hole from my op.

[–] JoeCinema (92) 4 years ago

The book mentions something about getting them to grow faster.

My question is how did they bring back plants?

[–] Gubbio (3893) 4 years ago

My question is how did they bring back plants?

I wondered the same thing.

The character, Ellie, says, with some concern:

The question is: how much can you know about an extinct ecosystem, and,
therefore, how could you assume you can control it? You have plants right
here in this building, for example, that are poisonous.

You picked them because they look pretty, but these are aggressive living
things that have no idea what century they're living in and will defend
themselves. Violently, if necessary.

The implication is that the plants were brought back the same way the dinos were. But, the script doesn't go into that.

[–] Heisenberg (6730) 4 years ago

Yes the same way as dinos. Because mosquitos bite lots of plants to suck their blood.

[–] Gubbio (3893) 4 years ago

No, the theory is that they extracted something from the plant-life trapped in the amber to re-create the plants. Don't be a wise ass. 🙄

[–] WuchakTheBitch (100) 4 years ago

Not a plot hole. It takes a T. rex less than 20 years to grow to full size, and they could have begun cloning years before the park began operation. And they could have stimulated their growth cycle as well with all the genetic experimentation they were doing. As far as sci-fi goes it’s pretty serviceable.

[–] Heisenberg (6730) 4 years ago

How so?
NOBODY ever talks about them starting 20 years before (in the 70s...yeah, right) nor about stimulating their growth.
This scifi is as solid as the crap we see in the newest ones, with the invisible T-rex and such ludicrous bullshit.

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

"This movie plot has a giant, brachiosaurus-sized gaping hole in it."

That would be the 'fiction' part of 'science fiction' movie. This whole post is meaningless.

I eagerly look forward to your post dissecting the plot hole of a stainless steel car being able to travel through time EVEN IF it were fitted with a flux capacitor.

Similarly your acute understanding of physics should similarly illuminate the the plot hole of a man spontaneously gaining mass to turn into a giant sized green rage beast.

PS:

i. You don't understand what a plot hole is.

ii. A quick Google search reveals that some of your 'facts' are wrong anyway.

[–] kenburke (2383) 4 years ago

May a velociraptor munch on you this Thanksgiving!!!

[–] Heisenberg (6730) 3 years ago

Only if I can't parallel-bars kick it in its face.

[–] Heisenberg (6730) 4 years ago

Bumping, this movie gets stupider every year.

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Yes, it's one of the most moronic sci-fis of all time. It makes me so angry, because this was the movie that hijacked high concept sci-fi and turned it into dumbed down fluff that doesn't even attempt to be remotely intelligent on even a kid's level. Now authentic high concept sci-fi is dead, because everyone thinks it's supposed to be like this movie's brand of dumbed down 1950s/1960s B movie Irwin Allen-esque sci-fi, as in short on logic and plausibility, long on fantasy and illogical plot points that you should never question "cuz reasons." (Otherwise, you're being a stupid geek who doesn't know how to enjoy a movie, or hasn't learned suspension of disbelief, etc.).

Spielberg did such an effective job hijacking and destroying high concept sci-fi with JP, Minority Report and War of the Worlds that he comes across to me as a guy cynically using film to perpetuate his brand of anti-intellectualism. The clincher for me was when he had Sam Neil's character realize in a span of a few hours what the scientists who cloned the dinosaurs would have anticipated happening using frog DNA. This is a theme that I've seen in both JP and Minority Report--the layman winds up being smarter about the very system that the genius created because no matter how brilliant an expert is, he is stupid like the absent-minded professor. But the common person on the street who is only vaguely familiar with the system will somehow figure it all out with intuition and superior insight.

[–] Heisenberg (6730) 4 years ago

Spielberg, an often mediocre filmmaker, dumbs down sci fi like he dumbs down romance, humor, action or anything else. He is just that, a dumbed down artist of little ambition.
His only goal is to surprise and amaze his audience with something. How he gets there, it does not matter.
His mediocre style usually takes over, with his infamous schmaltz and cheesy family values. To measure his puniness you can imagine what Kubrick intended with A.I., and compare it to the family oriented turd this silly man laid.

That bit with the common character (nowadays, often a little girl) who outdoes trained personnel is a common trope with mediocre filmmakers, that's how they think they will connect with the general public. That, and some shitty family situation.

Why do you think JP single handedly hijacked high concept sci fi?
I think it just followed a trend of dumbed down fluff.

[–] mikethemartian (6857) 3 years ago

The part that always bothered me was they keep talking about how birds are the closest currently living relative of dinosaurs but when they need to fill in some missing DNA gaps they used frogs instead.

[–] Pete314 (3095) 3 years ago

This! But they HAD to use frog DNA because birds don't change their sex... In a script like this one the writers are all the time busy to fix plot holes. But of course they cannot fill every single gap.

[–] millsey72 (10539) 3 years ago

Yes, you found a plot hole