>>213826376It's not that inaccuracy ever ruined anything since if that was the case then the inciting incident wouldn't have worked, its that accuracy matters to the first film due to the notion the original Jurassic Park relies on the climax of "wow! dinosaurs!" and production wanted the dinosaurs being realistic. (for the time)
>Stan Winston specifically wanted to read a paper for every species before he designed them.>Spielberg hired Jack Horner (regrettably), but hired a paleontologist to consult for accuracy>Spielberg specifically did NOT want tail-dragging and outdated depictions and wanted this to be as up-to-date as it can be.By removing this then it just makes the film way less interesting and there is zero interest in making the "dinosaurs" fun in the World movies. There's nothing like "Oh, we brought back Carnotaurus and it has chromatophore-skin like an octopus, neat." that leads to a fun and thoughtful sequence in the books. In the World movies, they don't even try unless its something not real that's ugly like the rest of the designs in Jurassic World.
Also every single theropod dinosaur has a fused-clavicle bone in their neck called a furcula bone. Coelophysis from the Triassic has one, and T.rex has one so it was present in all of them. Birds have this bone today, its their wishbone.
>prioritizing fun over accuracyYou have to be clinically lobotomized to have any 'fun' watching garbage like Fallen Kingdom or Dominion.
The reason people pick on films like Jurassic World and not something like Primal is cause the latter is actually being made by people who like dinosaurs and embraces that it ISN'T realistic.