-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Prehistoric Planet > Jurrasic Park?
- Thread starter Airbus Jr
- Start date
Spaceman292
Banned
I liked the little arsonist dino he was cool
crazy monkey
Banned
No. JP is better.
Aggelos
Member
Of course, Prehistoric Planet > Jurassic Movies, in terms of depicting the dinosaurs.
We've made an entire thread about it.
We've made an entire thread about it.
Spaceman292
Banned
By 'dinosaurs they left out' do you mean all the dinosaurs that ever existed or... what?
Huh? What?
Limited by effects?
What exactly did you want? Hundreds of species in one shot? I mean, you kinda got that at thr watering hole, but eh, no, I have no idea what your complaint is.
It had famous dinosaurs, unknown dinosaurs, spextacular effects, it was incredible.
Bragr
Banned
Well, the effects limited shots in terms of complexity, meaning certain shots like the interaction between dinosaurs like pushing, eating, fighting, and stuff like that, are very hard and labor intensive to create, so you could see in the show how stuff like that was largely obscured or missing.
I also wish they focused on stuff like running and flying speed compared to modern animals to give us some context and compare sizes and stuff like that.
But what I wanted more of is stuff like the Spinosaur, Baryonyx, Herrasaurs or bring in some deinosuchus or whatnot. Instead, they brought back a lot of the same dinosaurs throughout the episodes, which I assume is because of the effort it takes to make and animate models, so they reused assets instead of new ones.
Spaceman292
Banned
You can't blame the series for a load of random shit it didn't do.
nkarafo
Member
I'm probably the only one but i'm not convinced about the visual effects. The dinosaurs still look off. Too clean, too blurry, i dunno.
I also don't like the way Attenborough is overacting here, plus the little normie things like when the dinosaur in the first video goes to bite something and there is an obvious "chomp" stock sound effect.
Maybe i'm just too old and cynical.
I also don't like the way Attenborough is overacting here, plus the little normie things like when the dinosaur in the first video goes to bite something and there is an obvious "chomp" stock sound effect.
Maybe i'm just too old and cynical.
I collect VHS tapes
Member
Practical effects > cgi Dinos
They deliberately set out to show dinosaurs as something other than just ferocious hunters, so the redused focus on action and hunting is very understandable.
They took a time period and went for it. There are myriad dinosaurs that would have been great to see, but they have to make their choices.
Sure, they probably had to limit the scope somewhat, so there are a few dinosaurs of related species, but come on, that we're even getting this is remarkable. If it's a success, they'll probably fo a new season (and they've expressed desire for that) and then they'd explore different locations and times.
Remember, the dinosaur age was millions of years. There's more time between the herrerasaurus and any dinosaur in thr show, than between thr dinos in the show and us.
And this is pure nonsense. Practical effects can not compare, at all. Given the time to do their job, cgi outclasses practical every single time.
We now have photorealistic cgi humans that you don't notice because nobody alerted you to their presence.
Show me a single photorealistic human doll that moves and behaves like a real human.
One. Just one.
Edit: Was that too hard mr. VHS?
Last edited:
Bragr
Banned
Yeah, I can, I compare it to other nature shows, which is what it's trying to be.
Bragr
Banned
I'm not saying it was bad, I enjoyed it, but I think there are ways to improve it. Like not bringing back raptors for several episodes. And it felt like some dinosaurs, like the terrorsaurs, were extended to fill up time.
The reason why they don't show hunting is that it's hard to make eating and biting look real, it would take a lot longer to create.
I know the herrasaurs were ancient and one of the first dinos, but jurassic park has morphed the view of the dinosaur age to a specific period, and it sucks that the show follows that.
It really hasn't. It's blended the periods to make them look like one whole, hence stegosaurus, triceratopd, apatosaurus etc in the same shot. PP just bases itself on a point in time during the cretaceous. It omits a lot of famous dinosaurs and it shows for the most part, fairly unknown species.
And sure, showing eating might take more effort, but to think that's the only reason is just wrong. This is a show that aims to portray these animals as more than the Hollywood image of rampaging monsters, and it did a very good job at that.
But there's still hunting in it. Raptors hunting pterosaurs was some complex scenes I'm sure would take just as much time and effort as the stereotypical battle between tyrannosaurus and triceratops. There was also the hunt in the woods.
I dunno, I feel like you're complaining cause you didn't get a Hollywood movie, while this is precisely why I think it was brilliant, heh.
Bragr
Banned
Hunting doesn't automatically mean Hollywood. Bringing in Velociraptors, T-Rex, and Triceratops is more Hollywood than anything.
If they could show hunting they would, it's the bread and butter of almost every nature show. The hunting they show is mostly just running after each other, but any sort of complex physical interaction is avoided.
They brought in familiar dinos in a way the public had never seen before. Festhered raptors, chunky tyrannosaurus taking care of its kids, triceratops scavenging for minerals.
It's blatantly obvious to me why they chose the angle they did. Show famous dinosaurs in a new light, and bring unknown dinosaurs into light.
I don't watch nature docs for hunting, it's only a small part of it. I watch them to get insight into the lives of animals, of which only a tiny portion is hunting.
Bragr
Banned
In my opinion, it needs to be a mix, hunting is why animals survive, it's their most important function, and every animal show thrives on it, like the lions hunting in packs and whatnot.
I just don't buy that they skipped it because they wanted to show different things, if they could, they would have hunts in every episode. Who doesn't wanna see a Spinosaurus sprinting down a big planteater. It's just too hard to do and make it look realistic.
The practical effects in Jurassic Park are phenomenal, to this day. Hard to beat when done by skilled and experienced artists.
Having said that, I think the visual effects and compositing in Prehistoric Planet were very well done.
There were times when some shots looked very life-like, and there were times when the CGI was more obvious, but overall solid presentation.
Having said that, I think the visual effects and compositing in Prehistoric Planet were very well done.
There were times when some shots looked very life-like, and there were times when the CGI was more obvious, but overall solid presentation.
Last edited:
LiquidMetal14
hide your water-based mammals
It's definitely better than the new Jurassic Park. The OG JP is one of the best movies ever so we don't need to compare there.
Prehistoric planet is quite good though.
Prehistoric planet is quite good though.
Yes, for carnivores. And they showed some of that, but they aldo wanted to show the dinosaurs just doing what they do. They have stated this, in multiple interviews.
There are many complex shots in this show. Look at the sauropod fight.
I don't see the issue. There was a good mix, hunts and daily life.