Home
Creators
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Community
Telegram ThePornDude
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

JURASSIC PARK (1993) | UNCUT Reaction (Patreon)

Published:
2026-05-21 13:00:21
Edited:
2026-07-10 06:01:41
Imported:
2026-10
Tags:

Videos

  • 667005634.mp4

Downloads

Content

Here's our UNCUT reaction to JURASSIC PARK (1993)!

Files

Comments

Paul Phelan

It's funny how when we see 'Jurassic Park' as kids, most of us just think 'Whoa the dinosaurs are so cool!' but then as adults we notice every inaccuracy that we can see, and we question anything that doesn't look like it made sense. Among the plot holes in this first film, some of the biggest ones are in the whole basis of the park, the cloning of extinct dinosaurs from DNA isolated from fossilized mosquitoes: 1. DNA is very stable, compared to proteins and other organic molecules, but even DNA eventually breaks down with enough time. No intact dinosaur DNA has ever been recovered from fossilized remains, at least not yet. 2. Even if intact DNA could be recovered from a fossilized mosquito, any mosquito would most likely have taken blood from multiple dinosaurs and maybe other creatures too, if any early mammals were around at the same time. No dinosaur genome has ever been sequenced, so no dinosaurs can be identified from DNA sequences without having reference sequences to compare the DNA to. Plus, it would be impossible to tell which DNA fragment from a mixture of DNA from multiple sources, belonged to which dinosaur. Also, without having complete genome sequences, the part about filling in DNA sequence gaps with frog DNA would be impossible because we couldn't tell where the gaps are in the dinosaur DNA. Aside from those plot holes, a few more interesting points on the topic of cinema for dramatic effect vs. reality: 1. Only 2 of the several dinosaurs in this first film were actually from the Jurassic period: only the long-necked Brachiosaurus and the spitting Dilophosaurus. The others, including the T. Rex all lived in the Cretaceous period, millions of years later. But 'Cretaceous Park' doesn't quite roll off the tongue as easily as Jurassic Park. 2. The high voltage perimeter fences: if you get an electric shock, it's not the voltage per se that can kill you, but the current in amps. So very short high voltage shocks are survivable, as long as there isn't enough sustained current. Even static electricity shocks from metal furniture or door knobs can carry a few thousand volts, and voltages of hundreds of thousands of volts from power lines have been survived by people who were shocked, because the current was not high enough or too short lived. 3. Something that all of the Jurassic Park films and other films featuring dinosaurs have in common, is that they usually portray the dinosaurs as roaring loudly, especially the bigger, carnivorous dinosaurs like T. Rex. But I read somewhere that there is little to no evidence from fossilized remains that dinosaurs had the vocal cords for roaring like that. If you think about it, the largest reptiles that we still have today, including crocodiles that have been around since the age of dinosaurs, tend to only growl and hiss. So it's quite likely that most dinosaurs also were not very loud, and just growled or hissed in real life. But the roaring dinosaurs make better dramatic effects for cinema.

Hollow

Funny you mention about the Cretaceous, since there's an animated spinoff series called "Camp Cretaceous". First season or two was actually pretty decent. Then it turned stupid. My favourite underrated shot of the movie is towards the end when the raptor has the light from projector on its body showing "GTAC" etc, those letters representing the nucleotide bases in DNA.