You clearly underestimate Hollywood's dwindling sanity these days. I'm 100% certain someone saw the name, "Atrociraptor" thought it sounded incredibly badass and here we are now. Granted that's the least of Dominion's issues.
that's what im saying tho they wanted deinonychus in the movie previously then they probably realized "oh wait we have deinonychus woops" and decided to use atroci after a quick google and wikipedia scheme lol
@@Ohmanwhyyourfeelingshurtin the book, but the author at least recognizes the fact and uses the correct name of the species, even throwing a bone saying that it was relacified as velociraptor by the scientist recently
@@adriani9432 well we don't know if the species actually does exist considering that the paleontologist who found Dakotaraptor won't let anybody other than himself examine the fossils which is very sus.
The crazy thing is that Deinonychus was planned for Fallen Kingdom. There were leaks early on in development claiming that the Dromes were going to represent that genus before they swapped the names at the last minute. After Fallen Kingdom was released, a set of concept art was revealed featuring that not only was Deinonychus going to be the star of the Milan sequence, but that they were to be feathered as well - likely displaying the contrast between InGen and Biosyn research. Of course, again, I think they swapped the name because either the lore surrounding the genus in-universe or simply because they wanted something that sounded cool and like a foil for Blue the Velociraptor, despite the two species never interacting in the movie. Keep in mind that this is the series that has introduced Concavenator in the second film of the trilogy, but tossed in Becklespinax. A junior synonym of a mysterious Theropod known from fragmentary backbones while still basing the design off of Concavenator. Because Jurassic World wants to be special like that.
I remember seeing Atrociraptor pop up in Prehistoric Planet only a month after Dominion came out, and I laughed a bit that this otherwise unknown genus suddenly made its pop culture debut twice but in two completely different forms. In fact, I didn't realize Atrociraptor was even a real genus until the Prehistoric Planet episode, initially thinking it was a species made up for Dominion.
@@cryptodino3roberts712 The name sounded so stupid and over the top it had to be made up. Did you expect people to lookup Unobtanium too? Indominus rex sounded like a more legit name.
I also thought it was made up for dominion as well, and i even looked it up and didnt see anything other than jurassic world, honestly suprised its a real animal
Nothing against Atrociraptor as a animal, but I agree, Idk why they choose not only such a fragmentary dromeosaur, but they also did not much to make it any different from the velociraptor we already know We have all the Iconic Dromeosaur, why these Atrocious-raptors ?!
Id argue for uniqueness. They were likely saving Utahraptor for something else and since troodons have only appeared in soft cannon material I guess they opted for a new species
@cryptodino3roberts712 how is it unique when they are just beefier JP velociraptors? Utahraptor would be dumb to bring in too because both raptor species in the movie are already about the size of utahraptor and how they love to upscale raptors the utahraptor would be almost the size of t rex.
@HighAndHumble a regular sized Utahraptor would still be bigger than a jp velociraptor. Secondly they are unique in the way that they are potentially more intelligent or better trained than blue and the other raptors. To be fair we have only seen these trained individuals and never seen wild atrociraptors. But they are stronger and more durable. Thare more blunt snout would also theoretically allow them to have stronger bites. This being slightly backed up since in chaos theory brook lyn looses her lower arm to a atrociraptor bite. Granted a jo raptor could probably due the same but who knows
Just because humans are bad at recognising intelligence among those they don't understand or think of as "lesser" does not mean it doesn't exist. Pigeons are insanely intelligent, wasps are insanely intelligent, chickens are insanely intelligent, wrasses are insanely intelligent, etc. Intelligence is a spectrum, not a scale. Smoking is learned, it is also imprinted on, many species of birds observe other species and develop their own ideas and behaviour based on it. I know because I work with birds daily. It only takes one individual to get the idea or like the smoke, and many will follow. That aside, fantastic video, absolutely love the art included. Also, yes, I am certain that they just looked at the name "Atrociraptor" and thought "wow, sounds like an atrocious raptor, that's good enough"
Something interesting to note about JW Dominion: Therizinosaurus was actually going to be cut from the film. This was becuase when Colin Craparrow found out about the animal, he thought it was a carnivore becuase of it sharp claws (I’m not suprised.). When he found out it was actually a herbivorous theropod, he was close to removing from the film entirely because of that. It took bribing and reasoning from his crew to actually keep the animal in the film. Thank goodness that ballbag is gone from the series. Hopefully, the new guy actually understands the power of huge herbivores and uses it correctly in Rebirth.
@@dr.archaeopteryx5512 I mean hey, he’s the same guy who thought Giganotosaurus was too similar to T.Rex for the public so he made it look like a Legendary Monsterverse Gorosaurus so I wouldn’t put it past him.
Thank you for this: people don’t care about how complete a species is, but it is very relevant information. I agree with species known from more complete remains needing to have the preference when it comes to receiving attention. For instance, it’s not fair nor reasonable that Torvosaurus gurneyi, which is known from such scrappy material, gets more attention than the much more complete Torvosaurus tanneri from the Morrison Formation.
@ it doesn’t matter which is bigger, but which has better remains, and that’s T. tanneri. The more completely-known species is the more scientifically important one.
To be fair, T.gurneyi only appeared in a single pop culture thing on it's own (the Dinosaur Revolution documentary), wheras it plays second fiddle to T.tanneri in the Pop culture appearance both species share in Prehistoric Kingdom (having less skins and I believe lacking sexual dimorphism). Maybe Dinosaur King or Fossil Fighter had one or the other, idk, but I guess I'd count that in favor of T.tanneri unless otherwise specified. It is kinda sad that it has been excluded from the myriad Morrison documentaries, but to be fair, I can't think of many "story roles" it could fill without replacing the more interesting Ceratosaurus or the more commonplace Allosaurus; especially since Allosaurus being stupid common is usually part of the storylines these types of media like to go for. I guess I am not up to date on if tanneri is bigger than the Morrison Allosaurs, but if it is, it could have taken Sauropodphaganax'es role in Planet Dinosaur? Feels a little hairstplitty to me, but tbf, it would have saved us the sillyness of watching Allosaurus getting bullied by its own reskin
@@dr.archaeopteryx5512 I don’t think Ceratosaurus is more interesting than Torvosaurus. Allosaurus deservedly gets a lot of attention, but Torvosaurus (T. tanneri) should receive more attention as well. It’s fine if the other fragmentary species is forgotten by media. 👍🏻
It's a good thing that *Prehistoric Planet* showed and demonstrated what the real atrociraptor look like since the species was introduced in Jurassic world dominion and people think that's what the animal look like well it's a good thing that *prehistoric Planet* straighten this out and showed the real atrociraptor might have looked like.... especially since yes as this video suggests the specimen is incomplete.
You said it best at the start when you called Jurassic World Dominion a "monster movie." It goes back to something Alan Grant said in JP3 calling the dinosaurs "theme park monsters." So naturally, every new iteration of theropods are going to be oversized featherless turkeys with scales and more teeth.
Yes, he said in the first one that these were only animals, not monsters. But they seem to want to taking revenge on humans, and not just hungry creations.
This is exactly why I’ve never taken the inaccuracies in Jurassic Park so seriously. It stands to reason they wouldn’t be perfect recreations of the animals that they were because they don’t even possess all of the DNA and had to be genetically “Frankensteined” together. Even in the books I think I remember it being referenced that they aren’t true dinosaurs because of the nature of their creation. That’s what makes it science fiction. So if there’s anything I’m gonna nitpick about movies like Dominion it’s how bad the writing is lol.
@@codiehaleyt I remember when Robert Bakker took issue with the first movie when the raptor used its tongue in the kitchen scene, saying they treated them like snakes, and all it did was lick a spoon.
@@_GeneralMechanics_ thare actually was a version of the scene where they do legitimately flick their touges out. It was done in stop motion before they did cgi on the final scene. Although inaccurate I think it was a cool and creepy way to show they were searching for the kids beyond just sniffing. They could save something like that for megalania
@@Carlos-bz5oo I knew that but I feel like a flying microraptor is the best candidate for that title. Visually wise it's more different than the others which look like birds with teeth
Honestly, nobody really knew about atrociraptor before this, and i'm really surprised jw made an entire dinosaur after some teeth and a front jaw. I'm glad prehistoric planet made an episode with atrociraptors in it to clear that out. If I was jw, I would've use dakotaraptor. More accurately sized, plus, more known.
@@LibertarianTerriermon *Glances at Stygimoloch and Becklespinax* I get what you're saying but if anything that seems to make you more palatable to the Jurawsick Waaahrld writers
The JW Atrociraptor is my least favorite dinosaur in that franchise. Hate is not enough to describe my intense Hatred for those abominations against science.
Pretty sure it was just for the name. Like in JW1 Indominous Rex is easy to say and remember. Most English speakers already know the word atrocity. And I'm guessing "Utah"raptor sounds silly to them? But who knows what the Big Studio Heads think. Also the idea of a "copyright dinosaur design" is something i've never considered before. That's a very smart point.
22:31 bro, I'm from Brazil, and I only now realized that your video is American even though I read two comments in English and your voice was strange. Then I saw the audio track in Brazilian Portuguese, I'm feeling really stupid now🤡 (more good video I liked it, I hadn't found any videos about the real atrociraptor because people only talk about the velociraptor)
Hey there, as the guy who was one of the authors on the paper is the head of the paleontology department at Montana State University, and my academic advisor, I figured I would let you all know it is pronounced Var-ik-ee-ooh.
I know I'm not the only person that thinks this in-between phase dromaeosaurs represent between traditional therapods and modern birds is simply beautiful
Atrociraptor sounds like a monster name, That's why they chose it, Utahraptor is the name of a state, and Akilobator is a meaningless name to most people, It's not about including raptor on the name
Which is stupid on them because the size of Utahraptor and Achillobator should be enough for everyone to fear these types of Dromaeosaurs. Even the movie velociraptors didn't get that big.
Really? I always like when media included fragmentary taxa species Cause it’s shines the creature in the spotlight and allow people to know if their existence
@Mefilas._intrepidus7 Yes! In fact, if it wasn't for the Jurassic franchise, the Velociraptor, Spinosaurus, Sinoceratops, Stygimoloch, Pyroraptor, Atrociraptor and the Moros intrepidus would be obscure taxa to this day, all of these dinosaurs, yes even the Velociraptor, were heavily fragmentary when they first appeared in the movies, but their rise to fame brought more eyes to their fossils, and allowed for further research to be made.
@@darkonyx6995 I do disagree with the Spinosaurus being obscure. Though Jurassic Park undeniably gave it alot more attention, even without it, I think it would still be relatively popular, up there with guys like Struthiomimus, Torosaurus and Kentrosaurus. Especially due to the fact it would still have alot of controversy about its appearance even if it was given less attention at first.
@@cryptodino3roberts712 It’s just a velociraptor but juiced out a bit. That’s why that crime boss lady referred to them as “Thoroughbreds”, because that’s basically what they are, just raptors that are somewhat bigger and better than the velociraptor. If you didn’t tell me they were atrociraptors I would’ve just assumed they were just genetically enhanced velociraptors.
@@cryptodino3roberts712 and that’s exactly why they’re lame, because they’re just a 2.0 version of another dinosaur. They have no additional features or abilities separating it from velociraptor, making it completely lack its own identity.
I love science, love dinosaurs, and loved the first Jurassic Park when it came out. But then they refused to add complete feathers in their sequels (could have claimed a reason why their first ones were naked), I simply lost interest. Thanks for the info.
@@cryptodino3roberts712 Yes, for the first movie. Then in the magic of Hollywood imagination, he could have finally figured this out. Or switch to using bird - aka avian dinosaur - DNA to fill in the gaps, which would be closer match. Or claim they recovered more complete DNA from the mosquitos.
In the first three movies, it totally makes sense why they don't have feathers because the creatures seen in those films were from the first generations of clones seen in the first movie, the whole point of the second island was to care for the animals and study before shipping them to the Park. And all official cloning stopped after the park shut down and the island was wrecked by a hurricane. Granted they later reveal in outside lore that they were illegally cloning more dinos like the Spinosaur after the park's closure and Site B was abandoned so maybe they could have made more accurate feathered dinosaurs during that time, but that didn't happen. In Jurassic World though, that's a different story, because they were making all new clones at this point and Wu definitely could have implemented more faithful adaptations, but instead chose to stick with the 1st Gen's look. So your criticism holds weight there.
The Jurassic Park franchise has been both the best and worst things to ever happen to dinosaur research. On one hand, it made dinosaurs ridiculously popular and got tons of public interest... On the other though, they keep popularizing inaccurate dinosaurs.
I never really knew about Atrociraptor until now, and I can agree that Dominion was super off with this amazing dinosaur. But in my opinion Utahraptor would have been better
25 minutes? Do we even know enough about this dinosaur to fill up that runtime? And it's bad, apparently? My attention has been acquired. I'll be back later to actually watch this, just dropped by to feed the poor, starving algorithm.
Can we get a dedicated video on the controversy surrounding Dakotaraptor? I keep catching oblique references to it but I have no idea what the full story is
They really had Utahraptor and Achillobator, who were already massive Dromaeosaurs, that would have been perfect replacements to be even more terrifying than the Movie Velociraptor. If they wanted to go outside the box, they could have used Herrerasaurus and Liliensternus.
If I recall correctly, when Crichton was writing JP, Deinonychus was grouped under the Vélociraptor genus. But after the book was published Deinonychus was made it's own genus. So at the time, it was a "giant" Vélociraptor.
Not really. JP's Velociraptor is more of a mishmash of the 90's Deinonychus with plenty of creative liberties. And a different name. Currently, their Velociraptor has nothing in common with any known dromaeosaurid. Additionally, JW has a design (I don't know if it is canon or not) of the Deinonychus, which appears in JW: Evolution 1 and 2.
I like how in dominion their where just their and not really scary than chaos theory turn thing around and make them scary and in red case actually show their intelligence
You can tell family relationships pretty accurately from enough skull material, Nanuqsaurus is basically in the same camp as Atrocirapor. It really starts to becomes a problem when genera start to get described with just teeth like how Nuthetes was thought to be a dromaeosaurid but now it’s known to be a tyrannosauroid due to a more in depth analysis or like troodon is now considered invalid and it was only described by just the teeth
What would happen if we found a new Raptor that didn't have feathers what so ever and instead had scales all over its body since scales can fossilize proven with species like Carnotaurus, would that make it a Raptor or something new but similar?
Raptors aren't diagnostic on the basis of their feathers. But by their skull, hand and foot bones. So yeah, a "featherless" dromeosaur would still be a type of raptor.
I mean, we don't have fully scaly birds, today. If we found a Raptor with extensive scale impressions it would probably be sensible to assume it was an ostrich-like weirdo before declaring it a true scalyraptor. Maybe instead of clinging to outdated Raptor designs, you could try to find an Appreciation for Abelisaurs, Noasaurus, or "Rauisuchids" instead? Or maybe even modern monitor lizards, there's some really pretty ones out there.
Personally, I really like the design of the atrociraptors in the Jurassic Park franchise (especially that of Ghost which is my favorite) but I admit that it would have been cool if they put feathers instead of scales but kept their color code and hands in the right position.However their appearance I find it less curse and old-fashioned than the designs of the raptors in Jurassic Worlds I don't know why
I mean, it is probably based on one of the larger raptor and then given a cooler name, that is what happened with the deinonychus and veloceraptor, and the name "atrociraptor" is based on "atrocity" so objectively cooler name
Do you think Maisie's decision in fallen kingdom have any wait until dominion. I get it, if the dino ect clones deserve to die then the kid clone might as well too and we can't have that. But from a conservationists perspective, was it the move they should have taken given the circumstances. In any case I always wished she wasn't so metaphorical about it. "their alive like me", WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?
Glad people are starting to understand the frustration both paleo nerds and Jurassic fans have with Dominion. Because the atrociraptor in the film are just JP raptors with a pug face and half remembered non-pronated wrists. We don’t need more raptors!!!
They aren't. I feel the atrociraptors are a cool addition to the series and represent the consequences of an technological and evolutionary arms race when creating bioweapons. The atrociraptors are everything hoskins dreamed of and everything Owen feared
JW Writers' Logic: Using large raptor species like Utahraptor or Achillobator? Nah. Using small raptor species and oversizing and shave them? Hell Yeah!
I don’t like to cross the Jurassic franchise and paleontology because I love both and don’t like to critique the jurassic Park franchise, except dominions plot
The most pointless addition to the series like sino ceratops and nasuto ceratops. "Lets add an identical animal that fills in the same role" I hate the jw trilogy
Sinoceratops and Nasutoceratops would've been cool if they hadn't just been Triceratops with their horns changed. Atrociraptor is extra funny because Pyroraptor is ALSO a Velociraptor knockoff design beneath the fluff, but because it was allowed to wear a parrot onesie it was actually comparatively well received
They absolutely chose Atrociraptor over Achillobator for the exact same they chose Velociraptor over Deinonychus. It simply sounds cooler to English speaking ears; because it contains familiar and identifiable sounds, from known emotive words. Honestly, I also think its to do with the Average American's ability to pronounce the names. A-keel-oh-bah-torr still sounds quite cool. Ay-chilla-bayter does not.
Sometimes, the dinosaur world could use a little more 'quirkiness,' right? Atrociraptor may not stand out like its siblings, but it’ll definitely be a unique treat for those who love to explore!
@@LFacts-news let's also not forget that thare are a lot of modern animals that look similar to others like bison and buffalo. 2 different animals but both are essentially big fluffy cows
@@cryptodino3roberts712 ...Bison and (American) Buffalo are literally the same animal tho? I assume you mean the American ones since neither the African Buffalos nor the Water Buffalo are particularly fluffy.
@dr.archaeopteryx5512 shit I didn't know that. I thought they were separate but I guess it really is just different names for the same thing. Like yams and. Sweet potatos
the people making the movie might have thought.. it is hard for the children watching the movie to pronounce dynonikus. Velociraptor easier to pronounce and remember, or at least the kids watching the show would remember the word "raptor".
I dont understand this video. The Jurassic franchise starts at the top by naming the wrong Era. It's snappier than Cretaceous, Michael Crichton admitted this happily. This logic applied, to me, absolves the franchise from scientific accuracy. They aren't even dinosaurs they're just cloned lizards with a bunch of genetic material from different animals.
No it dosen't absolves the franchise of not including some sort of scientific accuratie. The first Jurassic Park movie had the success it had because a part of this success was due to them putitng big efforts at adding scientific datas and stuff into it, whatever if it's outdated today. Jurassic World throwed all that out. And no, Jurassic Park dinosaurs have never been supposedly mutant monsters that shit started in JP3 to excuses the production of the movies for making shity dinos designs from what they thought, with their non-existant inteligence, the public would've been more receptive to. Jurassic Park and The Lost World were supposed to be real dinosaurs not mutationed by DNA splicing. Do you see the scientists characters in those movies pointing how inacurate the dinosaurs are ? Well no, because they are the real one to them.
@@foxxtitan7028 Jurassic park always had inaccurate dinosaurs even for it's time, the teeth of the T.rex are thin and brittle and it's arms are too big, the Dilophosaurus has a completely wrong skull shape and of course a neck frill and venom, the Triceratops also has a completely wrong skull shape aswell, it's toes are too elephantine and it's tail is too big, the Gallimimus walks more like a human that proper birds, it's feet are oversized too, and sure, the Deinonychus used to be in the same genus as the Velociraptor, but even at that time this was a questionable relationship that didn't last long, and this decision was solely made because the name "Velociraptor" sounded cooler than "Deinonychus", despite being a fragmentary taxa at the time. Sure, Jurassic Park was extremely important for updating the public view of dinosaurs, from cold-blooded lumbering lizards to active bird-like animals, as well as bringing more eyes to the field of paleontology, but it wasn't perfect, not at all.
@@foxxtitan7028 Well no, even in the first book it was said that they were spliced with frog and other DNA of living species to explain the fact that some things may be inaccurate (say, the size of the Velociraptors/Deinonychus). Yes, they were always supposed to be animals with normal behaviour, but they were never meant to be "real Dinosaurs". I do see what you were trying to say though.
@Luokeyo I was talkin about the movie since it has quite the differences in how dinosaur genetics is treated. Also I will further press my argument that yes they were meant to be real dinosaur, at least real to the characters's universe. To proove that I can remind you both dig scenes in JP1 and JP3. They digs up giant velociraptor fossils skeletons the same size as the one alive on the islands who are supposed to be the "inaccurate/genetically modified ones". Why they unearth inaccurate skeletons fossils ? Because the dinosaur in the first trilogy (outside of JP3) are meant to be 'their' real dinosaurs. So it should've be an argument against those who complain about the lack of scientific accuracy, but even being established from this first dig scene that dinosaurs will not be 100% accurate it didn't stop Stan Winston and his crew to put as much science in their design and working with paleontologist to create believable design while keeping a margin for including creative liberty, this as a whole have bring Jurassic Park to his success, it is why it have change the vision of the public about dinosaurs in the entire world.
@@foxxtitan7028It's not that deep. JP and JW were worked on by different people with different intentions behind the dinosaurs. JW's writers probably took Wu's discussion with Hammond in the first book regarding the authenticity of the dinosaurs and ran with it. Whether or not they're real dinosaurs matters far less in the movies than it does in the books anyways, so don't worry about it. I don't think the folks behind the World movies even care considering the Dominion prologue.
They chose atrociraptor for the name. Atroci: atrocity, atrocious, gives the audience the feeling this animal is capable of atrocious acts or that they are evil in some way. It's really not hard to connect the dots.
It's pronounced "AKeroraptor", not "Asheroraptor". It comes from the Greek Acheron, one of the rivers of the underworld. CH is always pronounced K if it comes from a Greek root.
I do find it hilariously frustrating that the handler or whoever the fuck was controlling the atrociraptors made a big speech about “genetic purity over genetic hybrids” that’s clearly a meta jab at the use of hybrids from the earlier movies… and yet the raptors they have are still every bit scale-clad, broken wristed genetic cocktails as any of the other raptors from the Jurassic movies.
@@thewoollyviking5928 she didn't say anything about genetic purity. She was talking about their loyalty and how it can't be engineered it has to be earned
I may not forgive them for deciding to deliberately repeat their serious mistake with the Velociraptors in JP. 😂 "Atrociraptor" sounds neat and marketable? I would rather them refer to the original JP raptors as "Deinonychus" or "Utahraptors" than cause more confusion by introducing more innacurate dinosaurs.
I'm going to be honest, when I first saw trailers and posters for Jurassic World: Dominion that featured Atrociraptor . . . I thought it was just some weird looking Velociraptor . . .
Watched the first Jurassic World movie, but was bored the entire time. It was advertised to be like the first Jurassic Park movie, which was a like, since the plot and characters were completely unlikable. I had no idea what that raptor was in the few clips I saw online.
Yeah, JW was p underwhelming. Guess that's what you get when you let an awesomebro whose most notable prior work was "book of Henry" shit all over a beloved but long-dead franchise.
@dr.archaeopteryx5512 anyone who uses the term awesomebro on a sentence unironically is invalid. I'm sorry but after I read the word I couldn't understand the rest of your comment
I feel like you're being deliberately obtuse about the name. Its instantly recognizable to the general public as a portmanteau of atrocity and raptor, which is granted a bit on the nose for how they fit into the film's story but these films cater to the lowest common denominator so like... yeah obviously they want to use the name atrociraptor. What do you think the name "achilobator" means to the general public? And idk its kinda poetic given how its used in the story that the real animal was a similarly-sized animal to velociraptor and its depiction was butchered in similar ways.
It's hard to remember that "Name cool" is like, one of the highest priorities when it comes to slop-machine produced dinosaur movies. Or I guess "Name pleasant sounding" for Fasolasuchus, maybe? Does it count if the movie never mentions the animals name? Anyway, can't blame Hollywood too much on this one, I'm not sure what kinda crack some paleontologists are smoking to think some of the names they come up with are acceptable. Good luck getting someone without a special interest in the topic to say the word "Saurornitholestes" off their own volition, much less pronounce it correctly
I already dont like the jirassic world movies regardless of the dino inaccurate sruff. Isnt is aomething that can just be chocked up to the genetic reconstruction gaps being filled wrong?
On a second note, can we have a discussion about how scientists give dinosaurs unfitting names? I think I speak for many people here. With a few exceptions, most dinosaurs have lame ass names!
You clearly underestimate Hollywood's dwindling sanity these days. I'm 100% certain someone saw the name, "Atrociraptor" thought it sounded incredibly badass and here we are now. Granted that's the least of Dominion's issues.
I always jokingly call them Atrocious-Raptors.
That's why they chose to use velociraptor in the first movie because dynonikus doesn't sound as cool
that's what im saying tho they wanted deinonychus in the movie previously
then they probably realized "oh wait we have deinonychus woops" and decided to use atroci after a quick google and wikipedia scheme lol
@@thelittleal1212you’re not wrong, they’re atrocious.
@@Ohmanwhyyourfeelingshurtin the book, but the author at least recognizes the fact and uses the correct name of the species, even throwing a bone saying that it was relacified as velociraptor by the scientist recently
I love how Dakotaraptor is so problematic it doesn't even get a mention.
8:55
@@adriani9432 well we don't know if the species actually does exist considering that the paleontologist who found Dakotaraptor won't let anybody other than himself examine the fossils which is very sus.
The crazy thing is that Deinonychus was planned for Fallen Kingdom. There were leaks early on in development claiming that the Dromes were going to represent that genus before they swapped the names at the last minute. After Fallen Kingdom was released, a set of concept art was revealed featuring that not only was Deinonychus going to be the star of the Milan sequence, but that they were to be feathered as well - likely displaying the contrast between InGen and Biosyn research. Of course, again, I think they swapped the name because either the lore surrounding the genus in-universe or simply because they wanted something that sounded cool and like a foil for Blue the Velociraptor, despite the two species never interacting in the movie.
Keep in mind that this is the series that has introduced Concavenator in the second film of the trilogy, but tossed in Becklespinax. A junior synonym of a mysterious Theropod known from fragmentary backbones while still basing the design off of Concavenator.
Because Jurassic World wants to be special like that.
Its the 'Atroci' in the name that they thought sounded cool not the raptor part.
well, it's both, but it certainly doesn't have anything to do with the number of syllables or that it starts with an 'A'.
I remember seeing Atrociraptor pop up in Prehistoric Planet only a month after Dominion came out, and I laughed a bit that this otherwise unknown genus suddenly made its pop culture debut twice but in two completely different forms. In fact, I didn't realize Atrociraptor was even a real genus until the Prehistoric Planet episode, initially thinking it was a species made up for Dominion.
All you had to do was google
@@cryptodino3roberts712 The name sounded so stupid and over the top it had to be made up. Did you expect people to lookup Unobtanium too?
Indominus rex sounded like a more legit name.
I also thought it was made up for dominion as well, and i even looked it up and didnt see anything other than jurassic world, honestly suprised its a real animal
Not only that, in the scene, it was accompanied with an Anodontosaurus, an Anky featured in Path of Titans
I thought it was a hybrid because they kept talking about how it was bred for certain purposes
Nothing against Atrociraptor as a animal, but I agree, Idk why they choose not only such a fragmentary dromeosaur, but they also did not much to make it any different from the velociraptor we already know
We have all the Iconic Dromeosaur, why these Atrocious-raptors ?!
Id argue for uniqueness. They were likely saving Utahraptor for something else and since troodons have only appeared in soft cannon material I guess they opted for a new species
@cryptodino3roberts712 how is it unique when they are just beefier JP velociraptors?
Utahraptor would be dumb to bring in too because both raptor species in the movie are already about the size of utahraptor and how they love to upscale raptors the utahraptor would be almost the size of t rex.
@HighAndHumble a regular sized Utahraptor would still be bigger than a jp velociraptor. Secondly they are unique in the way that they are potentially more intelligent or better trained than blue and the other raptors. To be fair we have only seen these trained individuals and never seen wild atrociraptors. But they are stronger and more durable. Thare more blunt snout would also theoretically allow them to have stronger bites. This being slightly backed up since in chaos theory brook lyn looses her lower arm to a atrociraptor bite. Granted a jo raptor could probably due the same but who knows
They had to have done it purely on the name. It seems like something a dumb studio exec would do for marketability.
@KertaDrake why
Just because humans are bad at recognising intelligence among those they don't understand or think of as "lesser" does not mean it doesn't exist. Pigeons are insanely intelligent, wasps are insanely intelligent, chickens are insanely intelligent, wrasses are insanely intelligent, etc. Intelligence is a spectrum, not a scale. Smoking is learned, it is also imprinted on, many species of birds observe other species and develop their own ideas and behaviour based on it. I know because I work with birds daily. It only takes one individual to get the idea or like the smoke, and many will follow.
That aside, fantastic video, absolutely love the art included. Also, yes, I am certain that they just looked at the name "Atrociraptor" and thought "wow, sounds like an atrocious raptor, that's good enough"
Something interesting to note about JW Dominion: Therizinosaurus was actually going to be cut from the film. This was becuase when Colin Craparrow found out about the animal, he thought it was a carnivore becuase of it sharp claws (I’m not suprised.). When he found out it was actually a herbivorous theropod, he was close to removing from the film entirely because of that. It took bribing and reasoning from his crew to actually keep the animal in the film. Thank goodness that ballbag is gone from the series. Hopefully, the new guy actually understands the power of huge herbivores and uses it correctly in Rebirth.
Please tell me you're either joking or lying lmfao. What kind of concave-brain awesomebro nonsense logic even is that
@@dr.archaeopteryx5512 I mean hey, he’s the same guy who thought Giganotosaurus was too similar to T.Rex for the public so he made it look like a Legendary Monsterverse Gorosaurus so I wouldn’t put it past him.
I’m in love with the hot spring illustration of the pair enjoying the heat in the snow.
Only youtuber ive seen actually explain how paleontologists are actually able to infer what an animal couldve looked like. Props.
Happy 2025!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
@ Happy 2025!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thank you for this: people don’t care about how complete a species is, but it is very relevant information. I agree with species known from more complete remains needing to have the preference when it comes to receiving attention.
For instance, it’s not fair nor reasonable that Torvosaurus gurneyi, which is known from such scrappy material, gets more attention than the much more complete Torvosaurus tanneri from the Morrison Formation.
Especially since tanner is actually the bigger of the two.
@ it doesn’t matter which is bigger, but which has better remains, and that’s T. tanneri.
The more completely-known species is the more scientifically important one.
To be fair, T.gurneyi only appeared in a single pop culture thing on it's own (the Dinosaur Revolution documentary), wheras it plays second fiddle to T.tanneri in the Pop culture appearance both species share in Prehistoric Kingdom (having less skins and I believe lacking sexual dimorphism). Maybe Dinosaur King or Fossil Fighter had one or the other, idk, but I guess I'd count that in favor of T.tanneri unless otherwise specified.
It is kinda sad that it has been excluded from the myriad Morrison documentaries, but to be fair, I can't think of many "story roles" it could fill without replacing the more interesting Ceratosaurus or the more commonplace Allosaurus; especially since Allosaurus being stupid common is usually part of the storylines these types of media like to go for. I guess I am not up to date on if tanneri is bigger than the Morrison Allosaurs, but if it is, it could have taken Sauropodphaganax'es role in Planet Dinosaur? Feels a little hairstplitty to me, but tbf, it would have saved us the sillyness of watching Allosaurus getting bullied by its own reskin
@@dr.archaeopteryx5512 Tanneri is roughly the same size as A. anax (formerly Saurophaganax).
@@dr.archaeopteryx5512 I don’t think Ceratosaurus is more interesting than Torvosaurus. Allosaurus deservedly gets a lot of attention, but Torvosaurus (T. tanneri) should receive more attention as well. It’s fine if the other fragmentary species is forgotten by media. 👍🏻
It's a good thing that *Prehistoric Planet* showed and demonstrated what the real atrociraptor look like since the species was introduced in Jurassic world dominion and people think that's what the animal look like well it's a good thing that *prehistoric Planet* straighten this out and showed the real atrociraptor might have looked like.... especially since yes as this video suggests the specimen is incomplete.
what episode was it?
@erikwolff2942 episode 5 of season 1
Dude only dumb people would believe that. Jurassic world is for entertainment purposes only
You said it best at the start when you called Jurassic World Dominion a "monster movie." It goes back to something Alan Grant said in JP3 calling the dinosaurs "theme park monsters." So naturally, every new iteration of theropods are going to be oversized featherless turkeys with scales and more teeth.
Yes, he said in the first one that these were only animals, not monsters. But they seem to want to taking revenge on humans, and not just hungry creations.
This is exactly why I’ve never taken the inaccuracies in Jurassic Park so seriously. It stands to reason they wouldn’t be perfect recreations of the animals that they were because they don’t even possess all of the DNA and had to be genetically “Frankensteined” together. Even in the books I think I remember it being referenced that they aren’t true dinosaurs because of the nature of their creation. That’s what makes it science fiction. So if there’s anything I’m gonna nitpick about movies like Dominion it’s how bad the writing is lol.
@@codiehaleyt I remember when Robert Bakker took issue with the first movie when the raptor used its tongue in the kitchen scene, saying they treated them like snakes, and all it did was lick a spoon.
@@codiehaleyt whatever
@@_GeneralMechanics_ thare actually was a version of the scene where they do legitimately flick their touges out. It was done in stop motion before they did cgi on the final scene. Although inaccurate I think it was a cool and creepy way to show they were searching for the kids beyond just sniffing. They could save something like that for megalania
>gliding
There are now multiple studies showing microraptorines were powered flyers and couldn't glide well
Damn. So they were actual flying dinosaurs
@@cryptodino3roberts712 They and Rahonavis and true birds of course
@@Carlos-bz5oo so just paraves in general then
@@Carlos-bz5oo I knew that but I feel like a flying microraptor is the best candidate for that title. Visually wise it's more different than the others which look like birds with teeth
@@cryptodino3roberts712 Plus YiQi
Idc(well u got good Point like always)I love the Atrociraptor! it deserves the spotlight.
Honestly, nobody really knew about atrociraptor before this, and i'm really surprised jw made an entire dinosaur after some teeth and a front jaw. I'm glad prehistoric planet made an episode with atrociraptors in it to clear that out. If I was jw, I would've use dakotaraptor. More accurately sized, plus, more known.
Until you realize Dakotaraptor's validity is a subject of an ongoing debate
@@LibertarianTerriermon *Glances at Stygimoloch and Becklespinax* I get what you're saying but if anything that seems to make you more palatable to the Jurawsick Waaahrld writers
The JW Atrociraptor is my least favorite dinosaur in that franchise. Hate is not enough to describe my intense Hatred for those abominations against science.
It's not that deep
I don't actually hate it that much, but it's still my least favorite JP Dino.
Same, they feel like cheap velociraptor knockoffs that has barely any distinguishing traits to separate them from the JP raptors
@@rextexan4727 they aren't
Pretty sure it was just for the name. Like in JW1 Indominous Rex is easy to say and remember. Most English speakers already know the word atrocity. And I'm guessing "Utah"raptor sounds silly to them? But who knows what the Big Studio Heads think.
Also the idea of a "copyright dinosaur design" is something i've never considered before. That's a very smart point.
Thanks for posting this on my birthday.
22:31 bro, I'm from Brazil, and I only now realized that your video is American even though I read two comments in English and your voice was strange. Then I saw the audio track in Brazilian Portuguese, I'm feeling really stupid now🤡 (more good video I liked it, I hadn't found any videos about the real atrociraptor because people only talk about the velociraptor)
Hey there, as the guy who was one of the authors on the paper is the head of the paleontology department at Montana State University, and my academic advisor, I figured I would let you all know it is pronounced Var-ik-ee-ooh.
Ok I subscribe to your monster channel so I’ll be ready for anything toku related
it's probably because of the name for the cool factor
I know I'm not the only person that thinks this in-between phase dromaeosaurs represent between traditional therapods and modern birds is simply beautiful
Atrociraptor sounds like a monster name, That's why they chose it, Utahraptor is the name of a state, and Akilobator is a meaningless name to most people, It's not about including raptor on the name
Which is stupid on them because the size of Utahraptor and Achillobator should be enough for everyone to fear these types of Dromaeosaurs. Even the movie velociraptors didn't get that big.
I suspect it's the combination of "atrocious/atrocity" and "raptor" that made them pick it.
In general I’m not a fan of including incredibly fragmentary taxa in paleo media, cause we know virtually nothing about the animal.
Really?
I always like when media included fragmentary taxa species
Cause it’s shines the creature in the spotlight and allow people to know if their existence
@Mefilas._intrepidus7 Yes! In fact, if it wasn't for the Jurassic franchise, the Velociraptor, Spinosaurus, Sinoceratops, Stygimoloch, Pyroraptor, Atrociraptor and the Moros intrepidus would be obscure taxa to this day, all of these dinosaurs, yes even the Velociraptor, were heavily fragmentary when they first appeared in the movies, but their rise to fame brought more eyes to their fossils, and allowed for further research to be made.
@@darkonyx6995 I do disagree with the Spinosaurus being obscure. Though Jurassic Park undeniably gave it alot more attention, even without it, I think it would still be relatively popular, up there with guys like Struthiomimus, Torosaurus and Kentrosaurus. Especially due to the fact it would still have alot of controversy about its appearance even if it was given less attention at first.
I don't see the problem with it. If anything it can lead to further creative liberties taken with the designs and behavior
Damn things keep turning out to be cute and fluffy.
Jurassic World Atrociraptor in a nutshell:
What if…
Velociraptor…
But slightly bigger and faster.
Both Irl and JW are roughly the same size, but different skull shapes.
Not to mention way stronger. These things were busting down doors and can shake off hard landings like almost nothing.
@@cryptodino3roberts712 It’s just a velociraptor but juiced out a bit. That’s why that crime boss lady referred to them as “Thoroughbreds”, because that’s basically what they are, just raptors that are somewhat bigger and better than the velociraptor. If you didn’t tell me they were atrociraptors I would’ve just assumed they were just genetically enhanced velociraptors.
@ReyVelocii but they are legitimately better in almost every way . They are the upgrade
@@cryptodino3roberts712 and that’s exactly why they’re lame, because they’re just a 2.0 version of another dinosaur. They have no additional features or abilities separating it from velociraptor, making it completely lack its own identity.
Atrociraptor is a kick ass name, just like Saurophaganax, or...Allosaurus Anax, do y'all think cooler names have more chance of being dubium?
I mean idk. Seems like it. Especially with gojira saurus
It's just coincidence.
@@Bagelgeuse there ain't no way, they taking all the cool names
And yet Tyrannosaurus isn't dubious despite having an awesome name
@@kgmc29 makes sense, BUT WE LOST SAUROPHAGANAX, A.A? NO, NOOOOOO
I love science, love dinosaurs, and loved the first Jurassic Park when it came out. But then they refused to add complete feathers in their sequels (could have claimed a reason why their first ones were naked), I simply lost interest. Thanks for the info.
Thare literally is a reason. Frog DNA and Dr wu literally never figured out how to get or implement the feather gene
@@cryptodino3roberts712 Yes, for the first movie. Then in the magic of Hollywood imagination, he could have finally figured this out. Or switch to using bird - aka avian dinosaur - DNA to fill in the gaps, which would be closer match. Or claim they recovered more complete DNA from the mosquitos.
@@johnnehrich9601 how
@@cryptodino3roberts712 Oh, that explains their glossy, wet, warty skin. 🥸
In the first three movies, it totally makes sense why they don't have feathers because the creatures seen in those films were from the first generations of clones seen in the first movie, the whole point of the second island was to care for the animals and study before shipping them to the Park. And all official cloning stopped after the park shut down and the island was wrecked by a hurricane.
Granted they later reveal in outside lore that they were illegally cloning more dinos like the Spinosaur after the park's closure and Site B was abandoned so maybe they could have made more accurate feathered dinosaurs during that time, but that didn't happen.
In Jurassic World though, that's a different story, because they were making all new clones at this point and Wu definitely could have implemented more faithful adaptations, but instead chose to stick with the 1st Gen's look. So your criticism holds weight there.
The Jurassic Park franchise has been both the best and worst things to ever happen to dinosaur research. On one hand, it made dinosaurs ridiculously popular and got tons of public interest... On the other though, they keep popularizing inaccurate dinosaurs.
I never really knew about Atrociraptor until now, and I can agree that Dominion was super off with this amazing dinosaur. But in my opinion Utahraptor would have been better
Bring on the TERROR BIRD'S!
25 minutes? Do we even know enough about this dinosaur to fill up that runtime? And it's bad, apparently? My attention has been acquired. I'll be back later to actually watch this, just dropped by to feed the poor, starving algorithm.
Agora vai ter que fazer um vídeo do Pyroraptor, que também é muito fragmentado
Can we get a dedicated video on the controversy surrounding Dakotaraptor? I keep catching oblique references to it but I have no idea what the full story is
I am going to be honest until your video, I thought Universal made up the Atrociraptor.
I always knew they were real Dinos.(all Jp Dinos are real but the hybrids.)
@@excalibursaurusm5701 all you had to do was google
They really had Utahraptor and Achillobator, who were already massive Dromaeosaurs, that would have been perfect replacements to be even more terrifying than the Movie Velociraptor. If they wanted to go outside the box, they could have used Herrerasaurus and Liliensternus.
Will you do mid cretaceous Brachiosarids? The last era they reached.
1:01 you cant hide that theme i know where its from!
Love the big chicken in the thumbnail c:
Pyroraptor (another raptor in JW dominion) is also super fragmented too
I have a question why couldn't they just use the utahraptor? The atrociraptor in the movie quite literally matches the description of utahraptor.
add achillobator, it is big, fairly complete and has a "cool" name
Super excited for World of Monsters
17:56 They can't use Deinonychus because that's what the Velociraptors are.
If I recall correctly, when Crichton was writing JP, Deinonychus was grouped under the Vélociraptor genus. But after the book was published Deinonychus was made it's own genus. So at the time, it was a "giant" Vélociraptor.
Labels are labels. They are arbitrary.
@@Stothehighestexcept, that deinonychus was not as big as the Jurassic world raptors
@@EDGEscience so then what's the problem with using atrociraptor.
Not really. JP's Velociraptor is more of a mishmash of the 90's Deinonychus with plenty of creative liberties. And a different name. Currently, their Velociraptor has nothing in common with any known dromaeosaurid. Additionally, JW has a design (I don't know if it is canon or not) of the Deinonychus, which appears in JW: Evolution 1 and 2.
11:35 Most Xtreme mention?!
This time it was deliberate
the original plan was for them to be deinonychus, but they changed them to atrociraptors during production
I like how in dominion their where just their and not really scary than chaos theory turn thing around and make them scary and in red case actually show their intelligence
Well it's a differeence of 2 different scenarios
Am I the only one who compares The Atrociraptor to The Dromaeosaurus cuz I they got a similar skull?(Yes.)
You can tell family relationships pretty accurately from enough skull material, Nanuqsaurus is basically in the same camp as Atrocirapor. It really starts to becomes a problem when genera start to get described with just teeth like how Nuthetes was thought to be a dromaeosaurid but now it’s known to be a tyrannosauroid due to a more in depth analysis or like troodon is now considered invalid and it was only described by just the teeth
Can you also make a video about Gnatalie the first Green Bone Dino ever to known in NHMLA? Or Saurophaganax as two separate new species?
I'd prefer to wait till Gnatalie's identity is confirmed.
@@EDGEscienceanyway, Atrociraptors was planned to be Deinonychus till whatever reasons get replaced. Would you think of that?
2:18
Where's Dakotaraptor ?
What would happen if we found a new Raptor that didn't have feathers what so ever and instead had scales all over its body since scales can fossilize proven with species like Carnotaurus, would that make it a Raptor or something new but similar?
Raptors aren't diagnostic on the basis of their feathers. But by their skull, hand and foot bones. So yeah, a "featherless" dromeosaur would still be a type of raptor.
Feathers can fossilize. If a scaly raptor was found it would simply be a scaly raptor. Unusual because feathers are ancestral to the group.
@@EDGEscience Stranger things have happened.
I mean, we don't have fully scaly birds, today. If we found a Raptor with extensive scale impressions it would probably be sensible to assume it was an ostrich-like weirdo before declaring it a true scalyraptor.
Maybe instead of clinging to outdated Raptor designs, you could try to find an Appreciation for Abelisaurs, Noasaurus, or "Rauisuchids" instead? Or maybe even modern monitor lizards, there's some really pretty ones out there.
@@dr.archaeopteryx5512 it's just a question
Personally, I really like the design of the atrociraptors in the Jurassic Park franchise (especially that of Ghost which is my favorite) but I admit that it would have been cool if they put feathers instead of scales but kept their color code and hands in the right position.However their appearance I find it less curse and old-fashioned than the designs of the raptors in Jurassic Worlds I don't know why
I mean, it is probably based on one of the larger raptor and then given a cooler name, that is what happened with the deinonychus and veloceraptor, and the name "atrociraptor" is based on "atrocity" so objectively cooler name
Do you think Maisie's decision in fallen kingdom have any wait until dominion. I get it, if the dino ect clones deserve to die then the kid clone might as well too and we can't have that. But from a conservationists perspective, was it the move they should have taken given the circumstances. In any case I always wished she wasn't so metaphorical about it. "their alive like me", WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?
Glad people are starting to understand the frustration both paleo nerds and Jurassic fans have with Dominion.
Because the atrociraptor in the film are just JP raptors with a pug face and half remembered non-pronated wrists.
We don’t need more raptors!!!
They aren't. I feel the atrociraptors are a cool addition to the series and represent the consequences of an technological and evolutionary arms race when creating bioweapons. The atrociraptors are everything hoskins dreamed of and everything Owen feared
I'm new here....
Why the R4 music?
JW Writers' Logic:
Using large raptor species like Utahraptor or Achillobator? Nah.
Using small raptor species and oversizing and shave them? Hell Yeah!
Archeroeaptor was probably à Saurornitholestine not a Velociraptorine
They probably should have used Dakotaraptor
I don’t like to cross the Jurassic franchise and paleontology because I love both and don’t like to critique the jurassic Park franchise, except dominions plot
Yk honestly they hade a chance to add Utahraptor now that I realized…..
The most pointless addition to the series like sino ceratops and nasuto ceratops. "Lets add an identical animal that fills in the same role" I hate the jw trilogy
Sinoceratops and Nasutoceratops would've been cool if they hadn't just been Triceratops with their horns changed. Atrociraptor is extra funny because Pyroraptor is ALSO a Velociraptor knockoff design beneath the fluff, but because it was allowed to wear a parrot onesie it was actually comparatively well received
Wait what happened to Dakotaraptor :((((
Amei a opção de áudio em português
They absolutely chose Atrociraptor over Achillobator for the exact same they chose Velociraptor over Deinonychus. It simply sounds cooler to English speaking ears; because it contains familiar and identifiable sounds, from known emotive words. Honestly, I also think its to do with the Average American's ability to pronounce the names. A-keel-oh-bah-torr still sounds quite cool. Ay-chilla-bayter does not.
Sometimes, the dinosaur world could use a little more 'quirkiness,' right? Atrociraptor may not stand out like its siblings, but it’ll definitely be a unique treat for those who love to explore!
@@LFacts-news let's also not forget that thare are a lot of modern animals that look similar to others like bison and buffalo. 2 different animals but both are essentially big fluffy cows
@@cryptodino3roberts712 ...Bison and (American) Buffalo are literally the same animal tho?
I assume you mean the American ones since neither the African Buffalos nor the Water Buffalo are particularly fluffy.
@dr.archaeopteryx5512 shit I didn't know that. I thought they were separate but I guess it really is just different names for the same thing. Like yams and. Sweet potatos
@dr.archaeopteryx5512 to make a better example it's more like king penguins and emperor penguins.
Atrociraptor because the beginning sounds like atrocity
Can I PET DAT DROMAESAURID!?
the people making the movie might have thought.. it is hard for the children watching the movie to pronounce dynonikus. Velociraptor easier to pronounce and remember, or at least the kids watching the show would remember the word "raptor".
i want a small feathery lizard! i love these "mini" killing machines!
And just one movie...
I dont understand this video.
The Jurassic franchise starts at the top by naming the wrong Era. It's snappier than Cretaceous, Michael Crichton admitted this happily.
This logic applied, to me, absolves the franchise from scientific accuracy. They aren't even dinosaurs they're just cloned lizards with a bunch of genetic material from different animals.
No it dosen't absolves the franchise of not including some sort of scientific accuratie.
The first Jurassic Park movie had the success it had because a part of this success was due to them putitng big efforts at adding scientific datas and stuff into it, whatever if it's outdated today. Jurassic World throwed all that out.
And no, Jurassic Park dinosaurs have never been supposedly mutant monsters that shit started in JP3 to excuses the production of the movies for making shity dinos designs from what they thought, with their non-existant inteligence, the public would've been more receptive to.
Jurassic Park and The Lost World were supposed to be real dinosaurs not mutationed by DNA splicing. Do you see the scientists characters in those movies pointing how inacurate the dinosaurs are ? Well no, because they are the real one to them.
@@foxxtitan7028 Jurassic park always had inaccurate dinosaurs even for it's time, the teeth of the T.rex are thin and brittle and it's arms are too big, the Dilophosaurus has a completely wrong skull shape and of course a neck frill and venom, the Triceratops also has a completely wrong skull shape aswell, it's toes are too elephantine and it's tail is too big, the Gallimimus walks more like a human that proper birds, it's feet are oversized too, and sure, the Deinonychus used to be in the same genus as the Velociraptor, but even at that time this was a questionable relationship that didn't last long, and this decision was solely made because the name "Velociraptor" sounded cooler than "Deinonychus", despite being a fragmentary taxa at the time.
Sure, Jurassic Park was extremely important for updating the public view of dinosaurs, from cold-blooded lumbering lizards to active bird-like animals, as well as bringing more eyes to the field of paleontology, but it wasn't perfect, not at all.
@@foxxtitan7028 Well no, even in the first book it was said that they were spliced with frog and other DNA of living species to explain the fact that some things may be inaccurate (say, the size of the Velociraptors/Deinonychus). Yes, they were always supposed to be animals with normal behaviour, but they were never meant to be "real Dinosaurs". I do see what you were trying to say though.
@Luokeyo I was talkin about the movie since it has quite the differences in how dinosaur genetics is treated.
Also I will further press my argument that yes they were meant to be real dinosaur, at least real to the characters's universe.
To proove that I can remind you both dig scenes in JP1 and JP3. They digs up giant velociraptor fossils skeletons the same size as the one alive on the islands who are supposed to be the "inaccurate/genetically modified ones".
Why they unearth inaccurate skeletons fossils ? Because the dinosaur in the first trilogy (outside of JP3) are meant to be 'their' real dinosaurs.
So it should've be an argument against those who complain about the lack of scientific accuracy, but even being established from this first dig scene that dinosaurs will not be 100% accurate it didn't stop Stan Winston and his crew to put as much science in their design and working with paleontologist to create believable design while keeping a margin for including creative liberty, this as a whole have bring Jurassic Park to his success, it is why it have change the vision of the public about dinosaurs in the entire world.
@@foxxtitan7028It's not that deep. JP and JW were worked on by different people with different intentions behind the dinosaurs. JW's writers probably took Wu's discussion with Hammond in the first book regarding the authenticity of the dinosaurs and ran with it. Whether or not they're real dinosaurs matters far less in the movies than it does in the books anyways, so don't worry about it. I don't think the folks behind the World movies even care considering the Dominion prologue.
What about Achilobator, Pyroraptor, and that fish eating one from Prehistoric Planet?
Achillobator and Austro are both far more complete.
"Fish eating one" is called Austroraptor btw, in case u wanna look it up more on your own. Lovely muppet creature.
@ Thanks. I forgot the name
@@PackHunter117 Yeah, no worries, it happens!
I thought atrociraptor was a fake dino due to hit being laser controlled like the indoraptor
They chose atrociraptor for the name. Atroci: atrocity, atrocious, gives the audience the feeling this animal is capable of atrocious acts or that they are evil in some way. It's really not hard to connect the dots.
It's pronounced "AKeroraptor", not "Asheroraptor". It comes from the Greek Acheron, one of the rivers of the underworld. CH is always pronounced K if it comes from a Greek root.
"Scientists like to name things"
Yall are forgetting the maker of jurassic park says no dino is a dino there dinos with modern day animal DNA
I do find it hilariously frustrating that the handler or whoever the fuck was controlling the atrociraptors made a big speech about “genetic purity over genetic hybrids” that’s clearly a meta jab at the use of hybrids from the earlier movies… and yet the raptors they have are still every bit scale-clad, broken wristed genetic cocktails as any of the other raptors from the Jurassic movies.
@@thewoollyviking5928 she didn't say anything about genetic purity. She was talking about their loyalty and how it can't be engineered it has to be earned
Folowing theyr record, when we see an Utahraptor in jurassic park it will be the size of a t-rex
14:01 crack
You could say it's an atrocity what they did to my boy
I may not forgive them for deciding to deliberately repeat their serious mistake with the Velociraptors in JP. 😂
"Atrociraptor" sounds neat and marketable?
I would rather them refer to the original JP raptors as "Deinonychus" or "Utahraptors" than cause more confusion by introducing more innacurate dinosaurs.
I'm going to be honest, when I first saw trailers and posters for Jurassic World: Dominion that featured Atrociraptor . . . I thought it was just some weird looking Velociraptor . . .
You were right lol
Thanks to prehistoric planet
Watched the first Jurassic World movie, but was bored the entire time. It was advertised to be like the first Jurassic Park movie, which was a like, since the plot and characters were completely unlikable. I had no idea what that raptor was in the few clips I saw online.
@@Razgriz85 ok and
Yeah, JW was p underwhelming. Guess that's what you get when you let an awesomebro whose most notable prior work was "book of Henry" shit all over a beloved but long-dead franchise.
@dr.archaeopteryx5512 anyone who uses the term awesomebro on a sentence unironically is invalid. I'm sorry but after I read the word I couldn't understand the rest of your comment
Paleobiologists better quit giving new dino species such badass names or else Hollywood will find it and turn it cringe.
It would be hilarious if they put Thanos simonattoi in Jurassic World Rebirth. Or better yet, Kurupi itaata.
I feel like you're being deliberately obtuse about the name. Its instantly recognizable to the general public as a portmanteau of atrocity and raptor, which is granted a bit on the nose for how they fit into the film's story but these films cater to the lowest common denominator so like... yeah obviously they want to use the name atrociraptor. What do you think the name "achilobator" means to the general public? And idk its kinda poetic given how its used in the story that the real animal was a similarly-sized animal to velociraptor and its depiction was butchered in similar ways.
It's hard to remember that "Name cool" is like, one of the highest priorities when it comes to slop-machine produced dinosaur movies. Or I guess "Name pleasant sounding" for Fasolasuchus, maybe? Does it count if the movie never mentions the animals name? Anyway, can't blame Hollywood too much on this one, I'm not sure what kinda crack some paleontologists are smoking to think some of the names they come up with are acceptable. Good luck getting someone without a special interest in the topic to say the word "Saurornitholestes" off their own volition, much less pronounce it correctly
Dromeosaurids look so goofy when they have their faces painted yellow like it’s a beak, and I can’t take it seriously.
2nd
something something jurassic park/world having the most awful looking dinosaur designs imaginable...
Such an atrocity
I already dont like the jirassic world movies regardless of the dino inaccurate sruff. Isnt is aomething that can just be chocked up to the genetic reconstruction gaps being filled wrong?
Él doblaje automático esta horrible
On a second note, can we have a discussion about how scientists give dinosaurs unfitting names? I think I speak for many people here. With a few exceptions, most dinosaurs have lame ass names!
Yeah yeah yeah we get it. They have feathers you’ve made this point at least 300 times.