Comments: 31
AlisatheRaptor13 [2014-06-09 03:52:45 +0000 UTC]
Jurrasic park is a lie.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Hoke-of-Hock [2011-08-19 00:31:01 +0000 UTC]
Wait, Velociraptors have feathers?
Does that mean they're more fun to hug?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
frigidINC [2011-06-01 00:56:48 +0000 UTC]
Utahraptor! it's a raptor...from utah!!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
frigidINC In reply to armaina [2011-06-14 00:57:31 +0000 UTC]
I assumed as much xD
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
StevenRoy [2011-05-16 08:33:32 +0000 UTC]
They weren't this cute in those movies either!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
armaina In reply to StevenRoy [2011-05-16 18:24:51 +0000 UTC]
They're easier to draw this way!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
CloudEaterNG [2011-05-15 12:08:45 +0000 UTC]
You like drawing dinosaurs with mohawks and wings.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
armaina In reply to CloudEaterNG [2011-05-15 17:27:48 +0000 UTC]
Actually, they do have feathers. There was a skeleton found with the remains of a quill which confirmed that they did have feathers
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
CloudEaterNG In reply to armaina [2011-05-16 15:05:57 +0000 UTC]
Very interesting, I did not know this.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
DaPartyRooster [2011-05-14 20:17:37 +0000 UTC]
From something I read, they actually found Utahraptor like, right at the beginning of making the movie, so they based the size and shape off those remains.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
armaina In reply to DaPartyRooster [2011-05-15 01:55:59 +0000 UTC]
Yeah, the size was a dramatic effect I know, but the book itself was supposed to be a Deinonychus, but there was some confusion in the name and classification. Buuut this error has made everyone think that Velociraptors are big and have skull shapes like Deinonychus!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
DaPartyRooster In reply to armaina [2011-05-15 14:13:56 +0000 UTC]
Right, exactly. Though to be perfectly honest, I think the movie would have gone ahead with seven foot raptors, even if none had existed in the first place.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
armaina In reply to DaPartyRooster [2011-05-15 17:29:03 +0000 UTC]
haha yeah they might have, make it seem cooler and all.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
armaina In reply to LilOrangeDragoness [2011-05-14 17:33:25 +0000 UTC]
Yep! What was in the movie was actually supposed to be a deinonychus, and even then, it was still bigger than that was supposed to be, for dramatic effect.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
LilOrangeDragoness In reply to armaina [2011-05-14 17:45:47 +0000 UTC]
neat! That's an interesting fact I didn't know
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
dorumon210 [2011-05-14 16:56:47 +0000 UTC]
That's what I've been saying for years! i'm so glad that someone else noticed it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
armaina In reply to dorumon210 [2011-05-14 17:05:17 +0000 UTC]
haha yeah. A misinterpretation in the book, and then they were made bigger for dramatic effect. Shoulda been Deinonychus
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
dorumon210 In reply to armaina [2011-05-14 17:32:36 +0000 UTC]
Yeah, also, did you notice that Jurassic Park is really more of a mostly Cretacious park?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
armaina In reply to dorumon210 [2011-05-14 17:34:12 +0000 UTC]
hahahah yesss. I just think Jurassic was easier to say and spell, made for a better title.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
dorumon210 In reply to armaina [2011-05-14 17:36:09 +0000 UTC]
It still would have been better as Mesezoic Park but Jurassic does have a better ring to it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
UberAngus [2011-05-14 16:55:57 +0000 UTC]
Should have put the measurements in chickens
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
armaina In reply to UberAngus [2011-05-14 17:03:36 +0000 UTC]
but that would be too cluttered!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1