HOME | DD
ChrisMasna — My own InGen with blackjack and hookers
#carnotaurus #kangaroo #buildabetterfaketheropod #jwsucks
Published: 2015-06-22 22:33:37 +0000 UTC; Views: 37264; Favourites: 449; Downloads: 84
Redirect to original
Description
Carnogaroo, a (late?) addition to #buildabetterfaketheropod on Twitter.Related content
Comments: 74
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
👍: 1 ⏩: 0
I swear, if that's how Carnotaurus moves in real life, I'm gonna need a new pair of pants.
👍: 1 ⏩: 0
(I call dibs on the scientific name! Haha!)
Scientific Name : Carnomacromimus Christor
Meaning : Chris's Carnivorous Kangaroo Mimic
👍: 1 ⏩: 0
I'm Aussie right. I wouldn't be surprised to see one of these in my backyard
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
what an odd scene we have here
looks fun, i like it
👍: 1 ⏩: 0
Interesting fake theropod, so are you from Australia then.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Argentina or in that part of South America I think
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yeah. I found that out a while ago.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
That is probably the best title for a piece of artwork ever!
👍: 1 ⏩: 1
A kangaroo Carnotaur, that looks like the crimson red Carnotaur from Disney's Dinosaur. Heh, made a rhyme.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I wouldn't mind using this for my next post on moviepilot.com...it's the second iteration of #buildabetterfaketheropod 
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I did have an idea for a fake theropod in an Epic/Anthropomorphic Fantasy World that I might work on in my lifetime. I call it Typhoanassa roninii (Ronin's Queen of Hurricanes) because it was created by Ronin Iwamatsu (A Giant Nectar Bat and a Samurai, Scientist, Historian, Demolitions Expert, and Ghost Hunter) because he wanted to exterminate a couple of Oni who were causing trouble to some farmers, but we all know how that turns out, and The Oni weren't the only ones who were exterminated. He also did it out of laziness. These are the animals it is made of:
1. Silkie (A breed of chicken)
2. Common Raven
3. Southern Cassowary
4. Mountain Dragon
5. Giant Ground Sloth
6. Aye-aye
7. Electric Eel
8. Oni (Japanese equivalent of an ogre/demon)
9. Axolotl
10. Platypus
11. Bird-Eating Tarantula
12. California Condor
13. Reticulated Python
14. Flashlight Fish
15. Ocellate river stingray
16. Marine Iguana
There are no actual dinosaurs because birds have dinosaur genes like teeth, clawed hands, and whatnot. They're just turned off due to evolution and all you need to do is turn on these genes and you'd get a dinosaur that you can do whatever you want with!
My archnemesis Jack Horner plans on creating a dinosaur army that were made from chickens. Infact, you might as well call this fake theropod a parody on Jack Horner's evil plans.
She can breathe fire, tear through metallic objects like tissue paper, digest any material organic or inorganic, regenerate any arm or organ that has been removed or damaged, is venomous, gives off an electric shock, smell objects seven miles away, shapeshift, detect one's body heat, is bioluminescent, shoots stinging hairs, has a bony middle finger to snatch up its prey, can swim like an aquatic lizard, wields a spike on its tail that can impale some scientist who isn't being smart in that situation (I'm talking to you Prometheus), has a slashing claw on its foot, can solve obstacles, and has small bones beneath its skin that act like chainmail. Yeah, it's pretty much over powered. She gets her name from the fact that she is seen during natural disatsers including hurricanes. She's about 68 feet long, 25 feet wide, 35 feet tall.
Just thought I'd like to share this!
Gwiber signing off!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
So basically it's Mary Sueasaurus?
👍: 1 ⏩: 1
👍: 1 ⏩: 0
wow! This is amazing! This Carno must have extremely hollow bones, or strong-ass muscles : P lol
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
They missed the oportunity to, for once, include dinosaurs in the franchise.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Are you high? Of course there are dinosaurs! Yeah, they're inaccurate, but here's the thing: if the raptors and T-rex, for instance, for 'revamped for accuracy,' I can guarantee that it would go wrong-look what happened when Tristar tried to do that with Godzilla. Plus, a bunch of people would get pissed and claim that Jurassic World did it wrong, and demand that the dinosaurs be 'more accurate' when the studio had already tried to meet demands.
Personally, I think that people like you are actually really biased: you completely ignore Land Before Time, a franchise that's older than Jurassic Park with far more movies in its name and way worse inaccuracies-they still have a three-fingered T-rex, for fuck's sake; Jurassic Fight Club, where the 'head scientist' has no qualifications whatsoever and claims that dromaeosaurs could 'breath through their bones,' whatever that means; Monsters Resurrected, which makes Spinosaurus out to be a 300-foot-long Villain Sue; and Clash of the Dinosaurs, which flat-out quote mined one of their scientific advisors, a sauropod expert, to make it seem like he said that sauropods had two brains-an inaccuracy that's been wrong for decades now! But the very second Jurassic Park comes up, your kind bursts in, going on and on about inaccuracies, and taking one tiny part of one of the films and trying to make it seem that that one mistake results in the entire movie being shit. In fact, most of the people I've heard that are criticizing Jurassic World haven't even seen the fucking film! How in the hell are you going to give it a fair chance if you do that? Oh, wait, I forgot: you don't care if the movie's good. All you care about is getting a quick boost of views because you're criticizing something popular. Real mature.
Yeah, Jurassic World had flaws-all movies do. It's a given-nothing's perfect. But the good parts of Jurassic World definitely outweigh the negatives-why else do you think it's been breaking almost every single film record in the books?
Plus, I've gotta say: for all your claims that these #buildabetterfaketheropod entries are 'better' and 'more creative' than I-rex, most of them, quite frankly, are just unoriginal.
Take this one: dontknowwhattodraw94.deviantar…
Fast Allosaurus. Yeah, that's SO much better than I-rex.
Or this: pixelmecha.deviantart.com/art/…
Oh, come on! That's just a Concavenator with feathers!
In short, you really need to just get over Jurassic World. It's inaccurate. We know. Now stop whining about it. It's been over twenty years, for fuck's sake!
....Woah. I'm looking at this later, and I'm kinda wowed by how pissed off I was when I wrote this. If you judge me from this, I won't blame you-to be honest, I wouldn't blame you.
👍: 0 ⏩: 3
Too be honest we don't ignore TLBT or all those other dinosaur "documentaries". I think every decent paleoartist over here can confess he/she has at least once showed his opinion on one of those shows. You can even find opinions towards the glorified WW-series without any effort.
The reason why we're now all talking about JW is because it's the only current dinosaur movie that has been released at the moment. A movie that states it has contacted palaeontologists for making the movie, but the only thing it does is showing what dinosaurs looked like in 1960 because "we can't give them feathers because we have to stay in line with the previous movies that actually always have changed their designs with each sequel."
There's no reason to do that. It's not difficult to make a feathered dromaeosaur look scary, escpecially not with the current theories about how they disembowelled their prey. It's a missed opportunity and that's sad. Not that I thought the movie itself was bad: I've seen it twice, but watching tail-dragging herbivores and man-sized scaly Velociraptors in 2015 does feel wrong. Especially if you look at all these awesome dinosaur reconstructions from today who get no attention because JP fanboys can't stand them or the mainstream public just thinks they're weird.
Like I said, the producers had the chance to show a turkey sized Velociraptor covered completely in feathers jumping from a tree driving its claws in somebody's neck or a Tyrannosaurus with some protofeathers enjoying some fresh park-visitor meat. But no, they don't do that because it has feathers so it won't look cool.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Honestly, I think that the more inaccurate the dinosaurs get, the more relevant the message of the franchise is: don't play god. The Jurassic Park raptors are about as similar to their real-life counterparts as the Wolfman is to humans, and for good reason: they're monstrous versions of the real thing created by mankind's hubris.
Also, the T-rex in Jurassic World is actually the one from the first movie, so they can't exactly change the appearance of an individual that's already been established to have no feathers.
And finally, is it weird that I see almost no originality in any of these 'better fake theropods'? They're all just either 'dire' versions of regular dinosaurs or modern-day animals if they were dinosaurs. Doesn't that strike you as just laziness? At least the Indominus actually looks unique. The best that this challenge has produced are:
-Dinosaur dire boar: dracontes.deviantart.com/art/A…
-Feathered Concavenator: pixelmecha.deviantart.com/art/…
-Dinosaur cheetah: pristichampsus.deviantart.com/…
-Sea lion dinosaur: pristichampsus.deviantart.com/…
-And dire alvarezsaur: alexanderlovegrove.deviantart.…
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
That's actually a nice way to think about it, especially if you look back at Ian Malcolm's speech in the first JP. I fear however not much people who watched the movie have the same opinion. Especially not the lay-men who don't know a thing about up to date dinosaurs. What you'll basically get are more JP-fanboys who'll spam comment sections of paleoartists or movies on Youtube and people who think JW dinosaurs are accurate because they don't know better.
True, no way they could change her, but I meant it if they had gone for a new individual. They could've made their raptor pack accurate just as all the other new animals or at least stick to the designs of the first movies. If you look at the details of their anatomy you'll see that the dinosaurs from the previous movies are more accurate than the ones from JW.
I've seen lots of originality with lots of freaky monsters that may look a bit over the top, but still make sense. I had no problems against the I. rex while watching JW, but she has certain features that don't make sense though: thumbs, feathers, weird set of teeth ... All kinds of stuff most of the works in this challenge don't have. Don't get me wrong: I loved the Indominous and I think she is the best dinosaur from the movie, but I wouldn't start making fun of the versions people have made by themselves by now. If you don't like them then that's your opinion, I can understand that, but calling them unoriginal is just wrong, I think.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Eh, people are stupid. I've accepted that fact a long time ago. All we can do is educate them.
Yeah, you do have a point, and I have an idea to go along with that: keep the feathered raptor squad idea, but replace the scene where Indominus communicates with them with having the raptors from the nesting site in the first movie integrate I-rex into their pack! You've got more nostalgia, more accuracy, and more awesomeness in one fell swoop-RAPTOR FIGHTS!
Me, I think that the Indominus is a bit like Godzilla: she's more of a representation-in this case, of Ingen's meddling with nature, and maybe of animal abuse-than an animal that could really exist. At the same time, though, to me, Indominus looks both like something that could perhaps have existed and like something that clawed its way out of Skull Island at the same time (If you look at the V-rex from King Kong, it actually has a similar skull to the I-rex.) Yeah, I do agree that there are plenty of good ideas in this hashtag, but there are also a lot of bad ones as well, especially this one: altithoraxjjh.deviantart.com/a…
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
I can agree with you on everything you've said so far. Good job.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
True.
I was hoping for something similar: that the raptors from the first movie appeared in JW, making contact with the squad while they're in the forest, but without the I. rex involved with it. I thought that was happening when I saw the trailer for the first time: 'There's something wrong... they're communicating.'
Yeah, that symbolism makes sense, after all she's such a mixture of so much DNA.
She does look indeed like something that could've existed, some kind of generic carnosaur if you ignore the thumbs. That's actually exactly why so much people don't like her and this hashtag got created: she looks too much like a normal dinosaur, not a hybrid. It's sort of like my drawing I had done for the hashtag for Jdailey1991 dontknowwhattodraw94.deviantar… : It's a hybrid just like I. rex, but it looks just too normal. Not that I personally have a problem with that, but I understand the criticim for it being unoriginal. Lots of artists have proven they could've made something better with the BABFT hashtag in my opinion.
Okay, that drawing is indeed a bad one, but than again you have these awesome things that don't look 'normal':
www.deviantart.com/art/Sagitta…
www.deviantart.com/art/Umbraha…
www.deviantart.com/art/Biolumi…
I think in general people did a great job with the hashtag. There's a whole load of special hybrids now.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yeah, I like that there are a lot more hybrids, but I personally think that there's room for more. Imagine what people could do with just Triassic reptiles!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Indeed, or just with animals from totally different times. I think Mark Witton once wrote a post about the future of the Jurassic franchise, giving some personal ideas he'd thought would be good for it, more original.
For example: he suggested that InGen could clone hominids like Homo erectus or neanderthals. That would make a nice discussion about where you draw the line between animal and human and of course: what if they escaped? Their intelligence isn't something to underestimate. Plus they have thumbs.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yeah, I've heard of that idea. Personally, though, I don't want to see just accurate dinosaurs or just inaccurate ones-I want both. Just imagine:
-A Benjamin Hawkins-style Megalosaurus bursting out of the undergrowth like a crocodile from hell to snatch an unlucky human.
-An extremely gaudy feathered T-rex being easily spotted and slaughtered by Rexy.
-A backwards Elasmosaurus and a normally proportioned one peacefully fishing together.
-A Hydrarchos squaring off with a colossal pliosaur.
-Feathered raptors and scaled ones hunting together, with the feathered ones boxing in prey and attacking the upper half while the grounded raptors attack the bottom half.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I'd just have inaccurate ones. Enough 90's dinosaurs in pop industry for me. It's time for some welcome change.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You mean just accurate ones or older-style inaccurate ones?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Sorry, I meant modern accurate ones. That was a typo...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Ah, my mistake. Still, I think that if feathered dinosaurs make it into the JP franchise, they should still have the scaled ones alongside them-it wouldn't make too much sense if the scaled dinosaurs were absent for no reason.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Depends on what you choose: if you go for Site B still being untouched since Hammond wanted it to be protected and decide to take it into your movie, it sounds good to me, but if you do it like JW and only talk about the current park (ignore the references seen in the film, those don't matter) you should have feathered animals if you want to be accurate.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Not again.
Are you high, or something?
Also dontknowwhattodraw94.deviantar… was not 's design. It was a request by some other guy.
Also you haven't submit anything, while having an account since half a year. Seems you just made your account to fanboy around and complain on anything.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Wow, looks like we have a severe case of JP-fanboyism over here...
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I'm gonna screencap this and show it to the world as the perfect example of rampant fanboy.
"I'm looking at this later, and I'm kinda wowed by how pissed off I was when I wrote this. If you judge me from this, I won't blame you-to be honest, I wouldn't blame you."
Just for this, I will stop my reply here. Have a nice day.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Honestly, I won't blame you for it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
wrong: some birds were featured
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
| Next =>