V-rex should have won

[biochemitra]

Since this thread has been revived, remember all that stuff about spinosaurus being smaller than in JP3? About is weiging less than a rex and a slam from one would send a spino flying?

Well recent discovery of a skull that may have been eight feet long suggest that the spino may have been as much as 55 feet in length! A good four meters longer than sue, thats thirteen feet longer than the largest known T-rex! We also believe the spino may have been as heavy as if not heavier than the rex! Suddenly JP3 doesn't look all that exagerated now...Not as much as it did anyway...

http://www.livescience.com/animalwor...arnivores.html

[biochemitra]

A Spino would still lose; this new evidence has shown it was *longer*, and maybe heavier, (weight estimates *do* vary from scientist to scientist, after all), but T-Rex still had the superior bite. What matters more are weapons, and Spino is still seen as a fish eater. Wikipedia says...

Spinosaurus was popularized by its role as a main antagonist in the film Jurassic Park III, in which it is portrayed as a lethal and dangerous killer that is almost always hungry, even winning a battle with a Tyrannosaurus, but such Hollywood movie battles are little more than pure fantasy. Even if these two carnivores were to fight and a T. rex were to bite its opponent's neck (as it did in said movie), the fight would be instantly over (biomechanical studies show that the bite of T. rex was among the strongest of any known animal). Spinosaurus teeth are conical and their jaws narrow, used for grappling wriggling prey, like fish, not crushing a victim's neck.

Ok then...
1: A stronger bite does not guarantee a win. You said so yourself that a slam from the then presumed heavier rex would send a spino flying. Now reverse the weights to make the spino heavier and that would give it an advantage there. Yes, a bite to the neck and it would be all over but the secret lies in actually getting the bite executed.

2: The spino did not crush the rex's neck with its jaws like everyone seems to believe. The spino clearly used its arms to twist its enemy's neck until it snapped. Its arms had more than enough power behind them to do that, as it takes very little force to snap a creature's neck.

I won't say the spino is now the unbeatable dinosaur king the media had made T-rex but I will state proudly with my head held high that the spinosaurus officially now has a decent chance against the rex should their paths ever have crossed.

Oh, and we believe it stalked terrestrial prey as well as fish. It was equipped to bring down heavy prey as well as the massive fish that swam the ancient lakes and streams.

[biochemitra]

2: The spino did not crush the rex's neck with its jaws like everyone seems to believe. The spino clearly used its arms to twist its enemy's neck until it snapped. Its arms had more than enough power behind them to do that, as it takes very little force to snap a crreature's neck.


And that, in of itself, is an impossible act. Spinosaurus' arms were tucked away under its body. It wouldn't be able to raise them high enough to actually utilise them as such in a fight; it'd have to rear back and snap its tail, which in turn would throw it off balance, or it'd have to dislocate its shoulders. In turn, the fin would make it unweildly in battle as well. The JP Spinosaurus is riddled with anatomical inaccuracies; its sail is too short, its body too barrel chested. In terms of its actual body (as well as legs and tail), JP's Spinosaurus is built more like a Tyrannosaur then it is like one of its closer relatives such as Baryonyx or Suchomimus.

Furthermore, size isn't what matters, it's weapons, and real life teaches us that. Grizzlies and polar bears, for example. Thanks to global warming, Grizzly bears wander into Polar bear territory in search of food, and the Polar is driven south. The two species frequently come into conflict over food and territory, but despite the polar bear being much larger then the grizzly, the polar bear always loses. The grizzly has bigger claws, and a stronger bite, (as well as a nastier temper), and these advantages allow the Grizzlies to drive off, and sometimes even kill the larger, technically more powerful polar bear.

Not a bad set of points...

Meh, the world would be a sick and depressing place if we all only liked an animal because of who it can trounce in a fight. I still like spino better.

[Steve]

And I like T-Rex better, but not because he's an unstoppable killing machine; I just thinks he looks badass and has a cool sounding name and a lot of character. And he's got the old school nostalgia factor going for him too, as does Allosaurus. They're my personal favourite theropods.

[biochemitra]

And that, in of itself, is an impossible act. Spinosaurus' arms were tucked away under its body. It wouldn't be able to raise them high enough to actually utilise them as such in a fight; it'd have to rear back and snap its tail, which in turn would throw it off balance, or it'd have to dislocate its shoulders. In turn, the fin would make it unweildly in battle as well. The JP Spinosaurus is riddled with anatomical inaccuracies; its sail is too short, its body too barrel chested. In terms of its actual body (as well as legs and tail), JP's Spinosaurus is built more like a Tyrannosaur then it is like one of its closer relatives such as Baryonyx or Suchomimus.

Well that is a point...a really nice point...
And now it's fishwrap, really nice fishwrap.

By which I mean, you tell us that the spinosaurus was too barrel chested, stood too erect, had a tail that was too flexible.
This is nothing that the tyrannosaurs and velociraptors did not get just as much of. Note that in what is IMHO the single most powerfuls cene in the first movie, the rex reared up very upright and bent its tail into a 180 degree curve. What's more, when the velociraptors are stalking the kitchen, one raptor accidentally knocks some pots over with its tail. A velociraptor would have to break its tail in at least 7 different spots in order to flex its tail the way the one in the movie did.
Plus, both dinosaurs were shown to extend their arms much further outward than would be possible for them. In conclusion, Spino got the same treatment as the raptors and the rex yet everyone hammers on it anyway because it killed a T-rex.
That's just how JP does its dinosaurs, people! All of its theropods have barrel chests, flexible tails and general stylizations. Note that the real velociraptor was a mere 6 feet long and had a slightly narrower head than the movie renditions.

Quite frankly, pretty much all of the malice against the spino lies in its victory over the rex.
It kills a rex and people whine and moan over it and hold malice against an animal that died millions of years before the movie was even made! I'm not aiming this at you, Steve, I'm simply saying I have a heard some utterly shamefull things said about the spino on the net in disturbing masse. Quite frankly, it's some of the most immature blathering I have heard in my days and trust me, I'v heard alot. For example "You like mutant ducks? BAH! If I ever saw that spino I'd blow its head off with my gun!!!" Or worse still "This proves that T-rex was the bestest dinosaur ever!!!!!!" Or even"Spinosaurus was a lowly fisheater that would break its jaws ofF if iT tired to bite a tyrannosaurs!"
Quite frankly, I find myself feeling faint when I try to do an internet search on an interesting and unique dinosaur.

I will agree that the rex was probably among the most advanced and well adapted theropods known but I can't stand trying to learn about my personal favorite and hearing moaning about how a single franchise which has shown us time and again that it prefers entertainment to accuracy portrays a dinosaur other than T-rex.

[Steve]

Eh, I can relate to how you feel. Hardcore fanboys of anything can be grating, wether it be T-Rex, Gamera, or whatever.

My main beef with that fight was how it was handled. T-Rex has a lot more history going for him, in both the JP films and in cinematic history itself. Having the Spinosaurus so effortlessly kill it off struck me as simply an attempt at going "LYK ZOMGZORZ!!!1 T3h SpinerSoreus is t3h r0xxorz!!11". A case of Worf syndrome; kill off the old thing we know is tough to make the new thingy seem stronger. Not only was the fight just plain wrong, it was a disservice to a beloved cinematic icon.

The JP Spinosaurus immortalises one of my most-disliked Dino film cliches; the replacement of the Obligatory T-Rex with a Pseudosaurus Rex to try and be all cool and anti-cliche. While it's good for other theropods to get some exposure, it's often done in a way that seems rather banal and an obvious attempt to be anti-cliche. For example, the Carnotaurs in Disney's "Dinosaur". They picked a different theropod to be their main baddie. Carnotaurus is *very* different from T-Rex; it has a short snout, horns above its eyes, even shorter arms, and armoured scutes along its back. On top of that, it's smaller then T-Rex. The makers of "Dinosaur" chose it as their baddie, and what do they do with it? Supersize it to T-Rex size! What's the friggin' point of that!? "Dinosaur" set out to use a new carnivore as its villain, but fell flat on its face in the process. It tried to give us a new dino but the way they modified it/used it, they gave us what amounted to an an extra-bumpy T-Rex. Hell, most of the people I know who saw the movie couldn't even tell that they were being offered a new dinosaur; they thought it was a T-Rex. Instead of avoiding the cliche, they fell back into it.

JP's Spinosaurus is also a Pseudosaurus Rex, albiet a less blatent one. The river attack aside, they didn't *do* anything with it that made the Spinosaurus stand out as an indevidual dinosaur; it's the same ol' cliche, the same ol' T-Rex, just with a different name, a fin and a crocodillian snout. They should've put more emphasis on the aquatic aspect of the Spinosaurus. That would have helped it come into its own, but instead JP3 gave us a T-Rex redeco. The result was a stale, utterly forgettable villain. The fact that the Spino had next to no stage presence didn't help either; but that's not the fault of the Spinosaurus, it's the fault of the director and the screenwriters for simply making it a Pseudosaurus Rex.

Hell, if the screenwriters really, truely wanted to have the Spinosaurus kill a T-Rex, they could've handled it more subtley. Rather then trying to make the Spino just seem "that much stronger" then the Rex, they could've emphasised on the aquatic capabilities of the Spino, (something JP3 largely ignored so the Spinosaurus could run around on land and play T-Rex), and had it fight the T-Rex in terrain where it would hold the advantage. Having a Spino fight a Rex on its own terms is rediculous, but having the Rex lose to the Spino in the water, its home element, would have been both far more creative and realistic. Instead of matching T-Rex blow-for-blow on HIS turf, the Spino should've lured the T-Rex underwater, sat on him and drowned his Tyrant lizard ***.

It's not Spinosaurus I hold a grudge against, it's his misuse in the film that irks me more. I like Spinosaurus, just not JP3's Spinosaurus. This has nothing to do with scientific accuracy; it's all about entertainment. Wouldn't it have been more entertaining to have a Spinosaurus rather then a wannabe T-Rex?

[Steve]

...Read my damn post. It has nothing to do with "Scientific accuracy", it's all about the fact that JP3 set out to deliver a new Dinosaur as its villain but simply gave us a Pseudosaurus Rex. I'd have liked the Spinosaurus more if it had been a Spinosaurus and not a wannabe T-Rex.

[Bjrayzilla]

.........


So you wanted a animal that actually fished, and was mostly a scavenger? wtf


In my opinion they made Spino better. He looks VERY clumsy with that big sail. Which is why I'm positive that it only ate fish. That big sail easily tells me that its a scavenger also. So there is no way it was that manuverable.


Heck that post tells me that you want it accurate. Let me quote:

I'd have liked the Spinosaurus more if it had been a Spinosaurus and not a wannabe T-Rex.March 31st, 2006 14:46


That post quite easily tells me that you wanted it accurate. You wanted it to be a Spinosaurus, not a T-Rex wannabe. You wanted it to be real, you just proved yourself wrong there pal.

[Steve]

So you wanted a animal that actually fished, and was mostly a scavenger? wtf

An animal that big could still eat people, and it could still wreack havoc in the water. Bears are fish eating scavengers as well but they're plenty scary. Just because it wasn't capable of running around smiting T-Rexes outside of its home turf doesn't mean it couldn't still be scary. The attack in the River showcased the Spinosaurus beautifully. If that had been its only scene in the movie, the Spinosaurus would've been cool.

What I want isn't scientific accuracy, what I would have liked for them to do was to stray away from the cliche and give us a new dinosaur. What's the point of taking an unconventional theropod and forcing it into a conventional role when they could have done so much more with it?If it was scientific accuracy I was worried about, I'd whine about the implausibility of bringing back dinosaurs via cloning and filling in the gaps in their DNA sequences with a creature they aren't even closely related to. Or the fact that they're somehow surviving in a modern world with too little oxygen for them to breathe comfortably. Or I'd complain about the raptors not having feathers. This isn't about scientific accuracy, this is about wasted potential and lack of creativity. Forcing the Spinosaurus into T-Rex's role isn't creativity, it's hackneyed cliche. It shows that they had a new dinosaur but couldn't think of anything for it to do except for the same old T-Rex stuff, which is pretty self defeating if you're trying to be anti-cliche.

[biochemitra]

Well steve, I see where you're coming from. As much fun as the battle was for me, it would have been better had it been in the spino's turf. Also, it needed music, BADLY.

Now personally I love the design they gave the spino, the way the arms protrude outwards. Gave it a sortof godzilla-like quality that I happen to like.

Regarding whether it was a fish eater or a terrestrial stalker. We belive sarcosuchus also fed on dinosaurs and it's jaws weren't much thicker than a spino's. Now I do know that the croc tends to have a skull that is more merged together with fewer bones but still, it shows that a thin jaw structure can still be a deadly weapon. Note that we are almost positive that the spino stalked both fish and terrestrial prey. Those arms may have been slung under the body but they were still incredibly powerful, each one armed with a killing claw. If I remember right, we have evidence of a baryonyx attack on an iguanadon. Now if a 30 foot, sailless relative of the spino can go after an iggy, what makes you think a 55 foot monster couldn't?

As for the sail. The dorsal area rarely comes into combat between predator and prey, it wouldn't really be all that clumsy. Dimetrodon's sail was twice spino's size and it was the most terrifying predator of its time!

[Bjrayzilla]

Originally Posted by Steve

An animal that big could still eat people, and it could still wreack havoc in the water. Bears are fish eating scavengers as well but they're plenty scary. Just because it wasn't capable of running around smiting T-Rexes outside of its home turf doesn't mean it couldn't still be scary. The attack in the River showcased the Spinosaurus beautifully. If that had been its only scene in the movie, the Spinosaurus would've been cool.

What I want isn't scientific accuracy, what I would have liked for them to do was to stray away from the cliche and give us a new dinosaur. What's the point of taking an unconventional theropod and forcing it into a conventional role when they could have done so much more with it?If it was scientific accuracy I was worried about, I'd whine about the implausibility of bringing back dinosaurs via cloning and filling in the gaps in their DNA sequences with a creature they aren't even closely related to. Or the fact that they're somehow surviving in a modern world with too little oxygen for them to breathe comfortably. Or I'd complain about the raptors not having feathers. This isn't about scientific accuracy, this is about wasted potential and lack of creativity. Forcing the Spinosaurus into T-Rex's role isn't creativity, it's hackneyed cliche. It shows that they had a new dinosaur but couldn't think of anything for it to do except for the same old T-Rex stuff, which is pretty self defeating if you're trying to be anti-cliche.

You know what your right. They should of kept the Rex as the main enemy, then add all sorts of other animals in there. I also think the Spino should of been only in thar seen, and maybe they should of made him have a small clip of him in the trailer. To make fans speculate, I think that doeing what you said would have made the film ALOT more enjoyable

Sorry for the misunderstanding.

[Dr. Strangelove]

I personally belive that Rex, even if he was lighter then the Spino, would still be physically more powerful, due to the fact the Spino was a swimmer, and had to be sleek. Imagine the T-Rex as a Brick, and the Spino a ' Knife '. Knife is going to break when it hits the brick, no matter how much it weighs, because the brick is stouter.

[biochemitra]

People have grown up with spino as a bipedal dimetordon that was smaller than T-rex so when we see it somewhat poorly protrayed on the screen, we think they did a LOT worse than they actually did. Fact is, the spino looked more like a pumped up baryonyx with a dorsal fin than anything else. The skull was right, the size was right, the strength of the arms was right, it was simply the level of power it was shown to have that was wrong. It wa shonestly no worse than any of the other dinos.

Btw, The diloph was a juvenile. You can tell because its snout lacks the kink that the adults have.

[biochemitra]

If you want to get really technical, it's build was a tad off but like I said, all JP dinos are.

JP spino.

http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20030317/spino.jpg

http://dinonews.net/images/dinos/spinosaurus2.jpg

http://www.achetudoeregiao.com.br/AN...PINOSAURUS.jpg

http://digital-images.net/Images/Uni...aurus_6031.jpg

http://www.piinc.biz/images/dino/Din...pinosaurus.jpg

Real spinos.

http://www005.upp.so-net.ne.jp/Juras...pinosaurus.jpg

http://www005.upp.so-net.ne.jp/Juras...inosaurs02.jpg

http://www.avians.net/rkc/paleo/spinosaurus.gif

http://members.tripod.com/~Dinosauria/spinosaurus.jpg

http://www.dinosaur.co.kr/images/head.spinosaurus.jpg

http://www.rmdrc.com/images/spinosaurus-front-page.jpg

http://www.specialtyinterests.net/spinosaurus_water.JPG

http://csotonyi.com/Spinosaurus.jpg (My desktop BTW)

http://critters.pixel-shack.com/WebI...pinosaurus.jpg

http://www.fossilien.de/artikel/mode...inosaurus1.jpg

-sigh- What a beautiful animal...

[Goji Son]

I think the last pic of the skeleton shows that Spino definently wasn't a bulky creature. It's ribcage is very slim as well as his legs, perfect for a swamp environment where he would be treading on soft ground and probably swimming alot. It's definetly not a predator that would hunt large animals because of his skull and teeth. The teeth are made for grabbing but not cutting deeper into the flesh like the usually curved, serrated teeth you see, so if it got hold of a threshing dinosaur it wouldn't have that great of a grip even breaking the teeth. the only way I can see it taking down big prey is ambush from the water like a croc and using it's forelimbs to hold the prey as he tries to bring it into the water and hopefully drown it.

The JP version had it's liberties, but like what others said, all the dinosaurs were (Velociraptors being 6 ft, Dilophosaurus having a frill and projectile venom). I guess it could be taken into account that since their genes are spliced with frogs DNA that they wouldn't be the most accurate representation, plus they need to make them look meaner so people will be afraid.

[biochemitra]

I know, it was no rex, I'm trying to settle this thing that annoys me whenever I hear how badly they messed it up when it was actually a decent representation, beyond all the minor build gripes.

What REALLY gets me is when they tell us it was too large in the movie. If anything it was too small. The one in the movie was barely a snout longer than the rex. The real thing was up to 13 feet longer than the largest known rex! Even for a rex, 13 feet is quite a difference.

[biochemitra]

Look what I just found. Finally, we have a photo of the original spinosaurus specimen that was destroyed in WWII.

http://news-info.wustl.edu/pub/libs/...usr/3912_h.jpg

Keep in mind, that's just half the jaw there. There's a door somewhere in the image which should provide some sense of scale.
Those teeth lying on the table look a tad bigger than some images I've seen. The overall shape of the jaw seems to mirror the movie movie depiction more or less. though the fin is much larger and less semicircular in shape.

Thoughts?

[Light Surge]

The world seems to pick the T-rex as a whipping boy for some of the new recent movies which at times seems something the ruins my joys as I like T-rexes.

In jurassic park 3, the Spino vs T-rex match was so un-realistic. Spinosaurus jaws and claws are made to crush fishes not Giant tough hided T-rexes. On the second hand I see the spino shrug off the T-rexes bite as if it was nothing. It should have died right there when the T-rex grabbed his neck and dragged it into the earth. The only dinosaur that could actually beat a T-rex by sheer strength is the Giganatosaurus. However in most discovery channels, they have proved that this maybe untrue as T-rex was much more swift.

I feel the sameway for Peter Jackson's King Kong. The idea of King kong throwing and manhandling the V-rexes seem uncalled for. Yeah it was fun but I would have atleast expected the V-rexes to put up a fight. In reality kong would not have killed even one of them with the ease he did in the movie. Assuming the V-rex is something like a T-rex, I would expect its bite to penetrate kongs arms and make em bleed. The V-rexes could have easily just charged at kong and dropped their weight on it since they have the best legs of a carnivore dinosaur. The only reason kong would stand a chance against a V-rex is because of the size difference. Yes, kong has strong arms but can it be greater than the force of the power of a V-rex's jaw?

What are your views?

[Zigra]

While I'm not exactly crying over it, I do agree that these fights required one to suspend their disbelief just a little more than most people could. The whole fight between the Spino and Rex was lame on all levels, regardless of the winner. That the Spino didn't even seem harmed by a bite that in reality would have killed it almost instantly is even more groan inducing.

As for Kong's fight with the V-Rexes, Jackson went a bit too far in having Kong fight three when a battle with one would have been good enough, and the end result was a victory for Kong was very hard to swallow. The Rexes are said to have bone-shattering jaws, yet very little harm seems to be inflicted to Kong when they make a tremendous chomp on his arm. WTF? I also found it annoying that Ann could be tossed and snatched from the air and incredible speeds, yet she doesn't even so much as have the wind knocked out of her. Whatever.

[Doc Ock]

I tend to ignore these kind of things. Sure, the Rex may get its *** kicked a lot but it is a movie, and someone has to win. And obviously, Kong could not die, so, I guess Jackson said what the hell, let's have him fight three monsters! Yeah, it is completely unrealistic but then, this is a movie about a giant ape.

[Saruman]

I find it much more annoying that people keep rehashing the same thing over and over and over again. How many more of these "T-Rex's are the greatest" threads do we have to suffer through.

The movie is about Kong, you already know he's going to win the battle before you even go see it. If it bothers you so much then don't watch the movie, pretty simple solution isn't it.

[Excelsior]

A couple of things:

1) There are more dinos that match the Rex for size - the Charcharadontosaur, for one.

2) I have no problem believing that an animal the size of Spinosaurus could shrug off a Rex bite. Contrary to the "facts" we grew up with, it's now widely discussed that Tyrannosaurus was a scavenger, not a predator, a theory I happen to believe in. Therefore its jaws weren't killing tools. No doubt it still packed a lot of power in its bite, as it had some pretty sturdy dino hides to bite through, but I doubt that a Rex could have brought down a Spinosaur through any means.

3) King Kong 2005 was a POS anyway, and the V-rex battle was so ridiculous as to completely destroy the "suspension of belief" factor needed to enjoy the fight and the film as a whole. Whoever came up with the idea of Tarzanosaurs should be smacked on the head with a phone book.

[Light Surge]

2) I have no problem believing that an animal the size of Spinosaurus could shrug off a Rex bite. Contrary to the "facts" we grew up with, it's now widely discussed that Tyrannosaurus was a scavenger, not a predator, a theory I happen to believe in. Therefore its jaws weren't killing tools. No doubt it still packed a lot of power in its bite, as it had some pretty sturdy dino hides to bite through, but I doubt that a Rex could have brought down a Spinosaur through any means.

Oh please don't bring that up. It has been proven around many sites that the T-rex was a hunter. I have one perticular site with good information on this, but sadly its saved in my other computer which has gone for repairs.

I find it much more annoying that people keep rehashing the same thing over and over and over again. How many more of these "T-Rex's are the greatest" threads do we have to suffer through.

What other threads. I don't see any...

The movie is about Kong, you already know he's going to win the battle before you even go see it. If it bothers you so much then don't watch the movie, pretty simple solution isn't it.

If you don't like such threads then don't view them. pretty simple solution isn't it.

While I'm not exactly crying over it,

I think everyone is getting the wrong idea of what I made this thread about. I wanted to know opinions over how everyone know sees the T-rex as a target for some 17-20 meter title monster in movies made these days.

Its funny actually when you see how people at various jurassic park sites curse jurassic park 3 because of that battle. Many are just *****ing at universal studious for what the spino's role would be in JP4. Most of them would not like to see the spino star in it, and the other half would want to see it get its *** kicked by the T-rex over it.

[Orga777]

Originally Posted by Excelsior

A couple of things:
2) I have no problem believing that an animal the size of Spinosaurus could shrug off a Rex bite. Contrary to the "facts" we grew up with, it's now widely discussed that Tyrannosaurus was a scavenger, not a predator, a theory I happen to believe in. Therefore its jaws weren't killing tools. No doubt it still packed a lot of power in its bite, as it had some pretty sturdy dino hides to bite through, but I doubt that a Rex could have brought down a Spinosaur through any means.

Except for the fact that the Spinosaurus is NOT that big.... So no, it had no business beating the Tyrannosaurus at all. And I have a feeling that the T-Rex did scavage for food, BUT it was also capable of hunting prey. They say it had strong legs capable of some sprints. And I doubt that the T-Rex used those legs of his to run away from many things with its size. More like to catch its prey. So there ya go.

[Raptor]

Originally Posted by Kaiser MG

It has been proven around many sites that the T-rex was a hunter. I have one perticular site with good information on this, but sadly its saved in my other computer which has gone for repairs.

And THAT is supposed to make it so? I'd sooner hear Jack Horner out than even CLICK on most of those sites...

What other threads. I don't see any...

I'd say Saru is referring to threads like THIS ONE which often is a dinosaur fan boy's reason for not liking the King Kong films. Then there is THIS VERY THREAD we're in right here. It gets old quick.

If you don't like such threads then don't view them. pretty simple solution isn't it.

See above.

I think everyone is getting the wrong idea of what I made this thread about. I wanted to know opinions over how everyone know sees the T-rex as a target for some 17-20 meter title monster in movies made these days.

That's easy to do with the very "leading" title you gave it. At the same time, I'm thinking this needs to be moved to the NON-KAIJU Movie forum, what with all the ties to a real (and non-kaiju-sized) creature, T-rex.

Its funny actually when you see how people at various jurassic park sites curse jurassic park 3 because of that battle. Many are just *****ing at universal studious for what the spino's role would be in JP4. Most of them would not like to see the spino star in it, and the other half would want to see it get its *** kicked by the T-rex over it.

JUVENILE IMO. Even Godzilla has gotten his butt whipped but HIS FANS don't moan and groan about it the way the T-rex admirers do. I like theropods myself but I accept their limits in the overall scheme of things.