| Error creating thumbnail: File missing Join our Discord! |
| If you have been locked out of your account you can request a password reset here. |
Talk:Jurassic Park III: Difference between revisions
| Line 47: | Line 47: | ||
==Just a Theory== | ==Just a Theory== | ||
I think I know why Cooper's 20mm rounds didn't harm the Spino. There was a second Spino and Cooper killed it. Little did he know that the Spino he killed was the First Spino's mate and he got pissed off. What do you guys think?--[[User:SAMBAMA|SAMBAMA]] 11:27, 5 July 2011 (CDT) | I think I know why Cooper's 20mm rounds didn't harm the Spino. There was a second Spino and Cooper killed it. Little did he know that the Spino he killed was the First Spino's mate and he got pissed off. What do you guys think?--[[User:SAMBAMA|SAMBAMA]] 11:27, 5 July 2011 (CDT) | ||
:I think even that is better than the actual reason. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 11:31, 5 July 2011 (CDT) | |||
Revision as of 16:31, 5 July 2011
Moved from page
-I'm not gun genius, but how hard would it be to hit a huge dinosaur with a 20mm sniper rifle? and if you did, a round that big (and that pack a small boom) would cause damage, no?
- You make a good point. Some merc he is if he can't hit a Spinosaurus with that thing. But if he did hit it and kill it, it would be a 15 minute movie and thus serve no point to exist. In real life, the guys with the guns survive when facing dinosaurs, but in Hollywood, all you need to do is run fast. >:(. I wish he had killed the Spino, T-rex is the coolest and the Spino was a dumb attempt at topping it. Thanks a lot Jack Horner. (I used to be a dino-nut, in case no one knew) - Gunmaster45
- I agree, T-rex for the win man! But really, you saw what the rifle did to a light aircraft in the movie, so what would it do to a Spino? Anyhow, you hear him fire it like 4 times, in awfully rapid succesion. I'm thinking that firing a 20mm rifle that fast might hurt one's shoulder....
- Fuck the spino, fuck it in its ear.Oliveira 01:11, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
- Fucking A Right Mother Fucker! Fuck the fucking fucker.-SomeGuy
- I agree, T-rex for the win man! But really, you saw what the rifle did to a light aircraft in the movie, so what would it do to a Spino? Anyhow, you hear him fire it like 4 times, in awfully rapid succesion. I'm thinking that firing a 20mm rifle that fast might hurt one's shoulder....
- You make a good point. Some merc he is if he can't hit a Spinosaurus with that thing. But if he did hit it and kill it, it would be a 15 minute movie and thus serve no point to exist. In real life, the guys with the guns survive when facing dinosaurs, but in Hollywood, all you need to do is run fast. >:(. I wish he had killed the Spino, T-rex is the coolest and the Spino was a dumb attempt at topping it. Thanks a lot Jack Horner. (I used to be a dino-nut, in case no one knew) - Gunmaster45
- I was disappointed that they made the Spinosaurus into the main villain for this movie, but not quite sure I have that hostile a reaction to it. -MT2008
- It's hard to use any firearm effectively in a recent Spielberg movie, because guns are bad and icky. See also nasty gun-haver Muldoon dying in the original (in the book he survived), the two "big" guns in II never being fired (Roland's .600 nitro and Eddy's Lindstradt), one getting the more or less innocent user eaten horribly more or less just because he made a big deal about having a nice gun, the field full of heavily armed mercs in II getting killed while the unarmed civilians make it through without a scratch...And ET, of course. Can't let people think Federal agents would posess actual weaponry. He's fallen a long way since Harrison Ford remembered he'd bought a gun to a swordfight. Vangelis 07:51, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
- Indeed man, these movies make you wonder why they bother having guns in them. M14fanboy
- Well the 'subtle' thing throughout most big Hollywood films for quite some time now is that all guns are inherently evil and bad EXCEPT when used by a hero who is very handsome and/or built like a tank, using a gun with which he never misses, never jams and has infinite ammo, heh. StanTheMan 16:23, 29 June 2011 (CDT)
Spinosaurus WAS the king of dinosaurs
You guys are forgetting that we erroneously thought that the T-Rex was the king of the carnivores, but it wasn't. The ONLY EXISTING skeleton of a Spinosaurus (which was WAY bigger than any T-Rex) for decades was in the National Museum of Natural History ... in Nazi Germany BEFORE World War Two. It was obliterated (along with other priceless archeological treasures) by American and British bombing raids. So only recently archeologists unearthed other Spinosaurus bones, it can RIGHTFULLY take it's place as the dinosaur that kicked T-Rex's ass. So we're wrong. Not history. MoviePropMaster2008 07:07, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
I would have to disagree with you this time, MPM2008, even though Spinosaurus was bigger then Tyrannosaurus Rex, it would still have a better chance at losing the fight. Tyrannosaurus Rex had a pretty good size brain cavity, was stocky and muscular, and most of all, had one of the greatest bite forces of any land animal ever to live on this planet, it's jaw was capable of cutting through flesh, and crushing bone. So chances are, once the T.Rex bit down on the Spino's neck, it would have crushed it's neck, killng or atleast paralzying it.--Alienqueen11 07:19, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
- I haven't paid much attention to paleontology for about 10 years now, but didn't Spinosaurus have fairly fragile jaws and teeth? My understanding is that it ate lots of fish when it wasn't scavenging.
- As far as T-Rex goes, whether or not it was a predator is (I understand) still debatable, but it was certainly FAR better equipped to fight in hand-to-hand combat than a Spinosaurus. The fact that the Spinosaurus might have had an extra couple of meters length seems irrelevent; it would be like a basketball player fighting a professional wrestler.
- BTW, I think it's cool that so many other IMFDB members are into dinosaurs. -MT2008
- You are right, MT2008, Spinosaurus had small hollow teeth, while T.Rex had serrated teeth the size of bananas. So chances are that the Spino's teeth would have cracked when it tried to break the T. Rex's neck. I also think that T.Rex was a hunter since many paleontologists seem to have found dinosaurs bones with healed Tyrannosaurus bite marks on them, but the debate still goes on. I'm also glad to see that other IMFDB members are intersted in Dinosaurs as well, it's one of my other interests besides firearms. I enjoy watching dino-documentaries (Walking With Dinosaurs, etc) as much as I do movies, dinosaurs always interested me since I was small.--Alienqueen11 02:21, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
- Well, I did not know that. I had no idea we had master Paleontologists here ;) I just brought up this note, because of all the Spino-Hate and because I saw a documentary about all of the lost treasures that were destroyed by Allied Bombing in World War II, the ONLY Spinosaurus skeleton (and all the notes) being one of the casualties of the bombings over Germany. I'm not going to argue anything since I must defer to men who are far greater 'experts' than myself. :) I was far more into 'dinosaurs' when I was a kid. I think you grow out of dinosaurs when you *cough* become a man ...uh, I mean get OLDER... ;) LOL! MPM2008
a)the t-rex had pissy little arms which were useless. b)the spinosaurus had very strong forearms. c)both were dwarfed by the giganotosaurus which lived in south america
- I too was a dino-nut as a younger kid, but as MPM said, it fades usually. From what I read, the Giganotosaurus was taller and longer, but was much weaker and poorly built. The T-rex was a big bulky predator, while the Spinosaurus was a fish eater and scavenger. While the Spino had bigger arms than the T-rex, the T-rex had a very powerful mouth that more than made up for it (it was the size of a refrigerator). And while a spinosaurus skeleton destroyed during WWII was found to be very large, normal spinos aren't bigger than the T-rex. Just longer (T-rex being ~40ft and Spinos being ~60ft). So I believe the T-rex still deserves the rightful place as the Terrible Lizard King! - Gunmaster45
- Fun fact, today we know that while in the Jurassic Park films the raptors were six feet tall and called "Velociraptors", they actually mixed up the species. The dinosaur shown as the velociraptor in the series are in fact Deinonychus. The Velociraptor is the smaller 3ft dino. - Gunmaster45
- I too was a dino-nut as a younger kid, but as MPM said, it fades usually. From what I read, the Giganotosaurus was taller and longer, but was much weaker and poorly built. The T-rex was a big bulky predator, while the Spinosaurus was a fish eater and scavenger. While the Spino had bigger arms than the T-rex, the T-rex had a very powerful mouth that more than made up for it (it was the size of a refrigerator). And while a spinosaurus skeleton destroyed during WWII was found to be very large, normal spinos aren't bigger than the T-rex. Just longer (T-rex being ~40ft and Spinos being ~60ft). So I believe the T-rex still deserves the rightful place as the Terrible Lizard King! - Gunmaster45
I still think the T-Rex was a carnivore. I mean I can't imagine a T-Rex being a lazy couch potato and just going after what was already dead. Seems like Scientists like to (pardon my french) pussify things. I mean when JP 1 was being filmed Deinonychus was originally a Velociraptor subspecies. But then a few months after the movie came out, Paleotologists renamed it to what it is now known as today. And don't get me started on feathers, I mean (again, pardon my french), but nothing screams pussy like a dinosaur covered in feathers. But I did think Spino was a neat addition. I mean it is a 60+ foot long dino with the face of a crododile. That's K.A. The only thing that I wish in ANY action movie, is the enemies should at least actually attempt to fire their weapons accurately. I mean take out those mercs from II and III and replace them with the Ultranationalists and Wehrmmacht (From WaW and CoD4) and set the difficulty to Veteran, let's see what those raptors got to say about that...lol. That, or put in sharpshooters ala Tom Selleck in Quigley Down Under. He shot a man in the back of the head while speeding down the desert in a buckboard (From a distance of 700+ yards), and his shooting eye was black and blue. 1morey 05:49, 5 March 2011 (MSK)
Forget putting fictional characters. Put any of us with a gun and even if our aim sucks, at close range even when the dino is about to open wide, full auto from an assault rifle would take it down. Several shotgun blasts would at least make it think twice. Since these guys are most likely not accustomed to the sound of a gunshot, the noise alone would scare them away. Seriously, the Marines that showed up would have extincted all the dinos on the island. You tell a US Marine that there's dinosaurs on an island, you bet we're going to hear about a bunch of trigger happy guys and I'd join them. Excalibur01 08:31, 5 March 2011 (MSK)
Mossberg 500 Cruiser
That really sucks that Nash didn't use his Mossberg 500 Cruiser. He could have took it out from his back and injure the Spino instead of crawling for cover. - (Kenny99)98.234.123.141 19:58, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
- Cause shotgun pellets would injure such a large dinosaur..... M14fanboy 18:37, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
- Because it would knock a Raptor on its ass-S&Wshooter 20:14, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
Just a Theory
I think I know why Cooper's 20mm rounds didn't harm the Spino. There was a second Spino and Cooper killed it. Little did he know that the Spino he killed was the First Spino's mate and he got pissed off. What do you guys think?--SAMBAMA 11:27, 5 July 2011 (CDT)
- I think even that is better than the actual reason. Evil Tim 11:31, 5 July 2011 (CDT)