Dinosaur Character Development

Alright, let's talk about Jurassic Park.

No, not Jurassic World, specifically. Jurassic Park. Like, the whole franchise. Though, admittedly, there's quite a bit about Jurassic World at the end of this post, including big spoilers, so if you haven't seen it yet, only read this if you have a deep and abiding love for spoilers.

Let's start with the book.

So, reading the novel by Michael Crichton has pros and cons.

Pro: The plot is much more fleshed out, and doesn't have holes. "How the heck did Alan Grant know a T-rex's visual acuity is based on movement? You can maybe infer that from a fossil, but not enough to bet your life on it, and he treated it like a known fact!" Well, according to the book, he actually didn't know that until he got to the park and found out they had discovered that on the live T-rex. Same with the hunting tactics of the raptors.

Con: The characters are poorly developed, have no real arcs, and are so obnoxious you hope they all die. I spent the whole book wishing John Hammond, my #1 very most favorite character from the movies, would die a horrible death. And don't get me started on Lex. She was younger in the book - eight years old - and I've never wanted to see an eight year old get eaten by a dinosaur before.

Pro: The mysterious illness of the sick triceratops is figured out. Also the dilophosaurus is dramatically more terrifying, since it's nine feet tall, like it's supposed to be, instead of five. And the pterosaurs were fantastic. All in all, the dinosaurs in the book were much more realistic, and it addressed concerns like the lower levels of oxygen that their bodies weren't designed to handle.

Con: Ian Malcom will not shut up. You thought he talked a lot in the movie? He has whole chapters devoted to his diatribes about chaos theory, and you really wish that T-rex would have just done him in before he could spend the rest of the book boring everybody.

Ultimately, I'm glad I read it, and that I read it after seeing the movie. It gives me the option to pick and choose what I like from the stories - the characters from the movie, and the dinosaurs from the book. But, if you can't handle seeing your favorite characters get turned into horrible people that you want to die, then don't read it.

But there's one element of that book, and more particularly the movies that came from it, that I want to discuss.

The character of the dinosaurs.

The movie really didn't have time to get into the real world concerns of de-extinction, especially for such an ancient species. They're just there, in all their toothy, terrifying, and magnificent glory. The brachiosauruses are munching on tall trees, the stegosauruses stomp around happily, and the T-rex runs on a brutal rampage, eating everything in its path.

The book talks more about the genetic manipulation done to these creatures, and how much filling in those genetic gaps changed the creatures they were bringing to life. And despite that, they're still designed for a world with higher oxygen levels. We see a stegosaurus lumbering across a field, wheezing his labored breath as he struggles to get the oxygen he needs to walk.

And in the book, the dinosaurs were animals. In one scene the main characters get past the T-rex because it has just killed and eaten a brontosaurus, and it wasn't interested in them, beyond defending its kill.

This is, in my opinion, one of the primary problems with the movies... all of them. The T-rex just never stops eating. Same with the raptors.

Now, when the T-rex first stomps her way out of her pen (which somehow became ground level just long enough for her to walk out of... plot hole!!! She really should have jumped out of it, because that would have been cool), we can assume she was hungry. All she'd had to eat that evening was a piddly, little goat. So, yes. Trying to eat the kids, then Malcom, then successfully scarfing the lawyer, are all totally acceptable behavior for a hungry rex.

A couple hours later Ellie and Muldoon show up and save Malcom. The rex had just eaten a whole lawyer, which, though probably downed in 2 bites, was still a hefty meal. The rex's stomach couldn't have been much bigger than a grown man. The all-knowing XKCD supports this theory in their scientific breakdown of how many people a T-rex would need to eat each day if unleashed in New York. They say about half of a grown adult would do the trick.

Yet, despite the meal she'd just fully consumed, she goes chasing the jeep and tries to eat 3 more people.

Now, there are always other explanations. She could have been defending her territory. But, if that's the case, why did she chase them so far? And when they were clearly gone, why did she still keep running after them?

The next day the T-rex eats a full gallimimus, bigger than a grown man, and then shows up later the same day to eat a 6 foot raptor.

It. never. stops. eating.

And then we have the raptors.

On day two of the debacle, they escape from their pen, and we can infer that they were ravenously hungry. The cow they ate the day before was long gone, and with the park having so many problems with a rampaging, insatiable T-rex, they probably hadn't been fed that day. (This is, of course, assuming raptors eat every day, which is believable since they were more like birds than reptiles.)

There are three raptors. They escape, and it's safe to assume that at some point one of them breaks from the pack, because when our hapless humans encounter them, two are out hunting, and one is stuck in the control bunker. If a grown man is more than enough of a meal for a T-Rex, it's more than enough to feed three raptors.

But between those three raptors, they eat not one full grown man, but two. Mr. Arnold becomes a meal for the one stuck in the bunker, who was clearly too full to finish the whole thing, judging by the arm she kindly dropped on Ellie's shoulder. And Muldoon becomes lunch for the other two.

Now, the raptor attacking Ellie in the bunker is totally understandable. It was in an enclosed space when an unknown fellow-predator-looking-creature shows up way too close to its kill.

But what about the infamous kitchen scene?

We have two very full raptors, no more than a couple hours after their last meal, stalking around, outside their normal territory, obviously hunting.

What?

About the only way to explain this behavior is that in this story, dinosaurs are not rational, normal carnivores who eat when hungry and defend their territory. They are unstoppable killing machines who kill and chase and eat in a never-ending cycle of carnage.

Jurassic Park II, Lost World and all that, tried to give the characters of the dinosaurs a bit more depth. We got into the parental instincts of the T-rex, and all the attacks that happened on Isla Sorno were completely justified and made total sense. The raptor massacre was the work of a full, enormous pack, some of whom probably didn't get in on the meal and were apt to go chase Malcom & co. around.

But as soon as Rexy starts stomping around San Diego, he's eating animals and people left and right, with no rhyme, reason, or sense. He's supposed to be looking for his baby, but he's just running around chomping people and biting stoplights.

And then, in Jurassic Park III, we see the raptors get some character development. Their packs not only communicate with each other, but they also protect each others' nests. And, in the end, when they get their eggs back and hear an indication of danger on the beach right next to where they're at, they do the rational thing and run away.

But the spinosaurus?????????

It witch hunts the entire party throughout the WHOLE movie! Like, it saw them and it wants them dead... even though it's had plenty to eat throughout the course of the movie, including multiple party members. It just keeps popping up over and over.

All of this culminates in Jurassic World.

Ahem, SPOILER WARNING.

SPOILERS BEGIN HERE.

The Indominus Rex.

Fascinating character development for a dinosaur. In this instance it made total sense for the dinosaur to rampage everywhere killing things. She wasn't hungry... she ate two people that morning. But she wasn't interested in eating after that.

Owen explained it perfectly - she'd been raised in complete solitude after eating her one sibling, never leaving her pen, and not only was she completely dysfunctional from it, but she was in a new world that was both fascinating and frightening. She stomped around slaughtering whatever she could, because she was messed up in the head, and it was her designers' fault she was like that.

I liked the Indominus. I thought she was an awesome monster.

And the raptors? So, it took the character development of the past films - their communication and pack mentality - and built on it. It showed the difficulty of accepting a human into their pack, even though they had imprinted on him as babies, and up until the very last scene of the movie, they were true to their monstrous selves. Despite him being a pack member, they still tried to kill Owen when he turned his back to them.

When they go out hunting in a pack, even accepting the human soldiers as part of the pack, they still turn on the humans and massacre them with very little provocation.

Theirs and Owen's struggle to allow Owen to be their Alpha is a character arc for the raptors that runs throughout the entire film, and it has a satisfying conclusion. And in that final scene, we see the three remaining raptors and Owen fighting the Indominus as a deadly pack of four.

And that's really how it should have ended.

Buuuuuuut, no.

You just had to go and get the T-rex involved, didn't you?

Rexy was obviously hungry. All she'd had to eat that day was a goat before the park broke down. And yes, other than this brief mention, I'll ignore the ridiculousness of girl-in-heels outrunning a T-rex, since that's not the point.

Now, the T-rex, true to the character established in the rest of the movies, completely irrationally attacked the Indominus. The Indominus was bigger with more teeth and longer claws, but Rexy still felt that insatiable need to rampage and attacked it anyway.

And the one remaining raptor fighting with the rex? Sure, I'll accept that, if I must. The raptor had been trying to kill the Indominus anyway, and it's not like it was a coordinated attack or anything. It was a little cheesy, but I suppose it did make sense for two dinosaurs to try to kill a third dinosaur simultaneously.

Okay, now here's where I have a problem. The Indominus is defeated, and ends up in the lake where it's not going to be eaten by either Rexy or Raptor.

Rexy is still hungry.

There is still a crowd of humans huddling nearby.

Rexy looks at Raptor.

Raptor looks at Rexy.

Rexy nods at Raptor and then walks off in peace.

Whaaaaaat??????

I mean, come on! What was that? The rex is still on her feet, and for some reason she doesn't feel like slaughtering things?  And the raptor isn't going to irrationally attack the rex?

For keeping the character of the raptors so incredibly consistent throughout the course of the whole movie, that was a sickening break in character for both the rex and the raptor.

I think their "alliance" against the Indominus ending in peace was supposed to be heartwarming or something.

It was not heartwarming. It was stupid.

So, let that be a lesson to anyone and everyone hoping to write dinosaurs. You can make them realistic predators, or you can make them irrational killing monsters, but whatever you do with them, DO NOT BREAK CHARACTER! Even when the character is a monster, it can grow and develop. The raptors did that beautifully. But don't make your monsters experience sudden and inexplicable change because the script writers think, "Oh, this would be cool."

Dinosaurs are characters.

Treat them as such.

And thus concludes my rant on the dinosaurs of Jurassic Park.