Watching this series is actually what inspired me to rewatch JFC with my friend. We were able to watch three episodes, after which she had to ask me if I was okay because I sounded dead inside.
Ariel Nunez it’s bad. It is most certainly bad. But, for some reason, it’s fun to watch with a friend because it’s bad. I think it’s because it’s fun to laugh at the show for everything wrong with it.
@@Dinoceratops It's unintentionally hilarious if you just treat it like a Mystery Science Theater 3000 B movie. The problem was it was marketed as a documentary.
In all honesty, after watching this analysis series, I have to say that I've learned quite a bit more than I've already known. (Also, is "awesome bro" spelled as one or two words?) 1.) I personally believe that real dromaeosaurs look better than the ones portrayed in media (in my personal opinion, the feathers make them look more intimidating, the wings and tail fans look pretty cool, and the whole raptor-prey-restraint sounds a whole lot scarier than how dromaeosaurs attack prey on JFC). Now I already knew about feathered dromaeosaurs ever since I played Zoo Tycoon 2: Extinct Animals where the Velociraptor in that game is the only completely feathered dromaeosaur (minus wings and pronated wrists of course). 2.) I already knew dinosaurs couldn't roar, and I think that dinosaurs would've sounded 5 times scarier in life than in media. 3.) The whole "harmless but not defenseless" thing from Gang Killers. When I first heard the explanation behind that, I had to think for a second. Many modern herbivores that may seem harmless can actually be pretty defensive towards predators (for example, a zebra can usually kick or bite a lion that is attacking it). I used to think that ornithopods were near defenseless (with the exception of Tenontosaurus and Iguanodon), but after realizing how big an Edmontosaurus is compared to a T. rex or how big a Shantungosaurus is compared to a Zhuchengtyrannus, I now beg to differ. That massive tail of theirs could do some serious damage with one direct hit to the skull.
Connor Harris yeah I agree on all your points I personally view accuracy as us getting to know these animals in a way it’s like a friendship when you first know somebody and when you spend more time with them can be massively different experiences you make assumptions that can be proven to be right or wrong also the whole idea of a edmontosaurus bitch slapping a t-rex with its tail sounds hilarious to think about
Seriously: a bird the size of a bear with talons and a menacing wingspan like an eagle that attacks from above is fucking horrifying. Most of the animals in the show don’t look nearly as visually stimulating as more recent paleo art. Also, edmontosaurus is a fucking badass and I would rather take my chances with a majungasarus than and edmontosaurus or a tenontosaurus
Great Explanation of how Jurassic Fight Club fails as a dinosaur documentary. I used to love this show back when I was younger, but all thanks to your scientific analysis and great educational experience of the dinosaurs and prehistoric creatures in this show, the show did not aged well in my opinion. By the way, I absolutely agree everything you said about this show, it’s nothing but complete violence and so brutality. Thanks for the scientific analysis of Jurassic Fight Club and you’re awesome.
I've watched George Blasing's TH-cam videos, and yes, he's a very nice guy and much more laid back, and his knowledge of paleontology, for circa 2012 standards, is not bad. That said, some of his flaws as a paleo-buff still creep through in these videos. Like how he repeatedly emphasizes intelligence as if it would be a deciding factor in a hypothetical brawl (like claiming Acrocanthosaurus was more advanced than Allosaurus/Saurophaganax, and would, therefore, have a major advantage in a fight), to which I say; if an unarmed human fought a gorilla, would the human win simply because he's much more intelligent? He also makes other errors, like claiming the biggest dinosaurs lived during the Jurassic (namely sauropods), which is a common media misconception, but a paleontology buff should know better. And judging by all the letters he answers, yup, his fans are predominantly kids and young teens. Some identify themselves as such, but it's pretty easy to deduce the age of the senders, given how their question are rarely more complex than "Which dinosaur was bigger, Mr. Blasing? Who's your favorite dino, Mr. Blasing? If dino A fought dino B, who would win?" Given what wide appeal dinosaurs have, unless you're making something like Dinosaur Train, if the bulk of the fandom for your dinosaur-centric show are kids, you should really reevaluate the quality of your work.
I think it's kind of offensive to equate Jurassic Park to this. JP had its fair share of inaccuracies and exaggerations but it came out in the 90s and the dinosaurs behaved like animals for the most part. Except the deinonychus-shaped likely-actually-achillobator velociraptors, but since the movie went for high intelligence and compact social behaviour, you could say their psychotic behaviour was a case of nurture, not nature. JFC is just fights, fights, and more fights. The original JP focused a lot on humanity's hubris and the sheer awe these animals invoke in people. Come to think of it, JFC sounds like all cheap JP ripoffs ignoring what made the original so great.
To be perfectly honest, given that the History Channel made this documentary, I'm surprised that it was this accurate; I would have expected time-traveling Nazis and Atlantic ruins.
The more I think about it the way Dromeasaurs are portrayed is hilarious. It's like if they found packs of coyotes millions of years from now and envisioned them as shrink-wrapped super predators that could jump 10 feet straight into the air and regularly took down Bisons
This has to be your best Scientific Analysis video yet. You explained every single thing wrong with this trash documentary. The paleontology community needs people like you to correct the dumb mistakes and misconceptions that History Channel made. I’m excited for your upcoming videos, especially your analysis on Monsters Resurrected. Can you imagine the spirits of the prehistoric animals rolling around in their graves given how they’re poorly depicted in media? This is just like HoopsAndDinoMan’s review except way better.
Here’s some documentaries you can review after Monsters Resurrected: Amazing Dinoworld (NHK) Planet Dinosaur (BBC) Bizarre Dinosaurs (National Geographic)
Also, why would Saurophaganax attack a giant 20-30 ton Sauropod the way they did. They wouldn’t have attacked an adult that recklessly. And if they did, they’d all die! And Saurophaganax is one of my favorite dinosaurs alongside the Spinosaurids, Torvosaurus, the Allosauroidea, megaraptorans and the sauropods!
28:09 I mean to be fair, if the comment section of this video and other videos regarding this show is anything to go by, alot of people(Including myself) were introduced to the show as children and grew up with it Overall, you did a wonderful analysis on how this show fails as a Documentary, but how does it work as mindless, gory popcorn entertainment? Like the kind of entertainment where you leave your brain at the door and just enjoy the stupidity?
Honestly, the fact that it tries to be a documentary ruins any chance for me to see it as anything more than a failure of a documentary. Some people may be able to enjoy it as purely entertainment, and as long as they know it isn't accurate, I'm fine with that. I personally can't really do that, but that doesn't mean other people can't either.
About dinosaurs not being able to roar, if we want to be technical, any loud prolonged sound is considered by Merriam Webster to be the definition of roaring. This is also supported by the modern crocodilians and large birds which make deep pitched noises by forcing air through their throat. In alligators and crocodiles this takes the form of deep bellows and hisses, while birds tend to use these calls to attract mates or intimidate rivals. So yes by the dictionary definition, dinosaurs would be able to roar, just not in the same sense that lions or bears do. And their modern relatives prove this. Also about dinosaurs singing, technically the sounds produced by hadrosaurs such as Parasaurolophus would have sounded like the sounds of tube instruments, so yes dinosaurs could also sing again just not in the same way as birds. From what I gather dinosaurs would make generally the sounds their cousins made and the same types of general noises as animals in their weight class, so say a T.rex would make low frequency grumbles like elephants do to communicate over long distances. Tldr, roaring isn't just a mammal thing, no idea where you got that from, and the sounds they could make could fit the definition of roaring. I know you covered this in the video but I wanted to cover it because it doesn't cover the full picture of the sounds they could make. Dinosaurs have been proven to make surprisingly beautiful sounds and some we would recognize in studying them, just crocodile plus ostrich noises doesn't cover the full picture. And a hiss from say a Spinosaurus would probably be just as terrifying as anything in this show. One more thing, yeah the roaring is extremely excessive in the show but nature isn't a very silent place. Dinosaurs would likely make noise for the same reasons as modern animals; intimidating rivals, attracting mates, defending their territory (birds, reptiles and mammals all do this) so the only reasonable scenes would be say when the Allosaurus/Epanterias/Saurophaganax are roaring at Ceratosaurus to piss off.
The main plobelm guys is that This show is trying to be educational but fail at it Instead of showing Animals Just doing what Animals do (sleep,eat,play,etc) they show they as ferocious beasts That The main flaw of The show But the animation and The dinosaurs desings were cool (like allosaurus and Nanotyrannus)
Riddle me this? So the featherless raptors (some of the main characters in this series) are A-okay, giving them filaments is not important. But the pterosaurs (minor characters who just cameo in one episode) have to be given pycnofibers? That's so bafflingly backward compared to most documentaries from the 2000s-early 2010s (When Dinosaurs Roamed America, Dinosaur Planet, Clash of the Dinosaurs, March of the Dinosaurs, Planet Dinosaur), which always give the small maniraptors feathers but aren't concerned about keeping the pterosaurs (who likewise take a backseat to the dinosaurs) naked.
@@PaleoNerd1905 And then there's Monsters Ressurected, which has a scaly Deinonychus, and yet its Titanis does not look like the Hesperornis from Primeval.
As something go poke fun at, and to see ridiculous scenarios, this series was okay. The animation quality itself was somewhat decent for a seemingly low budget tv show. But as a documentary, it is absolutely terrible. Almost nothing is accurate aside from a few models and details. The scenarios are insane and highly improbable in most if not all cases. If the show treated these scenarios and animal characteristics as speculation, then it may have been slightly passable. A glaring example is the T-Rex’s apparent septic bite. The show treats it and other theories as indisputable fact. As a documentary it flops hard.
Rewatching the episode, I was yet again amazed by the terrible editing. There is a moment, right after Blasing talks about Pachyrhinosaurus having a keratinous horn, where Larry Whitmer talks about how the boss of Pachyrhinosaurus is a very different structure from the horn-anchoring point on a rhino's skull, obviously expressing doubt about that theory, and the episode just moves on from there, acting as if that scene never happened. Why would they leave that in? Showing the certified paleontologists NOT endorsing what your show is preaching? Here's another, there's a bit where Phill Currie is talking about Albertosaurus' range, saying, in no uncertain terms, that fossils of it were only found in Alberta and Montana, and yet the episode claims it ranged from Alaska to Texas (the southern range seems to have been based on a bunch of indeterminate fragmentary tyrannosaur fossils labeled as "cf. Albertosaurus" found across the USA and in Mexico, none from Texas though). Like, good lord, either all the editors on this show had ADHD or they just did not give a shit. Scientific accuracy is one thing, but this show is also a giant insult to the simple art of filmmaking. I noticed something else rewatching it. They say Pachyrhinosaurus was found in Alaska and Alberta, but also in Montana? Meaning, yes, it wasn't just TMP 2002.76.1, they did include Achelousaurus as a species of Pachyrhinosaurus. Giving Blasing and the producers the benefit of doubt, perhaps there was a push back in the 2000s to synonymize the two, but regardless, it still makes no sense why they would use "Pachyrhinosaurus horneri" as the model when they had a whole drowned herd of P. lakustai to use for reference.
Here’s a question since theropods made of sounded like crocodilians or birds what would herbivore sound like and specifically ceratopsians and sauropods
No when I’m trying to say is that wouldn’t that be weird if they made the same exact sounds they will have to sound different Instead of birds in crocodilians
Hello, my son wanted to comment: Um, well, TECHNICALLY the first big-budget film I've seen to feature a feathered non-avian dinosaur was in those like, two shots in Fantasia of that Archaeopteryx sixty-one years before When Dinosaurs Roamed America. Even though that's different 'cause Fantasia is eighty percent traditionally animated rather than partly or fully CG obviously. As of the time I write this I just finished seeing this video series for the first time. And I was very recently just introduced to it by my twin brother. We're probably the only people watching these that technically haven't seen Jurassic Fight Club having only seen a few episodes of it. But my first real exposure to the show outside of just knowing it was a thing was seeing Hoopsanddinoman's review for the first time 'bout two years back. My twin brother and I are both huge animal nerds. This video series reminds me most of the Mistaken Truths video series by Scanova the Carnotaurus. My twin brother and I are almost gonna be fifteen and we first started watching paleo film and mainstream film reviews on TH-cam about three years ago when I was an immature snob. And I've just finally seen this TH-cam series for the first time and loved it.
I used to enjoy this show early on when I was in like, 5th grade or so. Good thing I caught on its nonsense relatively early. There are a few things I want to say regarding this video (fair warning, though: I haven't watched any of your other videos regarding JFC yet, so I don't know if you address any of these in those videos). 1.) While there's obviously no evidence of dromaeosaurids using complex hand motions or vocal mimicry to hunt prey (like in JFC), I do still think that complex hunting strategies, even in the context of cooperative hunting, are within plausibility. I know non-avian dinosaurs have no close analogues with regards to properly judge intelligence (unlike say, how we can reasonably think an extinct elephant was probably smart like modern ones), but (relatively) long story short, if modern crocodylians have shown quite complex and intelligent hunting strategies, it wouldn't surprise me if non-avian theropods did too. There's no evidence (or really any way to prove) that any non-avian dinosaur uncovered so far was exceptionally intelligent (a la corvids, parrots, dolphins, apes, and elephants), but respectably intelligent? Sure. I know you didn't say "dinosaurs were dumb", so note that I'm not accusing you of claiming such. 2.) I'm imagining a crocodilian growl right now. If a non-avian dinosaur could make a similar noise but simply "raise its voice", wouldn't that sound something like a roar? Obviously it's not going to sound like a mammal, but still, roar-like, perchance?
1. I mention the hand motions/mimicry stuff in my Raptors vs. T. rex video, so feel free to watch that one. As for the intelligence of non-avian dinosaurs, you're correct in the fact that they weren't likely to be exceptionally intelligent, and I do think it's possible that some could be respectably intelligent. After all, many birds and crocodilians have proven to be surprisingly intelligent, and they're the closest living relatives of non-avian dinosaurs. Dinosaurs weren't dumb, just not as smart as, say, Jurassic Park would have you believe. 2. Dinosaurs could definitely make roar-like noises (modern crocodilians and even some birds can make really deep roar-like sounds), but a true roar is only produced by mammals. So, the answer to your question is yes.
I don't know if you take requests, but are you planning to do a scientific analysis of Monsters Resurrected? (which I personally think is worse than JFC)
In my opinion, the show itself is rather bad and have lot of problems, which may not limited to: 1. Formulaic nature of episodes and it soundtracks are mostly no fitting for documentary series. 2. Episodes titles being either misleading or more in common with gore/slasher films than anything. 3. focus on one sided fights (because of the aggressive and violent behaviours of the most animals depicted of the show being exaggerated.) 4. Reliances on very wild speculations, often based on unrelated animals like monitor lizards. Dinosaurs deserve better than this show.
@@PaleoNerd1905 Good choice, that show deserves more attention. The weird thing is that rewatching it, I surprisingly found it not as inaccurate as JFC (the Spinosaurus episode being the big exception) and I even commend it for entirely focusing on more obscure animals as its stars (it even introduced me to Acrocanthosaurus) and for giving terror birds their just dues (along with Prehistoric Predators) after BBC made them out to be Smilodon-phobic wimps. That said, once you look at how the show is structured and its focal topics, the similarities to JFC begin to resurface with a vengeance.
I can think of 2 oof moments for Tier zoo like allosaurus used head crest to smash prey and dromaeosaurus hunting like wolfs even at best they hunted like unorganized gang like crocodile or Komodo dragon.
@@stevenrith2386 he never said allosaurus used its head crests to attack prey. He said it used its jaw like a battle axe, and this was due to the weak bite theory (now debunked and it was made before the Paleo Nerd video so it was decent for the time). The wolf pack dromaeosaurs is not entirely inaccurate though they likely did travel in groups and maybe hunted like Harris’ hawks. But Harris’ hawks are an outlier for raptors as most raptors are solitary. So dromaeosaurs were possibly solitary yet somewhat social.
@@WesleyO05 Simply by twisting them around too much. The joints in a skeleton only have a limited range of motion, and if they go past that range of motion, they will either become dislocated, or flat-out break. Think about your own wrists. When you try to turn/rotate your wrists, they can only rotate a set range of degrees and if they go past that range, they will break. So if somebody grabs you by your wrists and twists them around, the rest of your body HAS to follow through in that range of motion or they're going to break your wrists.
Well, if WWD was meant to be shot and narrated like a nature documentary, maybe they shouldn’t have used speculation as it could mislead viewers into thinking it’s fact (I’m looking at you, Liopleurodon!)
The problem is, speculation is pretty much a necessity for any dinosaur documentary, because there's just so much we don't know about prehistoric animals. WWD was very accurate at the time it was released, and most of the inaccuracies are simply Science Marching On. Others, like the oversized Liopleurodon and Ornithocheirus/Tropeognathus, was the result of unreliable size estimates of fragmentary remains and wastebasket taxonomy.
That is agreeable. I can’t stand seeing dromaeosaurs without feathers (although in my opinion, the Jurassic Park/World raptors are the only exceptions because I like to think they’re Velociraptor/Deinonychus hybrids with no feathers).
Land Before Time 75 I know but some even had both. In Trey the Explainer’s feathers video, he said it’s very likely that all dinosaurs would have processed some evidence of feathers. He also addresses that their ancestors were feathered. If sauropods did have feathers, it probably would have been very light bristles on the neck (like hair on elephants if you know what I mean).
I still think dinosaurs could make some weird roar-like bellows, but not the roars you hear from the movies (I don't count creatures like Godzilla since they are fictional creatures, therefore they don't have follow real life anatomy).
And your not the only one, I to watched this when I was child and back then I was an awesome bro and now a days I find the narration cringe and everything to over the top
This show could’ve been like The Truth About Killer Dinosaurs. It could’ve used actual science and speculation to teach people how the fights could’ve went down.
I’m pretty much back then I used to like the show as well are used to have it on DVD but now it’s been a year now since I got rid of it I should’ve destroyed it with a baseball bat but instead I gave it to a friend
21:13 So there is such a thing as convergence: For example, the keratin horn of a rhinoceros and the horn of a pachyrhinosaurus are an example of convergence. Or the saliva of monitor lizards and tyrannosaurus rex or any other animal may contain harmful bacteria.
10 or 11 years ago I used to love this documentary but now it has its problems ever since you tubers like you and the rest of the Dino TH-camrs review yeah it does have a bad reputation sometimes I feel to grab a baseball bat and hit it since I have it on DVD but I’m getting rid of it.
Fair, but that's like saying you like how hairless bears look better than normal bears. It might look cooler to you, but it's just not what the animal looks like.
If I'm going to be honest as a documentary Jurassic Fight Club fails in every single way possible if Jurassic Fight Club was in a school it would get an easy quadruple f- but if we're talking about it is entertainment it's all right
If you're interested in joining the Paleo Nerd Discord server, here's the link: discord.gg/FApgMSW
"this ins't about making dino "awesome bros",it's about the learning we made along the way"
Thaaaaanks!!!!!!!!!!!
First of all jurassic fight club is not a documentary
@@kashan29 It is though
People saying this piece of s**t documentary doesn’t exist, and I can see why they say that
Watching this series is actually what inspired me to rewatch JFC with my friend. We were able to watch three episodes, after which she had to ask me if I was okay because I sounded dead inside.
You still hate JFC, right?
Ariel Nunez it’s bad. It is most certainly bad. But, for some reason, it’s fun to watch with a friend because it’s bad. I think it’s because it’s fun to laugh at the show for everything wrong with it.
Understandable. Whenever I watch these videos, I just laugh on how terrible this show is.
Also when a girl actually watches a dinosaurs documentary with you, quality aside: *rank of master granted*
@@Dinoceratops It's unintentionally hilarious if you just treat it like a Mystery Science Theater 3000 B movie. The problem was it was marketed as a documentary.
In all honesty, after watching this analysis series, I have to say that I've learned quite a bit more than I've already known. (Also, is "awesome bro" spelled as one or two words?)
1.) I personally believe that real dromaeosaurs look better than the ones portrayed in media (in my personal opinion, the feathers make them look more intimidating, the wings and tail fans look pretty cool, and the whole raptor-prey-restraint sounds a whole lot scarier than how dromaeosaurs attack prey on JFC). Now I already knew about feathered dromaeosaurs ever since I played Zoo Tycoon 2: Extinct Animals where the Velociraptor in that game is the only completely feathered dromaeosaur (minus wings and pronated wrists of course).
2.) I already knew dinosaurs couldn't roar, and I think that dinosaurs would've sounded 5 times scarier in life than in media.
3.) The whole "harmless but not defenseless" thing from Gang Killers. When I first heard the explanation behind that, I had to think for a second. Many modern herbivores that may seem harmless can actually be pretty defensive towards predators (for example, a zebra can usually kick or bite a lion that is attacking it). I used to think that ornithopods were near defenseless (with the exception of Tenontosaurus and Iguanodon), but after realizing how big an Edmontosaurus is compared to a T. rex or how big a Shantungosaurus is compared to a Zhuchengtyrannus, I now beg to differ. That massive tail of theirs could do some serious damage with one direct hit to the skull.
Glad I could help! From what I've seen, awesomebro is typically spelled as one word.
Connor Harris yeah I agree on all your points I personally view accuracy as us getting to know these animals in a way it’s like a friendship when you first know somebody and when you spend more time with them can be massively different experiences you make assumptions that can be proven to be right or wrong also the whole idea of a edmontosaurus bitch slapping a t-rex with its tail sounds hilarious to think about
Seriously: a bird the size of a bear with talons and a menacing wingspan like an eagle that attacks from above is fucking horrifying. Most of the animals in the show don’t look nearly as visually stimulating as more recent paleo art. Also, edmontosaurus is a fucking badass and I would rather take my chances with a majungasarus than and edmontosaurus or a tenontosaurus
Great Explanation of how Jurassic Fight Club fails as a dinosaur documentary.
I used to love this show back when I was younger, but all thanks to your scientific analysis and great educational experience of the dinosaurs and prehistoric creatures in this show, the show did not aged well in my opinion.
By the way, I absolutely agree everything you said about this show, it’s nothing but complete violence and so brutality.
Thanks for the scientific analysis of Jurassic Fight Club and you’re awesome.
The fact that you consider this to be a scientific analysis is bizarre.
@@LevTark, get out of my comment and leave me alone.
Please delete this comment and leave me alone.
@@LandBeforeTime75 ...? Are you okay?
@@Perfect-Sininen, LevTarkovski was bothering me.
I didn’t expect our speckly boi here!
I've watched George Blasing's TH-cam videos, and yes, he's a very nice guy and much more laid back, and his knowledge of paleontology, for circa 2012 standards, is not bad. That said, some of his flaws as a paleo-buff still creep through in these videos. Like how he repeatedly emphasizes intelligence as if it would be a deciding factor in a hypothetical brawl (like claiming Acrocanthosaurus was more advanced than Allosaurus/Saurophaganax, and would, therefore, have a major advantage in a fight), to which I say; if an unarmed human fought a gorilla, would the human win simply because he's much more intelligent? He also makes other errors, like claiming the biggest dinosaurs lived during the Jurassic (namely sauropods), which is a common media misconception, but a paleontology buff should know better.
And judging by all the letters he answers, yup, his fans are predominantly kids and young teens. Some identify themselves as such, but it's pretty easy to deduce the age of the senders, given how their question are rarely more complex than "Which dinosaur was bigger, Mr. Blasing? Who's your favorite dino, Mr. Blasing? If dino A fought dino B, who would win?" Given what wide appeal dinosaurs have, unless you're making something like Dinosaur Train, if the bulk of the fandom for your dinosaur-centric show are kids, you should really reevaluate the quality of your work.
Does George Blasing really work on Dinosaur Train?
@@CW56 I never said that.
I think it's kind of offensive to equate Jurassic Park to this.
JP had its fair share of inaccuracies and exaggerations but it came out in the 90s and the dinosaurs behaved like animals for the most part.
Except the deinonychus-shaped likely-actually-achillobator velociraptors, but since the movie went for high intelligence and compact social behaviour, you could say their psychotic behaviour was a case of nurture, not nature.
JFC is just fights, fights, and more fights. The original JP focused a lot on humanity's hubris and the sheer awe these animals invoke in people.
Come to think of it, JFC sounds like all cheap JP ripoffs ignoring what made the original so great.
To be perfectly honest, given that the History Channel made this documentary, I'm surprised that it was this accurate; I would have expected time-traveling Nazis and Atlantic ruins.
The more I think about it the way Dromeasaurs are portrayed is hilarious. It's like if they found packs of coyotes millions of years from now and envisioned them as shrink-wrapped super predators that could jump 10 feet straight into the air and regularly took down Bisons
without hair no less
Imagine shrink wrapped humans
@@karenanewme7520 tbf, we are pretty shrink-wrapped unless you're American
This has to be your best Scientific Analysis video yet. You explained every single thing wrong with this trash documentary. The paleontology community needs people like you to correct the dumb mistakes and misconceptions that History Channel made. I’m excited for your upcoming videos, especially your analysis on Monsters Resurrected. Can you imagine the spirits of the prehistoric animals rolling around in their graves given how they’re poorly depicted in media? This is just like HoopsAndDinoMan’s review except way better.
Also, I think a new name for you is “The Angry Paleo Nerd”. 😂😂😂
Well said.
Here’s some documentaries you can review after Monsters Resurrected:
Amazing Dinoworld (NHK)
Planet Dinosaur (BBC)
Bizarre Dinosaurs (National Geographic)
Bizzare dinosaurs was my childhood (I do know that it had a lot of innacurate stuff in it tho)
Also, why would Saurophaganax attack a giant 20-30 ton Sauropod the way they did. They wouldn’t have attacked an adult that recklessly. And if they did, they’d all die!
And Saurophaganax is one of my favorite dinosaurs alongside the Spinosaurids, Torvosaurus, the Allosauroidea, megaraptorans and the sauropods!
Feathers on dromeosaurs look better anyway
Indeed. They look way better as birds with claws and teeth than bipedal lizards.
Feathers on dinosaurs in general look better.
Reny Rex meh personally scales look better on trikes stegos and sauropods in my opinion but meh what ever you do you
Well said partner.
Every naked dromaeosaurus should be banished to hell and suffer for all eternity
28:09 I mean to be fair, if the comment section of this video and other videos regarding this show is anything to go by, alot of people(Including myself) were introduced to the show as children and grew up with it
Overall, you did a wonderful analysis on how this show fails as a Documentary, but how does it work as mindless, gory popcorn entertainment? Like the kind of entertainment where you leave your brain at the door and just enjoy the stupidity?
Honestly, the fact that it tries to be a documentary ruins any chance for me to see it as anything more than a failure of a documentary. Some people may be able to enjoy it as purely entertainment, and as long as they know it isn't accurate, I'm fine with that. I personally can't really do that, but that doesn't mean other people can't either.
@@PaleoNerd1905 Fair enough
About dinosaurs not being able to roar, if we want to be technical, any loud prolonged sound is considered by Merriam Webster to be the definition of roaring. This is also supported by the modern crocodilians and large birds which make deep pitched noises by forcing air through their throat. In alligators and crocodiles this takes the form of deep bellows and hisses, while birds tend to use these calls to attract mates or intimidate rivals. So yes by the dictionary definition, dinosaurs would be able to roar, just not in the same sense that lions or bears do. And their modern relatives prove this. Also about dinosaurs singing, technically the sounds produced by hadrosaurs such as Parasaurolophus would have sounded like the sounds of tube instruments, so yes dinosaurs could also sing again just not in the same way as birds. From what I gather dinosaurs would make generally the sounds their cousins made and the same types of general noises as animals in their weight class, so say a T.rex would make low frequency grumbles like elephants do to communicate over long distances.
Tldr, roaring isn't just a mammal thing, no idea where you got that from, and the sounds they could make could fit the definition of roaring.
I know you covered this in the video but I wanted to cover it because it doesn't cover the full picture of the sounds they could make. Dinosaurs have been proven to make surprisingly beautiful sounds and some we would recognize in studying them, just crocodile plus ostrich noises doesn't cover the full picture. And a hiss from say a Spinosaurus would probably be just as terrifying as anything in this show.
One more thing, yeah the roaring is extremely excessive in the show but nature isn't a very silent place. Dinosaurs would likely make noise for the same reasons as modern animals; intimidating rivals, attracting mates, defending their territory (birds, reptiles and mammals all do this) so the only reasonable scenes would be say when the Allosaurus/Epanterias/Saurophaganax are roaring at Ceratosaurus to piss off.
The main plobelm guys is that This show is trying to be educational but fail at it
Instead of showing Animals Just doing what Animals do (sleep,eat,play,etc) they show they as ferocious beasts
That The main flaw of The show
But the animation and The dinosaurs desings were cool (like allosaurus and Nanotyrannus)
Riddle me this? So the featherless raptors (some of the main characters in this series) are A-okay, giving them filaments is not important. But the pterosaurs (minor characters who just cameo in one episode) have to be given pycnofibers?
That's so bafflingly backward compared to most documentaries from the 2000s-early 2010s (When Dinosaurs Roamed America, Dinosaur Planet, Clash of the Dinosaurs, March of the Dinosaurs, Planet Dinosaur), which always give the small maniraptors feathers but aren't concerned about keeping the pterosaurs (who likewise take a backseat to the dinosaurs) naked.
It really is a baffling move for a series that claimed not to have the budget for feathered dinosaurs.
@@PaleoNerd1905 And then there's Monsters Ressurected, which has a scaly Deinonychus, and yet its Titanis does not look like the Hesperornis from Primeval.
As something go poke fun at, and to see ridiculous scenarios, this series was okay. The animation quality itself was somewhat decent for a seemingly low budget tv show. But as a documentary, it is absolutely terrible. Almost nothing is accurate aside from a few models and details. The scenarios are insane and highly improbable in most if not all cases. If the show treated these scenarios and animal characteristics as speculation, then it may have been slightly passable. A glaring example is the T-Rex’s apparent septic bite. The show treats it and other theories as indisputable fact. As a documentary it flops hard.
The Walking With series did speculative behavior better than this show.
Rewatching the episode, I was yet again amazed by the terrible editing. There is a moment, right after Blasing talks about Pachyrhinosaurus having a keratinous horn, where Larry Whitmer talks about how the boss of Pachyrhinosaurus is a very different structure from the horn-anchoring point on a rhino's skull, obviously expressing doubt about that theory, and the episode just moves on from there, acting as if that scene never happened. Why would they leave that in? Showing the certified paleontologists NOT endorsing what your show is preaching? Here's another, there's a bit where Phill Currie is talking about Albertosaurus' range, saying, in no uncertain terms, that fossils of it were only found in Alberta and Montana, and yet the episode claims it ranged from Alaska to Texas (the southern range seems to have been based on a bunch of indeterminate fragmentary tyrannosaur fossils labeled as "cf. Albertosaurus" found across the USA and in Mexico, none from Texas though). Like, good lord, either all the editors on this show had ADHD or they just did not give a shit. Scientific accuracy is one thing, but this show is also a giant insult to the simple art of filmmaking. I noticed something else rewatching it. They say Pachyrhinosaurus was found in Alaska and Alberta, but also in Montana? Meaning, yes, it wasn't just TMP 2002.76.1, they did include Achelousaurus as a species of Pachyrhinosaurus. Giving Blasing and the producers the benefit of doubt, perhaps there was a push back in the 2000s to synonymize the two, but regardless, it still makes no sense why they would use "Pachyrhinosaurus horneri" as the model when they had a whole drowned herd of P. lakustai to use for reference.
Now the scientific consensus is that small dromaeosaurs are in fact capable of powered flight, not just gliding
I don’t blame the narrator I blame the producers or the director
You should blame the narrator as well, Ryan. He lies to the audience about some facts like hand communication on dromaeosaurs.
Why he’s just a narrator he is just doing his job
Are you sure about that? Are you REALLY sure?
Yes
@@batspidey7611 The narrator doesn't write the text he reads, for God's sake...
14:01 and by big cats do you mean lions tigers leopards and jaguars since they are the only big cats that actually roar 🦁🐯🐅🐆🐅
Yes
Here’s a question since theropods made of sounded like crocodilians or birds what would herbivore sound like and specifically ceratopsians and sauropods
Probably crocodilians and birds as well. You'd be surprised how many different sounds you can get from those animals.
Paleo Nerd But wouldn’t that be weird though
Modern animals make weird noises all the time.
No when I’m trying to say is that wouldn’t that be weird if they made the same exact sounds they will have to sound different Instead of birds in crocodilians
Hadrosaurs with crests can make loud, bellowing sounds because of tubes in their crests.
I used to love jurassic fight club, now I can see the issues with the show.
Hello, my son wanted to comment: Um, well, TECHNICALLY the first big-budget film I've seen to feature a feathered non-avian dinosaur was in those like, two shots in Fantasia of that Archaeopteryx sixty-one years before When Dinosaurs Roamed America. Even though that's different 'cause Fantasia is eighty percent traditionally animated rather than partly or fully CG obviously. As of the time I write this I just finished seeing this video series for the first time. And I was very recently just introduced to it by my twin brother. We're probably the only people watching these that technically haven't seen Jurassic Fight Club having only seen a few episodes of it. But my first real exposure to the show outside of just knowing it was a thing was seeing Hoopsanddinoman's review for the first time 'bout two years back. My twin brother and I are both huge animal nerds. This video series reminds me most of the Mistaken Truths video series by Scanova the Carnotaurus. My twin brother and I are almost gonna be fifteen and we first started watching paleo film and mainstream film reviews on TH-cam about three years ago when I was an immature snob. And I've just finally seen this TH-cam series for the first time and loved it.
13:41 so a ankilosaur was found with a laranx and in prehistoric planet the T. rex made low hiss and bellows so I guess they roar but idk
I used to enjoy this show early on when I was in like, 5th grade or so. Good thing I caught on its nonsense relatively early. There are a few things I want to say regarding this video (fair warning, though: I haven't watched any of your other videos regarding JFC yet, so I don't know if you address any of these in those videos).
1.) While there's obviously no evidence of dromaeosaurids using complex hand motions or vocal mimicry to hunt prey (like in JFC), I do still think that complex hunting strategies, even in the context of cooperative hunting, are within plausibility. I know non-avian dinosaurs have no close analogues with regards to properly judge intelligence (unlike say, how we can reasonably think an extinct elephant was probably smart like modern ones), but (relatively) long story short, if modern crocodylians have shown quite complex and intelligent hunting strategies, it wouldn't surprise me if non-avian theropods did too. There's no evidence (or really any way to prove) that any non-avian dinosaur uncovered so far was exceptionally intelligent (a la corvids, parrots, dolphins, apes, and elephants), but respectably intelligent? Sure. I know you didn't say "dinosaurs were dumb", so note that I'm not accusing you of claiming such.
2.) I'm imagining a crocodilian growl right now. If a non-avian dinosaur could make a similar noise but simply "raise its voice", wouldn't that sound something like a roar? Obviously it's not going to sound like a mammal, but still, roar-like, perchance?
1. I mention the hand motions/mimicry stuff in my Raptors vs. T. rex video, so feel free to watch that one. As for the intelligence of non-avian dinosaurs, you're correct in the fact that they weren't likely to be exceptionally intelligent, and I do think it's possible that some could be respectably intelligent. After all, many birds and crocodilians have proven to be surprisingly intelligent, and they're the closest living relatives of non-avian dinosaurs. Dinosaurs weren't dumb, just not as smart as, say, Jurassic Park would have you believe.
2. Dinosaurs could definitely make roar-like noises (modern crocodilians and even some birds can make really deep roar-like sounds), but a true roar is only produced by mammals. So, the answer to your question is yes.
I don't know if you take requests, but are you planning to do a scientific analysis of Monsters Resurrected? (which I personally think is worse than JFC)
I'm going to be starting that very soon.
@@PaleoNerd1905 Cool
Can't wait to see
I cant wait for you to rio apart the Spinosaurus.
Jurassic Fight Club be like “Fuck Ceratosaurus”.
In my opinion, the show itself is rather bad and have lot of problems, which may not limited to:
1. Formulaic nature of episodes and it soundtracks are mostly no fitting for documentary series.
2. Episodes titles being either misleading or more in common with gore/slasher films than anything.
3. focus on one sided fights (because of the aggressive and violent behaviours of the most animals depicted of the show being exaggerated.)
4. Reliances on very wild speculations, often based on unrelated animals like monitor lizards.
Dinosaurs deserve better than this show.
This I hope is gonna be the FIRST and LAST time History Channel make a paleo-documentary.
Ariel Nunez unless they can do one right that is.
Agreed.
But knowing History, they’re probably gonna pull another JFC or Ancient Aliens again.
Actually History channel Has Made More, I Can Remember Only One, Its a Documantary Used to Scam People.
What’s it called?
13:05 i think, that this is about book "all todays", not "all yesterdays"
All Todays is not its own book, but a section of All Yesterdays
@@PaleoNerd1905
Ok then
If dinosaurs weren’t able to roar, if they continued to live into the modern day, they probably would’ve adapted to have the ability to roar
What's the next documentary? Also can you do one on the truth about killer dinosaurs?
Didn't tilt my head
And he said the order he plans on in one of his first videos if you can find it
Up next is Monsters Resurrected. I do have plans for Truth About Killer Dinosaurs, along with pretty much every major paleo documentary.
@@PaleoNerd1905 Good choice, that show deserves more attention. The weird thing is that rewatching it, I surprisingly found it not as inaccurate as JFC (the Spinosaurus episode being the big exception) and I even commend it for entirely focusing on more obscure animals as its stars (it even introduced me to Acrocanthosaurus) and for giving terror birds their just dues (along with Prehistoric Predators) after BBC made them out to be Smilodon-phobic wimps.
That said, once you look at how the show is structured and its focal topics, the similarities to JFC begin to resurface with a vengeance.
Honestly the Truth about Killer Dinosaurs is literally a more accurate version of JFC.
@@CW56 ik but there's still alot of inaccuraties there like the Triceratops' design
Fun fact: The dinosaurs were going to clap but the meteor hit and they died before they could.
“History” Channel? More like Propaganda Channel, amirite?
That’s an accurate nickname right there. It’s more like reality shows and outrageous alien information than actual information.
The quote on quote “History” channel is pretty terrible.
What are your thoughts on TierZoo? Do you think he's a good channel when it comes to paleomtology?
I can think of 2 oof moments for Tier zoo like allosaurus used head crest to smash prey and dromaeosaurus hunting like wolfs even at best they hunted like unorganized gang like crocodile or Komodo dragon.
@@stevenrith2386 he never said allosaurus used its head crests to attack prey. He said it used its jaw like a battle axe, and this was due to the weak bite theory (now debunked and it was made before the Paleo Nerd video so it was decent for the time). The wolf pack dromaeosaurs is not entirely inaccurate though they likely did travel in groups and maybe hunted like Harris’ hawks. But Harris’ hawks are an outlier for raptors as most raptors are solitary. So dromaeosaurs were possibly solitary yet somewhat social.
pachyrhinosaurus horn made out of hair? what were these creators of this show on
19:54 I came up with that little name
I absolutely love that he used it!
16:28 watch Tarbosaurus the Mightiest Ever btw, u would be dissapointed
Even as a kid I knew it wasn't as good as other dinosaur documentaries
30:19 was that show so awful Just because of the fights?
When some 20 year old guy on TH-cam made a better documentary than multiple people on a tv show budget with 12 episodes.
13:33 Kids Learning Tube also mentioned that fact in their T-Rex video
Can you do planet dinosaurs next?
Terry Newsome he’s doing Monsters Resurrected next.
@@CW56 k
As entertainment JFC is pretty good but the fact that it is masked as a Nature Documentary really sinks it
I didn't even know there was such a thing as Stupidoceratops Suckitudinus! Which I guess is pretty much a really bad restoration of Pachyrhinosaurus
But, can't crocodiles kind of roar?
Crocodilians can make deep sounds, some similar to a roar, but by definition it is not a roar because only mammals can truly roar.
@@PaleoNerd1905 maybe they do not specifically roar, but the do sounds that are almost the same th-cam.com/video/1_yyvTRVoZQ/w-d-xo.html
According to a paper from 2020 dromeosaurs like Veloraptor would’ve hunted like Komodo dragons, but without the venom
Basically if you like this series that fine,but excatly why is that:( and I think this video explains the reason how JFC fails as a documentary.)
So if a dinosaur tried to pronate its wrist, it would break them? How?
Dinosaurs couldn't pronate their wrist, even if they wanted. The thing is that a dinosaur could only do that if it had broken them.
But HOW would it break their wrists?
@@WesleyO05 Simply by twisting them around too much. The joints in a skeleton only have a limited range of motion, and if they go past that range of motion, they will either become dislocated, or flat-out break. Think about your own wrists. When you try to turn/rotate your wrists, they can only rotate a set range of degrees and if they go past that range, they will break. So if somebody grabs you by your wrists and twists them around, the rest of your body HAS to follow through in that range of motion or they're going to break your wrists.
Kevin Norwood oh okay. Thanks for the explanation
Well, if WWD was meant to be shot and narrated like a nature documentary, maybe they shouldn’t have used speculation as it could mislead viewers into thinking it’s fact (I’m looking at you, Liopleurodon!)
The problem is, speculation is pretty much a necessity for any dinosaur documentary, because there's just so much we don't know about prehistoric animals. WWD was very accurate at the time it was released, and most of the inaccuracies are simply Science Marching On. Others, like the oversized Liopleurodon and Ornithocheirus/Tropeognathus, was the result of unreliable size estimates of fragmentary remains and wastebasket taxonomy.
I guess you’re right. I was mainly pointing out how viewers watching might not pick up on the speculative parts and just accept it all as fact.
To me, a dinosaur without feathers isn’t a true dinosaur, it’s like a mammal without fur (if you know which ones I’m referring to)
Reny Rex, Actually buddy.
Some dinosaurs had feathers while others have scaly skin.
That is agreeable. I can’t stand seeing dromaeosaurs without feathers (although in my opinion, the Jurassic Park/World raptors are the only exceptions because I like to think they’re Velociraptor/Deinonychus hybrids with no feathers).
Ariel Nunez
And they aren’t true dinosaurs, they are genetically engineered.
JFC on the other hand, has no excuse what so ever.
I know that.
Land Before Time 75 I know but some even had both. In Trey the Explainer’s feathers video, he said it’s very likely that all dinosaurs would have processed some evidence of feathers. He also addresses that their ancestors were feathered. If sauropods did have feathers, it probably would have been very light bristles on the neck (like hair on elephants if you know what I mean).
I think the designs of the dinosaurs in Jurassic fight club look cool but they don't look good for a documentary and look better for a action film.
This is probably the only time I agree with you.
I still think dinosaurs could make some weird roar-like bellows, but not the roars you hear from the movies (I don't count creatures like Godzilla since they are fictional creatures, therefore they don't have follow real life anatomy).
How come are mammals able to pronate their wrists but not dinosaurs
13:33 that was part destroy that childhood
25:22 isn't that just the new Star wars trilogy with Rey and shit.
Well I kind of like the show but I didn't like it especially with inaccuracies dromaeosaur with no feathers and the Pachyrhinosaurus
“Pachyrhinosaurus”? More like Stupidoceratops suckitudinus!
@@batspidey7611 lol
18:20 Hey that's just like me
Walking With Dinosaurs + White Wilderness + Animal Face-Off = This
Same,as a child I liked this ""show"" and now not aymore and yes it could have been better
And your not the only one, I to watched this when I was child and back then I was an awesome bro and now a days I find the narration cringe and everything to over the top
This show could’ve been like The Truth About Killer Dinosaurs. It could’ve used actual science and speculation to teach people how the fights could’ve went down.
@@batspidey7611 that's so true,the worst is that it has potential but nononono
This show treats poor Ceratosaurus, Edmontosaurus and Tenontosaurus as if they all went cloaca to cloaca with George’s mom
This video was great!! I totally agree with what you said.
3:01
Is this a oriental yeti?
....It's a (mostly) hairless bear. Read the text.
Paleo Nerd I think they’re slightly illiterate
Looks like an overgrown pit bull.
Since dinosaurs are related to birds and reptiles dromeasaurs tweet and tyrannosaurs Bellow
Correct.
I’m pretty much back then I used to like the show as well are used to have it on DVD but now it’s been a year now since I got rid of it I should’ve destroyed it with a baseball bat but instead I gave it to a friend
You: JFC
Vs.
The guy she tells you not to worry about: PaleoNerd
21:13 So there is such a thing as convergence: For example, the keratin horn of a rhinoceros and the horn of a pachyrhinosaurus are an example of convergence. Or the saliva of monitor lizards and tyrannosaurus rex or any other animal may contain harmful bacteria.
Oh dinosaur George is the problem
10 or 11 years ago I used to love this documentary but now it has its problems ever since you tubers like you and the rest of the Dino TH-camrs review yeah it does have a bad reputation sometimes I feel to grab a baseball bat and hit it since I have it on DVD but I’m getting rid of it.
Good on you! I hope you had fun destroying that awful DVD.
No I gave it away I wish I did destroy it
☹️
I know
Hey, I loved Animal Face-Off as a kid. It was certainly a better than this show.
Yep, still a better documentary than JFC
I already know they can't roar.
What if the show got a Reboot ha ha ha
And dude critics love
Sorry I meant critics love this garbage
Hadrosaurs with crest was use make sound
It’s pathetic and I wasted my life watching it
Not gonna lie i actually prefer featherless raptors over raptors with feathers
Fair, but that's like saying you like how hairless bears look better than normal bears. It might look cooler to you, but it's just not what the animal looks like.
If I'm going to be honest as a documentary Jurassic Fight Club fails in every single way possible if Jurassic Fight Club was in a school it would get an easy quadruple f- but if we're talking about it is entertainment it's all right
🤷🏻♂️Nah I Enjoy Jurassic Fight Club To The End Of The Time.