Revisiting My Teenage Crush on Jurassic Park (and Getting the Scoop on the Movie’s Dinos)

In 1993, as a dinosaur-obsessed 13-year-old, I saw Jurassic Park in surround sound—the first movie released with the technology. For months I’d anticipated the film: reading fan magazines, making clay dinosaurs, and of course rereading Michael Crichton’s best-selling novel.

This week, nearly 20 years later, I saw the film in IMAX with a new twist on a popular technology: 3-D. 

It was even better. The close calls seemed closer, the Velociraptors bigger and badder, the jump-out-of-your-seat moments even jumpier. I was also amazed how convincing the dinosaurs still looked, even after two decades of advances in special effects.

But I wondered how those two decades have changed what paleontologists know about the movie’s dinosaurs. So I called Thomas Holtz, a vertebrate paleontologist at the University of Maryland, College Park. The main difference? “Feathers, feathers, feathers, feathers,” he told me: Recent science suggests many of the movie’s dinosaurs bore plumage.

y. huali picture
The feathered T. rex relative Yutyrannus, pictured in an illustration by Xing Lida, National Geographic


For instance, instead of the gray, pebbly skin portrayed in the movie, “Velociraptor would have been as feathered as a bald eagle,” he said. (Also see “‘Jurassic Park’ Raptors Had Feathers, Fossil Suggests.”)

Much of the evidence comes from raptor fossils discovered in China’s Liaoning Province (map), where ancient, low-oxygen lakes preserved the animals perfectly as they died. Some of the fossils still bear “true, honest to goodness” feathers; others have bumps on their shoulders that show where big wing feathers would have attached, Holtz said.

The same may also go for T. rex. Just last year, scientists discovered Yutyrannus, a one-ton, distant cousin of T. rex that was covered in fuzz, like a chick. So “we can’t dismiss the possibility that even a giant T. rex had some feathers,” Holtz said.

(Also see “Did the Real T. rex Resemble the One in Jurassic Park?”)

Another Jurassic Park denizen that was also plumed: the ostrich-like Gallimimus, a flock of which nearly runs over Tim, Lex, and Alan Grant while they’re trekking through the park.

Feathers may have kept the prehistoric creatures warm, attracted mates, or even protected eggs if dinosaurs fanned their arms over nests, said Holtz, who is disappointed that the dinosaurs in Jurassic Park 4—to be released in June 2014—won’t have feathers either.

I asked Holtz whether scientists still think Velociraptor was smart enough to open doors, which happens a few times in the movie—in one instance, a raptor turns a door handle to get to Lex and Tim hiding in the park’s kitchen.

He said that Spielberg and Crichton overshot while trying to dispel the idea that dinosaurs are dummies. Velociraptor was probably only about as smart as your backyard opossum, Holtz said. What’s more, further analysis of its skeleton has revealed it wasn’t nearly as fast as a cheetah, as game warden Robert Muldoon says at the beginning of the film. Instead it was short and stocky, like a jaguar, and relied on stealth instead of speed.

“It would have been dumber than in the movie, and slower than in the movie,” Holtz said. “But I still wouldn’t want to meet one without some serious weapons.”

And Holtz believes that Crichton made a mistake setting the book in then-modern times. That’s because adult Brachiosaurus—the four-legged giants that leave Ellie and Alan awestruck—take up to 30 years to mature, which means that the dinosaur-cloning technology would have had to exist in the early 1970s. Even in a cloning fantasy movie, that strains credulity, says Holtz.

Speaking of the cloning technology, Holtz noted we still can’t recover enough viable DNA to bring a T. rex back to life. However, scientists including North Carolina State’s Mary Schweitzer are recovering biomolecules from ancient fossils—so, in that sense, the “knowledge of biochemistry of ancient life has become a reality.”

Even if we did bring dinosaurs back, he added, there’s a fundamental problem—the chemistry of modern air.

“For creatures like passenger pigeons or even the woolly mammoth, the world hasn’t changed that much,” he said. “For a Cretaceous dinosaur, the atmosphere is going to be different [in terms of the] amount of carbon dioxide and oxygen—it’s not going to breathe properly in our atmosphere.”

Despite his nitpicks, Holtz said he liked Jurassic Park—it was the first movie he paid multiple times to see in the theater. It was also the first film to introduce the public to dinosaurs beyond T. rex—giving “scientists and the public a common language to use.”

After seeing Jurassic Park in 1993, I wrote hundreds of pages of a sequel, in which many of the park’s dinosaurs swim to an island off Honduras and establish themselves anew. (My plot also involves Ellie and Alan roaming the island on horseback, which just happened to be my teenage passion.) I never sent it to Crichton, but I’m happy that I’ve gotten the chance to write about the movie 20 years later.

Christine Dell'Amore, environment writer/editor for National Geographic News, has reported from six continents, including Antarctica. She has also written for Smithsonian magazine and the Washington Post. Christine holds a masters degree in journalism with a specialty in environmental reporting from the University of Colorado at Boulder. Her book, South Pole, was published in 2012.
  • Henrique

    Christina, as you, I was young and loved dinosaurs when JP came out in 1993. I’m still a big fan of Crichton’s work and even made a map for the novel ísland just for fun (it is here: https://www.sites.google.com/site/hztomassi/isla-nublar-map ). Unfortunately the 3D version of the movie will be presented in my country only in august… As you wrote, it must be great.

  • Jason Scott

    They had a great new Dino for Jurassic park but it was rejected because it was too historically accurate: http://site.daftgadgets.com/blog1/the-8-part-dinosaur-abomination-too-badass-for-jurassic-park/

    I say, put it in anyway.

  • Andrew

    This again reiterates the fact that films are not documentaries – Hollywood directors don’t do documentaries. Films are pure fiction and fantasy, but so many people want to treat them as fact. There’s a definite line between the two which often gets blurred and it’s important not to lose sight of thatt. The problem is, many people who enjoy films don’t watch documentaries as they find them ‘boring’.

    Somehow, I think many people will be disappointed to see film dinosaurs covered with feathers. They actually want to see the bald, grey-skinned sauropods and tyrannosaurs. It’s what dinosaurs have always been in the imagination.

About the Blog

Researchers, conservationists, and others share stories, insights and ideas about Our Changing Planet, Wildlife & Wild Spaces, and The Human Journey. More than 50,000 comments have been added to 10,000 posts. Explore the list alongside to dive deeper into some of the most popular categories of the National Geographic Society’s conversation platform Voices.

Opinions are those of the blogger and/or the blogger’s organization, and not necessarily those of the National Geographic Society. Posters of blogs and comments are required to observe National Geographic’s community rules and other terms of service.

Voices director: David Braun (dbraun@ngs.org)

Social Media