Jurassic Park 3

(234 votes, average 4.46 out of 5)

Order The Uncanny Valley here.

Facebook Share
Comments (384)
  • Xandrew
    avatar
    Finally! the Review we've been waiting for!
  • theroomisawesome22
    this review was surprisingly not as funny as ''Jurassic park'', that is kinda ironic cause the first one is a classic and you make it seem worse then number 3. but anyway it was still a good review. I agree it was horrible when they killed the mother f....ing T Rex, and INSTEAD used an uncool gay as hell not as awesome predator. you should do ''Jurassic World'' in 2015! Also the blonde lady ''I don't remember her name'' is so annoying she is like Willy Scott and Jar Jar Binks had a daughter. good review best you've done this year even though it was not as funny as you're ''Jurassic Park'' review and that is OK.

    p.s.
    finally I seen a good Matthew Brodrick performance in a great movie called ''Glory''
  • GlerksFlu
    This comment was more mixed and confused than Neapolitan ice cream.
  • 94MICK19
    Yeah, "Glory" is a great movie. BTW did you forget he was Simba in "The Lion King"?
  • theroomisawesome22
    Rest in peace mother f....king T Rex

    1993 - 2001

    you were so awesome it made me cry.
  • SkyExplosion
    Everytime the Nostalgia Critic made fun of Matthew Brodick I always thought back to glory. He was great in glory and it obviously shows he can act (just like Shattered Glass showed Hayden Christensen can act and emote) yet they rarely choose the correct roles to do so.
  • Fionna Wannabe
    avatar
    "uncool gay" whooooooah oxymoron there
  • Yarin
    Everything you do is amazing what can we as viewers do to make you happy besides giving you all our money
  • Shawn.W.  - What is wrong with you people?
    J.P.3 is awesome! Seriously, I love this movie. How could anyone not? I completely agree with critics about the second film: it was oh so lame. But you cant look at this film and not think its amazing and inspired.

    Quick facts; tyrannosaurus rex were not hunters. Their anatomy was that of a formidable scavenger. That thing the rex is eating in this movie was killed by something else. Spinosaurus aegypticus on the other hand was a true predator, and the largest one ever at that. It weighs about three tons more than the rex. Everything you think of as awesome about the rex in this franchise was fabricated. So if you think the rex is badass, take a look at the thirteen ton slab of epic that is the spinosaurus.

    By the way, I think that doll skit is the best one you have ever done, Doug. It was HILARIOUS!
  • SpeedyEric  - Shawn.W.
    avatar
    I also enjoy watching Jurassic Park 3, and I was surprised as hell seeing the spinosaurus kicking the Muthafuckin' T-Rex, we got to see more on the pteredactyls which we've only seen in the ending shot of the previous film, the raptors became for of a threat for our heroes, and Sam Neill still gave it his all.

    And before anyone asks, YES, I am planing on seeing Jurassic World next summer.
  • Baby Hitler
    avatar
    Pteranodons only ate fish, despite their large size, Though I suppose you could say they attacked the people because they were defending their territory. Or more likely it was because of Téa Leoni's acting.
  • Trisdino
    they also, did not have teeth. In fact, their name means "toothless beak". The science is strong with this film.
  • Carewolf
    Already by the time Jurasic Park 2 was out it was also firmly established the raptors and T-rex should have feathers. Somehow it is more important to make the movie what people expect rather than what is accurate.
  • Falconfly
    avatar
    Pteranodons also had pycnofibrils (aka "hair"), didn't had teeth, had huge wingspans, did not have grabbing feet and most likely didn't build nests or raise their young, leaving them to fend for themselves like lizards or turtles.

    Really, can you honestly point me to a movie where Pteranodons are realistic?
  • minnie3434  - SpeedyEric
    avatar
    lol I want to see that when it comes out too.



    Doug, I've been waiting for you to review since you said you would. Definitely not disappointed.

    PS: I saw the T-Rex thing coming
  • SpeedyEric
    avatar
    BTW, "Transformers: The Splooging of the Dong"? REALLY?! Doug, if you want to judge a movie, PLEASE do it AFTER you've seen it.
  • JMLee13
    avatar
    Another fun fact for you, studies have shown that despite the Spinosaurus' size it had relatively weak jaws, and from the placement of their bones, it's believed they spent most of their time in the water and had a diet of mostly fish, sort of like modern day crocodilians
  • Trisdino
    Well, the jaws were not weak, just not strong enough to do... that. They did have strong claws though, which it of course never uses in this film, because reasons.
  • LikaLaruku
    avatar
    When Sam Neill (Dr. Grant) looks a certain way & the light catches his face just so, he looks like Hugo Weaving. & showing that clip of Elrond made me wonder if you were thinking the same thing.

    Spinosaurus vs T-rex, Crocodile vs Ostrich.

    Hollywood + Tyrannosaurus, Allosaurus, Giganotosaurus, Mapusaurus, Carcharodontosaurus, Tarbosaurus, Acrocanthosaurus, Torvosaurus, Saurophaganax, Ekrixinatosaurus, Epantarius, or Zhuchengtyrannus = "Fukkit, it's a T-Rex."

    Every time the Raptor Pack shows up, it really does feel like a Land Before Time sequel.

    Seeing people discuss & argue about paleontology gives me the warm fuzzies.
  • SuperSaiyaMan12
    avatar
    You still believe that bullshit? Tyrannosaurus were the apex predators of North America, but they would also scavenge. Guess what, most animals are like that. We've found healed bites from Tyrannosaurus Rexes on Hadrosaurs and Triceratops showing that Tyrannosaurus DID actively hunt. Protip: even Jack Horner, the person who popularized this fail of biology DOES NOT BELIEVE IT ANYMORE.

    And Spinosaurus? It was a FISH EATER. True it'd eat (most likely scavenge) dinosaurs now and then, but its jaw's were designed to grab fish and hold them down to kill them. Its relatives were all fisheaters (Baryonyx notably) and it faced competition from Carcharodontosaurus which was the apex predator outside the rivers.
  • Trisdino
    The thing about spinosaurus is that the whole situation here is kinda a mess, for several reason.

    1. Logically, as they had different diets, they would never have fought in the first place. It is like a lion attacking a snake. It does not matter if it is a bloody anaconda, they do not eat the same prey, and thus, would not compete.

    2. Spinosaurus was actually far larger then the one in the film. The spino in this film appears to be the same size as the rex, placing it at 12 meters, while the real spinosaurus was estimated to reach 18 meters.

    3. Even if they did fight, it would not be like this. You are right that S. Aegypticus had weak(er, it is relative) jaws, but it also had very powerful claws. These would have been a real potential threat. It does not use them in the film though, so that point is mute.
  • JMLee13
    avatar
    All very good points, the Spinosaurus truly is a very interesting creature, and I think ultimately most fans wouldn't have been so offended by it killing off the T-Rex to be the main large predator of the film if one, their fight scene had been a little more epic and two, if they'd depicted the Spinosaurus a little better, made it more like an animal and less like a cheesy movie monster, I mean why was the thing chasing them throughout the movie, it's already eaten a couple of people and probably part of the Rex, predators don't act like this they don't continually stalk prey after they've had a good meal, in this the thing was tracking down the people like it was the Terminator, I mean in the first movie the Rex didn't hunt the people they would just accidentally run into it and they'd sometimes wend up catching it's attention which is scary, kinda like accidentally coming a cross a bear in the woods and it deciding to chase you, and if anyone argues that well in the second film the T-Rex's hunted down the humans well in that film the people had their baby making the parents super territorial until they got ahold of their offspring, in this the Spinosaurus has no good motivation to keep on chasing them
  • Shawn.W.  - I concede... partially
    I had actually not thought of that. Interesting. That does render this movie somewhat redundant. Well, I hope they tie up those loose ends in Jurassic World next summer.
  • Falconfly
    avatar
    Isotope ratios even show that it spent as much time in the water as a crocodile or a turtle. Clearly the ideal animal to face a T. rex in a rainforest [/sarcasm]
  • Dethhollow
    The T Rex's teeth are practically shaped like railroad spikes with a large head made for chomping down on stuff hard. I don't care what that thing is, there's no way it would be able to shrug off Rex chomping down on the back of it's neck like that.
  • Trisdino
    You are quite wrong. A rex's teeth were blunt, designed to break bones. The bite certainly would hurt, but not kill it. On the other hand, the spinosaurus's bite also would not be able to kill the rex, so it is all just a mess.
  • Mahasamatman
    Well, that's according to some paleontologists, (including the advisor to these films, Jack Horner). Other paleontologists, like Robert Bakker, believe Tyrannosaurus to be a hunter. It's possible it was both a hunter and scavenger, like a hyena. Also, Spinosaurus may be primarily eaten fish for its diet, due to the shape of its snout. It may have occasionally hunted small prey, like a grizzly bear may have, but the consenus seems to be that Spinosaurus was a fish eater.
  • SuperSaiyaMan12
    avatar
    Exactly. Hell for a dinosaur of Spinosaurus' size, it was extremely fragile compared to its smaller competitors. A broken spine would equal a broken back after all, and that's where Carcharodontosaurus would aim.

    And even Jack Horner doesn't buy into the pure scavenger hypothesis anymore. He's been forced to bow to the overwhelming evidence that Tyrannosaurus Rex was a predator and the top one in its niche.
  • Falconfly
    avatar
    Hyenas scavenge far less than lions, you know. ALL CARNIVORES are both hunters and scavengers.
  • Shawn.W.  - really?
    You may be partially correct. but some would estimate that the spinosaurus weighed twenty tons. If that is to be believed instead of the established thirteen, there is no possible way it could have survived on only fish. it would be REQUIRED to hunt. The rex, on the other hand, was perfectly capable of thriving on carrion. Therefore, it is far more likely that the rex scavenged than the spinosaurus ate only fish.
  • Falconfly
    avatar
    A) you do realise many huge piscivores nowdays rely on fish much smaller than them to survive, right? (several populations of orcas, sperm whales, et cetera) and B) Spinosaurus co-existed with fish as big as buses.

    And again, ONLY FLYING CARNIVORES CAN THRIVE ON CARRION ALONE. This is basic biology, and one of the reasons Jack Horner is ridiculed.
  • Kyman201
    By the time this movie was made, the "Spinosaurus is betterer than a T-rex" was mostly being supported by the Dinosaur consultant for Jurassic Park, and nobody else.

    Really, most paleontologists nowadays will tell you the T-rex was a predator. A MAJOR one.
  • SuperSaiyaMan12
    avatar
    Its also common sense. Given the size of the game (full grown Hadrosaurs and ceratopsians, even some sarupods), only Tyrannosaurus Rex could hunt them effectively. Dromeosaurs (like Raptors in the film) wouldn't be able to take down game that big due to being too small, and they were the only notable predators in that area.
  • Shawn.W.  - You're kidding me.
    You're KIDDING me. THE ONLY NOTABLE PREDATORS IN THAT AREA?!?!?!? Do any of these names ring a bell, SuperSaiyaMan12?

    albertosaurus
    alectrosaurus
    raptorex
    alioramus
    aublysodon
    bistahieversor
    appalachiosaurus
    dryptosaurus
    daspletosaurus
    eotyrannus
    gorgosaurus
    guanlong
    juratyrant
    kileskus
    lythronax
    nanotyrannus
    tarbosaurus
    teratophoneus
    xiongguanlong
    zhuchengtyrannus

    THESE were the true hunters of that time and area. The rex was nothing more than a parasitic raptor who fed off of the hunting prowess of these creatures. Go find a kindergarten scrapbook and use it to freshen up on dinosaurs.
  • Falconfly
    avatar
    ...most of which not living in the same time or place as Tyrannosaurus rex.

    It's like saying Smilodon is still alive today in the prairies of Australia alongside dingoes and emus.
  • Extreme-Madness
    avatar
    Most species you named are cousins of the T-rex, you consider them as true predators, but for some reason you still insist that the T-rex was a scavenger.
    You're not reading the latest scientific research regarding the behavior of T-rex.
  • SuperSaiyaMan12
    avatar
    Nanotyranus is just a juvenile Tyrannosaurus. Dasplateosaurus, Gorgosaurus, and Albertosaurus were all near extinct or occupying their OWN niches.

    Most of the dinosaurs you listed for North America are too small to prey on the big game of the range where Tyrannosaurus hunted. They had their own niche, Tyrannosaurus had its own.

    And you are an idiot.
  • Shawn.W.  - HA!
    Well, I am rubber, and you are glue. I'm sure you can fill in the rest.
  • spartan7
    That's like saying lions were exclusively scavengers because leopards, hyenas and cheetahs live in Africa. Different locations, different niches, different prey. Habitants aren't uniform across a continent, and even if they're similar, geographic isolation allows differentiation. Also, most of the species you cite existed millions of years apart anyway.
  • Shawn.W.  - According to what Disney show?
    In what twisted, convoluted, brain dead Disney show do MODERN paleontologists believe that the rex were anything but scavengers, Kyman201?
  • Falconfly
    avatar
    Pretty much the entire scientific community sans Horner, actually. There's a reason why even he abandoned that silly notion to save his own professional arse.
  • Chaseha_Wing  - It's in The bones Guys
    avatar
    yeah, besides the scavenger theory came about when they decided the T-rex was too big and heavy to gain the proper speed to get its prey, however in recent years they discovered something that blew that theory away and make the dino light enough to go after, catch and hunt its prey effectively on its own.

    Dino bones are hollow. Specifically, the T-rex has hollow bones making it light and nimble enough to run, attack and hunt its prey. Just like bird bones.

    Since then along with battle scars and hunting marks on other dinosaurs at the time, including their own kind (the t-rex apparently was a cannibal. Go figure.) its been repeatedly proven that they were hunters.
  • Extreme-Madness
    avatar
    It really does not matter because his prey like a triceratops and hadrosaurus also were not very fast animals.
  • SuperSaiyaMan12
    avatar
    Not any disney show. And you don't seem to get the main proponent of 'Tyrannosaurus was a Scavenger' switched sides when abundant evidence was found.
  • Spinodontosaurus
    The ONLY authoritative supporter of the scavenger hypothesis - Jack Horner - retracted his standpoint 5 YEARS ago. 5 years people.

    In addition to the hypothesis having no substantial evidence in its favour, healed bite marks on fossils of both Edmontosaurus and Triceratops indicate that Tyrannosaurus actively hunted live prey. There is no further debate.

    I mean, who else do you propose was the apex predator? Quetzalcoatlus? Or perhaps the turkey-sized Acheroraptor, right?

    Can we leave the scavenger thing to rot, please?
  • SpeedyEric
    avatar
    It should be noted that before Jurassic Park, I never heard of the spinosaurus.
  • Gojirafan666  - Dude, watch Discovery
    1. A Spinosaurus was a fish-eater, maybe going on land to scavenge dead animals or hunt smaller animals, since its relatively weak jaws and small teeth would make it unsuitable to hunt larger game. Despite its large size and clawed digits, it would have been able to take down an ankylosaurus or triceratops

    2. Despite current popular belief, T. Rex was an active hunter, going after medium to larger prey like Hadrosaurs and triceratops. Its jaws could exert a bite force three times that of a Great White Shark and its teeth were designed to crush bone. That means that if this movie had been accurate, and Spinosaurus had pulled away from it's jaws after the Rex had a hold on it, it would have torn out its muscles, ligaments, flesh, and vertebrae.

    3. They killed the Rex in the movie just so they could show-case the Spinosaurus. If Steven Spielberg or even Michael Chrichton worked on this film, the Rex would have killed the Spinosaurus.
  • Spinodontosaurus
    Hate to be that one guy, but Spinosaurus did not have small teeth.
    In terms of tooth crowns (the part that sticks out from the jaw), Spinosaurus probably has the biggest of any known theropod.
    If you include the root as well then Tyrannosaurus would have longer teeth, true, but probably very little else would, and the tooth crown is the pointy part that does all the damage.
  • SuperSaiyaMan12
    avatar
    But they weren't designed for ripping, tearing, or crushing, ONLY grabbing. Tyrannosaurus Rex had teeth capable of all three, with crushing being its specialty.
  • Falconfly
    avatar
    Yes, everything about T. rexes in JP was fabricated, HOWEVER the scavenger thing is bullshit only supported by Horner that doesn't make any sense. ALL CARNIVORES are scavengers, and the only animals capable of sustaining themselves on carcasses alone are flying animals like vultures or flies, because everything else saves a lot more energy by killing what's nearby.
  • Shawn.W.  - It makes perfect sence.
    The powerful jaws of the rex were designed to combat their own kind. That is well established and accepted. You must think of the fact that the rex had a very powerful sense of smell. When the rex existed, North America was crawling with large herds of triceratops, croryosaurus, parosaurolophis walker, and large numbers of anckylosaurus. now, if the rex was a hunter, it would simply wait by a water source for prey to walk by, rendering their advanced sense of smell mute. However, since it WAS, IN FACT, A SCAVENGER, a powerful sense of smell would be necessary to root through the vast wilderness for carrion.
  • Extreme-Madness
    avatar
    As long as you do not disclose any new scientific work that can conclusively prove that the t-rex was a scavenger exclusive, we have nothing to talk about
    You seem almost dogmatically believe that the T-rex was a scavenger, and obviously that nothing will get you to change your mind.
    All predators have a strong sense of smell, your argument does not make sense.
  • SuperSaiyaMan12
    avatar
    Are you an idiot? Other than Tyrannosaurus, there were NO other alpha, apex predators in North America. Dromeosaurs are too small. Strange how you ignore the fact that hadrosaurs and ceratopsians were found with healed wounds from Tyrannosaurus bites.

    Of course Tyrannosaurus would scavenge: ALL predators would. But there's a vast amount of evidence in which it was an active hunter.

    Claiming its bite force was used to solely combat its own kind? That is a new type of stupidity.
  • Bloodrealm
    "Everything you think of as awesome about the rex in this franchise was fabricated."
    Maybe, but it's still part of the franchise, and part of what people loved about it. Completely stripping that away out of nowhere and saying "No, this is better! Fuck that other thing you liked!" just like the skit in the review did is not a good way to treat the audience, and that's what the issue is here, not the accuracy of it.
    The second Silent Hill movie did something similar: it was more accurate to the source material, but it completely contradicted everything set up beforehand while still trying to be a sequel, therefore making no sense.
    There's is, in fact, a balance between pandering and tampering, and this movie fell off onto the tampering side.
  • Extreme-Madness  - BULLSHIT!
    avatar
    BULLSHIT! T-Rex was a true predator (scientifically proven), I can not believe that people still believe in this scavenger bullshit.

    Spinosaurus on the other hand is scientifically proven to be fed almost exclusively with large fish and small land animals.

    The only thing here that is fabricated is showing motherfucking T-Rex as some sort of pathetic and incompetent wimp, and the Spinosaurus as some sort of indestructible super-predator which is complete nonsense.
    T-Rex's still a badass.
  • blah3132  - What is wrong with you?
    The debate on whether the T-rex is a predator or a scavenger is still up in the air, with scientists on both sides. Regardless, it doesn't matter what they do in real life. As stated in the very beginning of this movie, these aren't real dinosaurs, these are reconstructions using modern animal DNA. The hunting ability could have been something they put in.

    That being said, the Spinosaurus was right to win. It is bigger and stronger.
  • SuperSaiyaMan12
    avatar
    Most scientists agree Tyrannosaurus is primarily a predator, not a scavenger. Even Jack Horner who popularized the hypothesis has conceded in recent years that Tyrannosaurus was in fact a hunter.

    No, it really doesn't. Spinosaurus was larger, but it was far more frail than Tyrannosaurus Rex. It had a weaker bite too. It was built to catch and eat fish, not kill other dinosaurs.
  • Extreme-Madness
    avatar
    T-rex was a predator and scavenger, like every carnivore ever, there is no longer any real debate.
    Spinosaur was only bigger, but more powerful, no. Except maybe his claws, but the t-rex had the strongest bite of all terrestrial predators.
  • spartan7  - Yeah, no
    Pretty much everything you just said is wrong.

    I won't quibble over whether the film's good or not. I think it seriously blows, but if you like it, good for you. I'm more angered by your claims about your "quick facts," since they're woefully wrong.

    Firstly, the T. rex WAS a predator - it's been confirmed through numerous fossil finds of healed prey with tyrannosaurus tooth marks, which prove it hunted live prey, especially hadrosaurs and ceratopsians. T. rex probably did scavenge occasionally - like modern predators which do the same thing.

    Secondly, whatever tonnage advantage the spinosaurus had, it was itself mostly a piscivore, with relatively fragile jaws. T. rex, on the other hand, had the most powerful bite of any land predator in the earth's history, and the most powerful neck muscles. The idea of spinosaurus snapping its neck is laughable. There's more direct evidence that spinosaurus was a scavenger than that T. rex was.

    (But yes, the doll skit was really funny.)
  • DrZulu2010  - That still doesn't change the facts.
    avatar
    No matter if the T-Rex is a scavenger or not, it's scientifically proven that his jaw can tear through flesh, muscle AND bones. One gnaw on the spinosaurus' neck and Wham! He's already dead. It's like seeing a Rottwiler losing a pelican.


    Also, to counter the T-Rex is a scavenger theory, there is a theory that the Spinosaurus is piscivore. Which means that they have a diet mostly consisting of fishes.

    Lastly, The spinosaurus' jaw and teeth don't have enought power to snap a neck like that of the T-Rex. The most it could do is giving some superficial neck wound and that's it.
  • HalfDemonInuyasha  - reply
    Yeah, I believe one of the reasons for the unpopularity of the Spinosaurus is partly because it's not nearly as well-known as the Tyrannosaurus Rex. IIRC, there's never even been a full skeleton of one made yet, and a number of the larger, earlier fossils of it that were discovered were destroyed in 1945 during the bombing campaigns in Europe in WWII.

    I mean, even before Jurassic Park, the Tyrannosaurus Rex was pretty well-known as the quintessential top predator of the dinosaur world.

    And also because we "grew up" with the Tyrannosaurus as the king in Jurassic Park; with how epicly he owned the two Velociraptors at the end of Jurassic Park to rampaging in The Lost World, to suddenly have it, a fan favorite dinosaur, be killed off by the Spinosaurus, a newcomer who I'm sure many people at the time wondered what the hell it was, and for the Tyrannosaurus to never make another appearance in III, was a huge shock.

    It's just as Doug made it out, like a favorite toy suddenly being forcibly replaced. I was one of those viewers who initially hated the Spinosaurus being thrown in as a replacement for the Tyrannosaurus, but after doing my own research on Spinosaurus, in hindsight, I now understand, in terms of dinosaurs anyway (not the movie necessarily), why it became center stage.

    As you said, the Spinosaurus is an actual hunting predator (who is slightly taller and heavier than the Tyrannosaurus) whereas the Tyrannosaurus Rex was largely a powerful scavenger who would bully kills made by others, weaker predators from them. Not to say the Tyrannosaurus never hunted, but it didn't do so nearly as much as initially believed.
  • Extreme-Madness
    avatar
    "the Spinosaurus is an actual hunting predator"

    For fish, fish were his main food, proven because they found fossils of the jaw, in which in which they are found fish scales and bones of large fish.

    What you're talking about the T-rex has long been rejected, but it seems that some people like to believe in something, even though it has long been proven wrong
    T-rex was both a predator and scavenger like all predators ever, proven because they found healed bite wounds on the bones of Triceratops and hadrosaurus.
  • Rusty hyena
    avatar
    Ok, I´m sorry but that´s just not true. I think you might have been watching Jack Horner too much.

    T.rex was an alpha predator. We´ve found dinosaurs with crushing and biting marks from T.rex that have healed. Rather convincing proof that T.rex hunted and tried to kill them. Plus, even if we had not found those fossils, the ecology of T.rex´s environment means it has to have been a hunter. There was no predator in North America during T.rex´s time that was even close in size and strength to T.rex. Sure, small raptors but they couldn´t have dreamed of taking down the megaherbivores that lived in their environment.

    Also, Spinosaurus is my favourite dinosaur but even I admit that it was not built for hunting big game. That long, thin skull would have broken if it clamped down on something big and thrashing. And if something like a sauropod knoced it over, it would have died because the big sail was connected to the spine. Meaning, if it gets knocked over, it breakes it´s back and dies. Spinosaurus was a large piscivore: a fish-eater. It used it´s long jaw and powerful arms to kill fish up to 8m in length. It´s size was likely due to prevent hypothermia from beeing in the water for long.
  • MorleyDev  - T-Rex as a Scavenger
    avatar
    The whole "hunter or scavenger" debate is one of the oldest one with the T-Rex, and still has not been solved.

    The main consultant for this film was one of the men who supports the pure scavenger theory, hence why they went with that approach, but it still hasn't been established as a scientific fact yet that T-Rex was or was not an Apex Predator.
  • Extreme-Madness
    avatar
    Actually no, the debate is over, t-rex was a predator and scavenger, like all other carnivores that ever lived.
    They were discovered fossils of Triceratops and hadrosaurus, which have traces of healed wounds from the bite of a t-rex proving that t-rex attack live prey.
  • davidtheotaku  - seriously
    Right because this flim CLEARLY doesn't fabricate ANYTHING about the Spinosaurus... true predator? Sure bro... IT MAINLY ATE FISH not large dinosaurs the second it bit a large predator like t-rex it's jaw would most likely break from the force and thrashing movements it's bones were weak and light-weight for a large predator because it was a swimmer t-rex had stronger bones and the strongest jaws of any dinosaur to ever live thats why it's called the king size isn't everything just because it big doesn't mean its the super predator
  • Sirpenguinthethird  - i know right
    You forgot to add something Spinosaurus is like a mix between a giant t-rex and a crocodile they have same sensors on their nose like crocodiles and spent most of their time living in water that's why the went extinct because of the water levels dropping
  • HentaiGuy42
    "tyrannosaurus rex were not hunters. Their anatomy was that of a formidable scavenger."

    *sigh* T-rex most likely was a predator who, like almost all modern predators, would scavenge opportunistically. We can't know for certain, obviously, but the general consensus stands.

    "Spinosaurus aegypticus on the other hand was a true predator, and the largest one ever at that. It weighs about three tons more than the rex."

    Except that estimates of the animal's weight vary wildly. And, regardless of what estimate was correct, it's not even close to being the largest predator ever. The modern day sperm whale is (at least) twice as heavy and much longer (as are many aquatic predators). If you want to specify terrestrial animals, you should probably do so. And even then it's only believed that the Spinosaurus was larger (it almost certainly was, but still). Upper limit estimates for the T-rex are higher than lower limit estimates for the Spino.
  • Suomismg
    avatar
    Once more a movie reviewed, and once more the Critic delivers words of wisdom to us all.
  • ShadowHand
    avatar
    It has finally come. As for Grant not being with doctor Satler that follows the books however in the books. Since in the book the first movie was based on grant and salter were teacher and student. The reason they mentioned the dines at the end is because that was part of the original script which involved the terasaurs attacking cities and as a result they must return to the island to investigate or some shit like that
  • wariolove
    YES IM A MOTHERFUCKIN TREX
  • BlakeFajack
    Sometimes I get really annoyed when everyone is too lazy to actually fact check. When it comes to zoology the Critic is dumb as a pile of rocks and this movie is dumb as a pile of dinosaur shit.
  • BlakeFajack
    Example: Pterosaurs are not actually dinosaurs at all, but are actually flying reptiles.
  • Falconfly
    avatar
    Indeed. That people still commit a mistake clarified in basically all children's educational books ever depresses me greatly.
  • rayhs1984
    avatar
    There is now a great tumblr called isnotadinosaur ran by a museum employee dedicated to pointing out toys and books that incorrectly label Pterosaurs, Dimetrodons and other animals as Dinosaurs. (A lot of them are either branded by Jurrasic Park or sold buy museums.
  • Spiritkitten
    avatar
    Um, I could be missing one, but most if not all dinosaurs were cold-blooded, therefore they were all reptiles.



    That aside, I loved this movie, it was at least 10x better than Lost World. AT least this one didn't try and jack hammer in an environmental and animal rights message.
  • BlakeFajack
    Dinosaurs is a clade primarily identified by the way their hips are orientated.
  • SuperSaiyaMan12
    avatar
    Dinosaurs were most likely warm blooded given their size and metabolism.
  • Extreme-Madness
    avatar
    No, dinosaurs were warm-blooded, small theropods and ornithopods had by recent evidence primitive feathers with which they maintain body temperature, and the largest dinosaurs maintain a constant body temperature by their sheer size.
  • Shawn.W.  - Well...
    Actually, Spiritkitten, several medium- sized dinosaurs were warm- blooded. Parasourolophus walkeri and corythosaurus to name a couple. Then again, some larger breeds of dinosaurs were likely cold- blooded. For example, the sail of the spinosaurus could have been used to regulate body temperature (expelling excess heat or absorbing required heat.) Then again, it could have been used simply to attract mates or make it look larger than it was to scare any potential predators.

    Also, cold- blooded does not under any circumstances definitively mean the creature was a reptile. Ever hear of amphibians?
  • SupermanXYZ  - SQUEE!
    FINALLY! Jeez! I've been requesting this one forever! Now all you need to do is make a Princess Diaries 2 and brave little toaster sequels review.
  • BlakeFajack
    The trilogy is complete.
  • SpeedyEric
    avatar
    Trilogy? Haven't you heard about Jurassic World coming out next year.
  • Mandalf The Beige
    I'M THE MOTHER-FUCKING T-REX.... OH SHIT!!!!!

    Omh, that killed me!
  • MarioToast
    Jurassic World?
    ...I is scared. Will probably suck. :c
  • SpeedyEric  - MarioToast
    avatar
    Sure. Judge a movie before a trailer is released.
  • AaronJer  - SpeedyEric
    avatar
    What. It's a fair prediction. More than half of movies suck, so it will probably suck.
  • Milanous  - The anticipation has been killing me
    avatar
    Ever since you said you would be taking a look at this I have been waiting with inner eager anticipation.
  • DeTroutSpinners
    avatar
    'Jurassic Fart.' Thank you, I'm here all week.
  • Robanah
    avatar
    THANK YOU!!! It's about time you did this movie!!!!
  • DecoNoir
    Registered just so I could say "HOLY GOD, YES!"
  • Heart-Lightning
    avatar
    I thought you would be doing a Michael Bay Transformers movie.
  • GutsForGlory38
    I always thought the reason that the red dino didn't attack Grant and the others was that the kid had the T-Rex urine with him. Either way, this movie was awful. I don't see much hope in the next sequel next year, but I want to give it a chance.
  • MLP Gustavia
    Critic can you please do The Hobbit?
  • archanix
    Couldn't you wait with that review just to make it... I don't know, funny?

    Last review was so idiotic but at liest funny a bit. Here there is nothing. It is not review, comedy or at liest random thoughts.
  • sekiwat
    avatar
    Sorry, critic, this movie is definitely the worst. It's pointless, it's forgettable...

    Jurassic Park was a huge film and when I see sequels of it, I expect equally huge films. It would be like a Star Wars or Indiana Jones movie having a very bland sequel or prequel where nothing feels resolved. Oh wait...
  • BTCRUISER12
    FINALLY!!!! I've been waiting a whole year for this!!!
  • EpicJasonRises
    avatar
    awesome review as always critic. while I know this film is pretty bad, I still enjoy it as a guilty pleasure. plus, it was the very last film I saw in theaters with my grandfather before he past away.

    on a side note, what many people fail to understand is that the T-Rex is not the biggest dinosaur in the fossil record as far as carnivorous dinosaurs are concerned. certain aspects of these dinosaurs were altered due to genetic mutation which is why the Velociraptors were bigger than normal and the Dilophosaurus had that silly frill and venom spit. so, in either case, they're not even realistic dinosaurs. Dr Grant, more or less, was right. they were pretty much genetically created monsters.

    and I hate to break it to you folks, but the Spinosaurus is in deed the largest of all known carnivorous dinosaurs. it's even larger than the mighty T-Rex and the Giganotosaurus. so, even though it pissed off the fans, the Spinosaurus was the top predator. and even after saying that, it's not like the films were realistic in the first place since they were cloned using frog dna even though they clearly stated that Dinosaurs were more related to birds than reptiles. which scientists are still debating about it even to this very day. but lets face it, the T-Rex can't always be the center of attention.

    in either case, I still like the film even knowing that it has some major flaws. and I think you did a great job finally reviewing this film.
  • SuperSaiyaMan12
    avatar
    Spinosaurus is indeed the largest therapod dinosaur at 60 feet long. However its a fish eater. Its teeth and jaws were designed to keep fish from swimming or wriggling away. Not only that its nostrils were far above its snout so it could poke its maw into the water without danger of suffocating.

    Tyrannosaurus was the heavy weight of the era. Strongest bite of any dinosaur (six to ten tons of force), possibly hunted in packs or family groups, and could even have a somewhat poisonous bite due to all the bacteria in its teeth.
  • EpicJasonRises
    avatar
    very true. even the other 2 larger dinosaurs, Carcharodontosaurus & Giganotosaurus, didn't have the biting power that the T-Rex had despite both being bigger. some even have bone structure in their jaws that gives them a less powerful bite. I guess you can say that all 4 big predators were the top of their class in their own way. and the idea of putting them in a fight makes no sense even for Jurassic Park III. sure the Spinosaurus was the largest carnivorous dinosaur, but he was a far different kind of predator than the T-Rex was. they all had different methods of hunting and their eating habits aren't exactly the same either. but like I said above, the films aren't exactly realistic in the first place since the dinosaurs presented in every single film and even in the novels were genetically engineered dinosaurs that were created by mutating their dna. at the end of the day, Jurassic Park is pure science fiction. fun and entertaining, but still fiction none the less.
  • Arturo dinosaur critic
    avatar
    he didn´t had the habiity t kill with poison or bacteria, but he indeed lived in family groups or packs.
  • JMLee13
    avatar
    Yes the Spinosaur was the largest carnivorous dinosaur, however studies also show they had fairly weak jaws for their size and placements of their bones suggest they spent most of their time in the water eating fish, kind of like modern day Crocodilians, so if we get technical the Spinosaur wouldn't have had enough strength to snap a T-Rex's neck like that, and also just because it was smaller doesn't make the T-Rex any less of an apex predator, and honestly large predators tend to leave each other alone, how many reports do you hear of black bears attacking, killing and eating mountain lions or visa versa, I mean both are large powerful predators who eat flesh and occupy the same territory as each other, why not go after each other? It's because predators especially solitary ones are extremely cautious, they stalk their prey and watch them closely, they aren't gonna go after something that can potential hurt them and effectively damage they way they hunt in the future, something like another large predator can do that to them. But let's get out of the realistic argument here, truth why so many people didn't like the Spinosaur killing off the T-Rex is because it was an unceremonious way to kill of the kids favorite dinosaur and trying to replace it as the favorite in their eyes, that's like let's have a Harry Potter film, but in the first 30 minutes let's drop a safe on Harry and replace him for the rest of the film with our new better character Jack Schmidty, you're gonna piss of a lot of fans and no matter how good the new character is no ones gonna wanna give them a chance because the fan favorite was killed off so unsanctimoniously, or like the Critic said going up to a kid and smacking their favorite toy out of their hand and giving them something new and telling them that's their new favorite toy
  • EpicJasonRises
    avatar
    while I can totally understand why it would piss off the kids who grew up with these films, I wasn't as put off by it. I grew up with Jurassic Park like everybody else. but the film even at that time felt kind of meh to me even at the age of 16. hell, even the super nintendo game Jurassic Park 2 The Chaos Continues was a better sequel and could very well be the very first sequel ever made before The Lost World novel came out. and that game was loosely inspired by the stories told in the comic books. as a kid into teenager age, I took films as is and I didn't bother getting upset. I wasn't this critical over a movie until I got older. but I guess some people are just far too attached to these films than I thought. don't get me wrong, I love Jurassic Park. it's one of my most favorite films ever made. but I'm not going to cry over spilled milk whenever an iconic character gets killed on screen just to have the new character introduced just to sell new toys to kids. if the film was made to be a cash cow on purpose, then don't take it seriously. the 1st film will always be around, so I would suggest to just watch that film or the 2nd film instead and just flat out ignore the 3rd film entierly. and if you are going to watch the 3rd film anyway, then don't get too emotionally attached to it thinking that it's going to be like exactly like the old films.
  • JMLee13
    avatar
    A very good point, and honestly it didn't bug me all that much either when they killed the Rex to have the Spinosaur take it's place, I was just saying why so many people had such a negative reaction to that, heck I don't hate this film or the second one either, they aren't as good as the first, but that doesn't make them awful movies
  • Baby Hitler
    avatar
    Jeez, when did everyone on this site become a paleontologist?
  • EpicJasonRises
    avatar
    exactly. I like the 2nd film more than the 3rd film, but that doesn't mean I hate the 3rd film. I have learned through the past 5 years that there is no such thing as a 100% good or bad movie. ultimately, review don't mean shit anymore. it's has and probably always will be based on personal taste at best. fans like some films while some fans hate them. some people love the most popular films ever while some don't like them. movies to me should only be made to escape reality for a couple of hours and just have fun. now a days, people have far too high expectations or most of today's films are more about quantity than quality. and no matter how many times they are warned about how bad a film is, they'll still go see it. I think sometimes we need bad films in order to balance out the good ones, sort of like the ying & yang theory. you can't have one without the other.
  • Spinodontosaurus
    I don't believe that any bite force has ever been properly estimated for Spinosaurus - I mean after all, we don't have any remains from the back of its skull where all the muscles would be.

    Nothing in it's skeleton, or that of its relatives, show adaptations towards aquatic life any more than any other theropod does. That said, Oxygen Isotope ratios do show it spent more time in the water than 'normal' theropods, but interestingly less time than other spinosaurids.
    So it spent significant time in the water, but wasn't especially adapted to living in it full time.

    And of course we don't know whether it could snap Tyrannosaurus' neck or not. It's jaw withstands stress best in vertical motions (up/down), that along with the muscle-attachment points known in its relative Irritator implying that it struck prey with a downward motion.
    So the movie has that going for it, at least.
  • jaxblade07  - The T-rex Spino Fight
    avatar
    I was anxiously WAITING For The Nostalgia Critics reaction when the Rex got killed hahahhahahha I knew he was gonna do something great xD
  • Microwave Jellyfish
    avatar
    Hm, the Crtic reviews a Jurassic Park movie that actually sucks? What the hell.
  • JMLee13
    avatar
    Well still a decent review, but I think MikeJ's was better, either way I'm hoping Jurassic World will be good, I really want a Jurassic Park sequel that's at least decent
  • EpicJasonRises
    avatar
    well, while I would love to have Jurassic World be a good film, I'm still going to remain cautious. it's been well over a decade since Jurassic Park III, and they can very easily screw it up again. just like Star Wars Episode VII, I'm still rather mixed about it since I have both optimism and skepticism at the same exact time. I don't want either of these films to suck, but I know full well that history has a funny way of repeating itself. so, we'll have to wait and see.
  • JMLee13
    avatar
    I'm definitely with you with on the skepticism, but I'm gonna try to hold on to a little hope for the film, but I'll more then likely take it with a grain of salt til I finally see it on the big screen
  • EpicJasonRises
    avatar
    same here. at this point, it's way too early to determine if Jurassic World is going to be good. both films are going to be one of the biggest movies I want to see next year, but I know far too well that they can easily screw it up again if they're not careful enough. as of now, I would rather wait until these films are officially released to give an honest & fair opinion on them. like the people who complain far too much over the new Superman/Batman movie, I would rather keep my opinions quiet until the movies come out instead of ranting on the internet like some kind of 9 year old child. there are plenty of movies coming out in the next 3 years that I really want to see. as far as how successful they'll become in the movies execution, that's yet to be determined.
  • TheGreatEscapist
    avatar
    Rob is a dinosaur… We can't help it if we love that moment.

    Sam Neil… I keep forgetting the Springfield Cat-Burglar was the lead from "Jurassic Park".

    And speaking of "The Simpsons", actually seeing William H. Macy with a mustache, he DOES look like the live-action Ned Flanders.

    From what I could tell from this review and the assorted clips, this movie actually does make for a decent B-movie (if there is such a thing). It's dumb, it doesn't need to exist, but on the other hand it's not so insulting that it's painful to watch. It looks like the sort of thing I could watch with some buddies on a Friday night and riff the hell out of it without necessarily screaming at the TV in anger.
  • SSH
    avatar
    Do let me get this straight you show no emotion, over thousands of sequences of horrifying death, the possibility that you lost your son. But no finding the skeleton of your boyfriend, positive you to try the goal for the title of scream queen.
    You're almost as bad as you finally learn how to start acting the moment you die!please watch more history of Power Rangers!

    also you know that the Rex would've won that fight it was fair, obviously he was full when it happened, and you never fight on a full stomach!
    because you don't kill that the Rex! generator new one of cybernetics, and make it shiny gold for no reason,despite his trademark color coded signal is blue!
  • namikawa
    avatar
    Amazing job as always Critic!
    I remember when this movie came out due the huge advertisement that there was for Jurassic Park , but I never watched it in the cinema. Later saw it on TV, since they aired all three movie in three weekends. And it was kind of a let down.
    JP 3 really is not overly bad movie, but is levels below the first one.
  • Brageyboy
    avatar
    My problem with JP3 was that the Dinosaurs didn't act like animals like in the other movies. They acted like Jason does or Freddy Krueger. While the T-Rex lashes out in the first, it's chance encounters with it. I'm not saying the second is great either really but I really don't like either second or the third. Though the third at least has a stronger connection with the books than the 3rd. The 3rd is just a special effects movie with a Jason Voorhees as a Dinosaur.
  • tinkerhell
    I really hope they just quietly revive the T-Rex for the fourth movie. I sincerely doubt anyone would complain.

    At least they're not doing the dinosaur-human hybrid thing they originally planned.
  • Ecartman12  - Finally!
    Great review Doug! Me and the family have been waiting for this review and it was so worth it! Keep up the awesome work!
  • The MegaNerd
    They're not? ah man! I was looking forward to that! But then again Ed Wood is one of my favourite directors.
  • Tom Smith
    avatar
    @tinkerhell
    The T-Rex of legend was on the first island whereas this movie takes place on the second island so its just some random T-Rex.

    Also: If they had gone through with the dino-human they should have made it so that all it said was Allen constantly. Pokemon style.
  • ReckoningReviewer
    avatar
    Finally, after all this time! You have reviewed what we have all been waiting for!
  • Alan I mean Douglas dude how could you and why would you write a scenario where Malcolm Ray on your phone tells you that your mother died all for a throw-away one-liner joke where a velociraptor bus you by constantly saying "Alan" I mean why?
  • Seriously dude it was juvenile humor at first but this is your mother's fake death for crying out loud, it wasn't really that funny.
Only registered users can write comments!

Follow us on:

Latest Videos

Todd: Maniac by Michael Sembello

Watch Video

Leon: RC - Psycho

Watch Video

iRawss: Pray 2

Watch Video

FB: Nightcrawler & Babadook

Watch Video

ChaosD1: Fear Online

Watch Video

Larry: Lost Thundercats VGs

Watch Video

TNChick: Pump 10 Goodpumpkins

Watch Video

Drmmr5: Business 4K

Watch Video

LOTD: Psycho #1-3

Watch Video

Shark Movies: Jurassic Shark

Watch Video

Brad: Halloween 2

Watch Video

MikeJ: Hellraiser Bloodline

Watch Video

Horror Guru: Deadly Spawn

Watch Video

Phelous: HW - Decorations

Watch Video

Mud2MMO: Halloween Ep

Watch Video

RC: Top 6 Best ICP Songs

Watch Video

SJ: Our Fave Halloween Eps

Watch Video

Rerez: 1st Video Game Console

Watch Video

LOTD: Creepshow

Watch Video

NC: Is Sleepy Hollow Brilliant?

Watch Video

Sage: AA - 100th Episode!

Watch Video

Yomarz: Tom and Jerry

Watch Video

Rantasmo: Spook: The Hole

Watch Video

MikeJ: Revenge of the Infomercial

Watch Video

TNchick: Pumpk 9 - Shiver Me Pumpk

Watch Video

Lupa: Radu - Turtle Tunes

Watch Video

Shaun: Monstrous October 25-27

Watch Video

LOTD: Witching Hour 2 &

Watch Video

Linkara: Trial of Peter Parker

Watch Video

Animerica: S1E7 Tenjho Tenge

Watch Video

TNchick: Pumpk 9 -PumpCANS

Watch Video

Rerez: Sonic 2006

Watch Video

Lupa: Radu - Potty Power Princess

Watch Video

LAG: YKW - Flatline

Watch Video

MasakoX: BFT - Ta Gost of U

Watch Video

AWD: E-Heroes - Haunting

Watch Video

Lucky 6: NGN - Avengers 2

Watch Video

JesuOtaku Says Goodbye

Watch Video

BB: Mortal Instruments

Watch Video

Blog Categories

What's Up? (144)
Sports (264)
News (284)
Book Reviews (567)
Funny (590)
Top # Lists (783)
Animation (984)
Wrestling (1013)
Movies (1137)
Anime (1159)
Thoughts (1200)
Comics (1288)
Misc Reviews (1344)
Music (1518)
Video Reviews (2013)
Film Review (2825)
Uncategorized (4074)
Video Games (5394)
Old Blogs (15309)