Wait a minute. Why the heck is that an unnamed Pliosauroid? Do they just introduce Pliosaurs and Spinosaurus then do nothing with them. I thought that was the Mosasaurid intro.
The sequence between 13:54 and 14:15 have anything wrong since they any accuracies. You made a mistake Red Raptor. But it's not a big one. Everybody do mistake time to time, even you. Plus, it's, I think the firs and only mistake and error like this one you made in your DinoDocs review. So, anything to really blame you here.
Yes, this sequence with the Spinosaurus who go on sea and who is killed by the Pliosaurus is the opening of the second episode centered on the Mosasaurus, "The World of Sea Monsters". It's truly a pliosaurid we have here, maybe not Pliosaurus itself, but definitely a Pliosaurid at least. However, his screen time is to 26 seconds in total, and we in addition not have a good look on him so the scene is quick and the pliosaurid is in black due to the shadow underwater, and the few close shot at him only show is head from not a good perspective. So, it's not surprising that you, and many people I can guess, have mistake him with a Mosasaurus, or a relative, even more since the subject of the episode is with Mosasaurus itself. But it's really a Pliosaurid because he have a short tail, four long flippers and a slender elongated snout. But even here, I don't think the reconstitution is perfect (BBC WWD have a good reconstitution of a pliosaurid with the Liopleurodon, in term of shape, with just the size who is an innacuracy, to compared). I appreciate the fact and the overall idea of the scene, to show that terrestrial dinosaurs and marine creatures have many more interaction between them that we usually imagine, to open the episode with a badass but realistic scene (Spinosaurus lived at the same time than pliosaurid species) where a mighty, big and terrific dinosaur is killed easily by a more mighty, big and terrific creature on the sea, and as an introduction with sea marine reptile, because she work in this way. etc... But however, like she was used in the episode and done, sadly, it's a little a mess and a waste. Because as an introduction to mosasaurid specifically, that don't work since they were two unrelated non-dinosaurs reptiles families. So, why doing a scene like that by using a pliosaurid thus the episode speak about a mosasaurid. Should have not more relevant, and appropriate to use an actual mosasaurid instead to open on the mosasaurid ? Plus, instead of Spinosaurus, they could have used instead of him the T-rex, to be killed by the Mosasaurus, since the two genus and species lived at the same time and places ! (in Hell Creek formation at least). Which they did in the actual second episode ! In which a Mosasaurus, the female protagonnist we follow, attack and kill a T-rex when this latter was attacking, feet in water on a beach, a sauropod with another T-rex. They should use this specific sequence for the opening of the episode instead of the Spinosaurus and Pliosaurus one. That would have work and made sens better. Plus, the Spinosaurus don't look very threatening, see a little goofy even, and thus the overall idea of a scene where a awesome predators id killed by a more awesome one don't work too.
The fact that the Pachyrhinosaurus bears more resemblence to an ice age rhino than a ceratopsian is the most hilarious thing in any of these dino docs so far. It’s so bad it’s actually good.
Honestly although Prehistoric Planet is by far the better documentary I think the Amazing Dinoworld design is better. I doubt it was nearly as shaggy as in Prehistoric Planet due to its size. The feathering in Amazing DinoWorld seems more plausible
I am SO looking forward to the Prehistoric Planet review!! Please take your time and make it as long as it really needs to be. This masterpiece deserves it.
(Part 2) - “Paleoworld” (“Jurassica” in Europe, TLC, 1994-1997, 244 minutes) and “When Dinosaurs Rules” (1999, The Learning Channel). A 50 episodes divided into 4 season American documentary and his spin-off, dedicated on paleontology. It was the first television series on that subject that spanned multiple seasons. The serie was famous for using numerous paleoart, using musical element with a calm and relaxing tone, before becoming a more conventional-style nature documentary. - “The Dinosaurs!” (PBS, 1992, 56 minutes). A 4 episodes mini-serie documentary about some of the then-modern theories about dinosaurs and how they lived. The serie was mainly focused about the fossil elements and the dinosaurs sequences, in 2D, were rather rare in comparison, but the slow tone and the palaeontologic level is good, and the level of species depicted onscreen is high. - “Wild New World”/”Prehistoric America : A Journey through the Ice Age and Beyond” (BBC, 2002). A 6 episodes documentary focused on the North America Ice Age Megafauna from the arrival of humans to the welcome of the Ice Age. The documentary is very detailed, with a great number of prehistoric species on screen along always alive extant species that also lived along them during the Ice Age. Each episode has a huge cast of creatures species (almost 15-20 species per episodes, whatever extinct or alive), thing rare for a documentary of the early 2000’s. - “Monsters We Met” (BBC, 2003). A 3 episodes mini-series documentary about the last moments of the latest megafauna species of the Ice Age in the last isolated stronghold of Earth and their encountered with the early humans when these latter arrived in these latest unoccupied landscapes. Featuring (at reason) humans as the main reason for the extinction of all great animals, this documentary shows a great number of animals, both extinct and alive, all living species being live-acted by a real animal and some extinct animals being live-acted by an actual representative (ex: the American lion is live-acted by an African lioness). But the human actors are also good with accurate depictions of early humans (how they look, what was their cultures, behaviors and traditions), and the aspect to show the world and the animal from their own perspective is an interesting choice that this documentary made. - “Ice Age Giants” (BBC Two, 2013. 60 minutes). A 3 episodes mini-series documentary who take place during the Ice Age in both North America and Europe. Thus, the information the documentary gives are pretty generic and well-known to the public, the CGI/3D of the creatures along with their sequences are really well-made. - “Prehistoric Assassins” (Discovery Channel, 2010-2011). A two-part documentary about Mesozoic and Cenozoic prehistoric predators. The two episodes are “Blood in the Water” who talk about the predators of the seas, and “Claws and Jaws” who talk about the terrestrial ones. The CGI and animations of the creature are decent, the blood effect is correct, the animals are depicted overall enough accurate (the raptors have feathers !). Outside that, not very different or innovant compared to all the other documentaries that speak mainly about prehistoric predators, and like every of them, focused and show mainly predators killing other animals a bit too much. But at least, like every other documentary of the same subject, the level is way far from the one of Jurassic Fight Club. - “Deadly Dinosaurs” (BBC, 2018, 29 minutes). A 10 episodes with English naturalist Steve Backshall who feature dinosaurs and their skills, which he compare and test with modern objects and tools. A correct documentary, with decent CGI animals even if some of them have not many screen-time. - “When Crocs Ate Dinosaurs” (National Geographic, 2009). A TV movie about the prehistoric land and water crocodiles during the time of dinosaurs. - “First Apocalypse” (2009). A TV movie documentary about the K-T extinction and focused on other explanations than the meteor impact and point out the fact that a new mass extinctions creating by us have already begin. - “Titans of the Ice Age 3D” (2013, 40 minutes). A short TV movie documentary about the ice Age fauna. Despite the info about the creatures and the setting are pretty generic for an Ice Age documentary, the GCI is amazing looking, with very detailed animals ! - “Dino Death Trap” (National Geographic, 2007). A TV movie documentary who turns around dinosaurs fossils dated from the Jurassic era and discovered in natural predators traps. While the subject is interesting and the info stand well, the CGI dinosaurs is just correct. - “Age of Big Cats” (Curiosity Stream, 2018, 49-50 minutes). A mini-serie documentary of 3 episodes around the evolution of modern big cats and their sabertooth relatives during the Pleistocene. The CGI of the extinct big felid specie are good and the cinematography of the real animals is good. - “Supercroc”(National Geographic, 2001, 1h 36min minutes). A documentary specially dedicated about Sarcosuchus, and everything we know from him. I know that is a long list, and that you will don't made a review on all of them, which a shame, but hope that will leave you with less work at least, and that you will find interesting subject to discuss among these !
@@dudeplayer7510 Not really sadly. Unlike many prehistoric documentary (like "Walking with..." franchise, or "Animal Armagedon") there any episode available on UA-cam. Just screen time videos by Shin Goji channel about each creatures' screen time in the documentary. It's available on Discovery Channel and by Google play. There is some streaing services online if you want to watch.
Quick addendum at 13:55, that’s actually not Mosasaurus that’s fighting with Spinosaurus, that’s a pliosaur. Not sure exactly why they decided to depict it in an episode dedicated to mosasaurs, maybe they just really wanted to show Spinosaurus somehow so they shoved it into the one about aquatic reptiles, but yeah this technically isn’t an inaccurate scene since large pliosaurs were definitely still around when Spinosaurus was.
@@legodan1815 it’s really hard to say. I personally would go with Brachauchenius since it was in Morocco around the same time as Spinosaurus and was possibly large enough to take one on in open water if the specimen suggested in the paper by Delphine Angst from 2015 is anything to go by.
@@Tiamat_Stan24 that’s why I referenced Angst’s paper from 2015, it noted that the mandible alone was about 1.5 m and likely represents a larger individual size than is typically assigned to it. This is even compared to Megacephalosaurus whose entire skull is 1.75 meters in length (and whose teeth suggest it wouldn’t go after very large prey). So I think Brachauchenius is a valid guess.
@@JurassicJustice hmmm, i see. Thanks for the information! Never heard about skull that large from Brachauchenius, it would be around 7m range at life (assuming 1:5 head to body ratio). Pretty large Pliosaur indeed.
17:15 In all fairness, it's realistic to assume that ornithischian dinosaurs this far north would've needed some filament-like covering for insulation. Plus: I thought the show was very conservative on how much "wool" was given to the pachyrhinosaurus.
I also think that feathers on pachyrhinosaurus is okay, but the real problem is that the narrator calls it fur. And seriously, what dinosaur, let alone, reptile, has fur?
When they animated Spinosaurus, they didn't thought "Wait, that's stupid"? Like, it was already stupid looking on images, but with the animation of how he walks, he looks like a wounded animal, not a healthy predator ^^' Even if the quadruped Spinosaurus was attested, it was definitely not how he would've walked, mechanically, I'm pretty sure putting a fourth of your weight on the articulation like that is just gonna break it....
17:48 Dude the random splits in the cladogram is actually comedy gold The way the lizard branch just shoots off into infinity and they put mosasaurs and lizards in a whole separate branch away from the lizards... It's just so wild... And oh my god, the crocodile part... it's so hard to read I can't even tell what's going on
1. Protoceratops and Halzskaraptor did live in the same time period as deinocheirus 2. what fought and killed spinosaurus was a pliosaur not an mosasaur 3. Andrea Cau argues that Halszkaraptor had characteristics that allowed it to spend time both in water and on land, including strong hindlimbs for running and smaller flipper-like forelimbs for swimming.
Hey! I requested this video a while ago! Thank you for making this possible and I’m glad you had fun reviewing it even though there are some things that aren’t scientifically accurate.
Happy Thanksgiving! Also, here’s my accuracy review request. -Animal Armageddon -Natural History Museum Alive -Out of the Cradle -Extinct (2001) -The Real T Rex with Chris Packham -Monsters We Met -Dinosaurs: The Final Day with David Attenborough Also also, the sea monster that’s attacking a Spinosaurus is an African pliosaur species.
I really enjoyed it. Everything they talked about was something new I learned. I loved watching that deinocheirus (0:32) smacking other small ones around defending its eggs haha
Man I remember watching this show and hearing them refer to that nest as “oviraptor” eggs and thinking to myself “have ya’ll ever even seen an oviraptor?!?!” This video was cathartic lol
Funny part was I completely called your B- review before you even did it hahaha. I've watched every one of your dino reviews are my favs and I have watched all of them many times. I've learned so much from your videos. But I won't lie I am Uber excited for prehistoric planet
Also the debunking of Halszkaraptor being semi aquatic in 2022 actually got debunked itself in the same year as it turned out that swans also have hollow bones.
Giant-horned Pachyrhinosaurus has been around as an idea since the 80s. It pops up every now and then. The design in this doc looks almost identical to the Dino-Riders Pachyrhinosaurus toy from 1990. This was very much considered a credible idea back then. The bony base of ceratopian horns are known to support larger keratin structures of unknown size, so this has never actually been ruled out, just never became mainstream due to being considered too speculative.
It's a relevant argument you mention here. However, since many decades, from early 2000's, we know for sure that Pachyrhinosaurus have a bump nose and any real horns. The differences between Ceratopsid and animal such Rhinoceros 🦏, is that, in rhinos, their horns are enterely made of keratine who grow on a structure predisposed for the horn. The shize and shape of the horns can highly varied following the specimens. Thus, in Ceratopsid, the horns are actually complete part of the skull, being bones, and are recovered by a simple layer of keratine, to protect the horns and the shull as an effect. In every animals, mostly ongulates today (Cattles, Antilopes, Sheep or Goat), who possess the same disposition than the Ceratopsid, the layer of keratine don't made most of the time the horns larger or longer, at least not extraordinary. To a point that, with or without keratine, we don't see the difference from far distances. Because, due to that, the Ceratopsid haven't horns very differents from what we know how these latter were in every species. Not specifically larger or longer for every of them. Outside some additional inches/centimeters, the overall shape and longer of the horns were not differents with or without keratine.
I saw this documentary not long ago, but it was the french cut : "Au temps des Dinosaures", wich is a bit different. The segments featuring hadrosaurus and spinosaurus are absent, but a new one about the french dinos appears, where Ronan Allain explains many things about the "Angeac Ornithomimid", and its herd lifestyle. Also, the abelisaurus is just called an "abélisaure" (abelisaur), wich is less specific, just like protomosasaurus. At the end, i was in the same mood : there is many good, many bad, and i explained all to my father with who i watched the documentary. Nice video btw
Yeah, I see it more or less too. I'm french so. Thus the cut is acceptable in the big lines, I don't thing that the differences and edits you mentionned were very relevant. For me, the main issues I have was the title, very generic and that many others dinos production have too. But also the fact that they add size comparaison with a human illustrations onscreen when the name of each creatures appear, things who isn't in itself bad, but most of the time don't depict the real size of the specie for most of them. The Nanuqsaurus is depicted as way more giant than he was in real life. Moreover, their silhouettes are most often not exactly in profile, in good position, which don't help to have a good idea of their size.
When you start going back to older documentaries, I highly recommend "Dinosaur!", a 1985 TV movie/documentary narrated by Christopher Reeve with stop-motion animation by Phil Tippett and appearances by Bob Bakker and John Horner. A family of Edmontosaurus are the main focus, with Tyrannosaurus, Monoclonius, Brontosaurus, Struthiomimus, and Deinonychus also having appearances.
We don't know. Currently it's best to assume they lacked feathers at any point in their life since we have no evidence of any dinosaurs having feathers as babies and losing them as adults, let alone evidence of this happening in specifically tyrannosaurids. Honestly if it happened in tyrannosaurids it would probably happen in other dinosaurs too, so that gives more reason to assume it didn't happen at all since it's never been observed in any animal. That said it's not physically impossible so it's whatever if someone includes it in their art. Kind of the same situation as including wattles on dinosaurs. Not necessary but it's something we can rarely actually find out about so the inclusion of them on random dinosaurs doesn't really harm the art.
“Amazing Dino World” (NHK World, 2019, 49 minutes). A 2 parts documentary, the second production of this same Japanese channel, and probably the most well-known and famous production of her. For the best… and the worst. If this documentary has greatly made a lot of noise about himself inside the paleo fans community, it’s mainly due to how a mix bag of everything he is, in term of scientific accuracies and inaccuracies, with also dubious choices. The first episode talks about the marine creatures and the second talk about the feathers on dinosaurs. Thus, the cinematography and CGI are awesome looking and incredibly well-made, same for the dinosaurs behaviors (really, near the “Prehistoric Planet” level, any problem on that), the narration is correct, the creatures description are good and the production budget was high, however, a good half of the dinosaurs have inaccurate and not very realistic designs (the most famous black sheep of the bunch being the Pachyrhinosaurus, exactly in the same situation than in Jurassic Fight Club). Plus, time to time, the show takes looks more of a prehistoric fiction story time to time rather than a documentary, with also dubious scenaristic choices (ex: the Deinocheirus protagonist who die after her battle with a Tarbosaurus, leaving her chick unsafe), with also some choice favorizing the actions sequences stories at the sacrifice of logic and scientific knowledge (ex: the big T-rex sized dinos who fall from a high heigh and survived with any broken bones, many times). Like his previous successor, this documentary also received a poor diffusion outside the Asiatic realm, and even on UA-cam there almost not very clips or extract from him (these latter being very scarces), even from the Official UA-cam channel of this latter. NHK World also made other dinosaurs shorts/clips, but they are scarce too. About the current video, personnaly, you resume pretty well how this documentary is.
I think the creature that fights the spinosaurus is a pliosaur. It has large flippers, a larger and longer head, and a short tail not normally associated with mosasaurs
I'd like to recommend a documentary: First Life (2010) by BBC This is a two part documentary that is primarily focused on the Ediacaran and Cambrian, with some additional animals from to Ordovician and Silurian. Not too many other documentaries cover these time periods that much (especially the Ediacaran), so this might be a good pick. I also remember some old documentary about Torosaurus's possible synonymity with Triceratops, but can't remember its name. Maybe you could have better luck finding it.
When you go back to check the ones you missed. Please. Give a try to "Flying Monsters" from NatGeo is a full documentary about Pterosaurs and IMO is pretty great
13:59 the silhouette shows a Pliosaur body instead of a Mosasaur body,a longer,less curved head,thicker body,shorter build,shorter tail,proportionally longer hind fins and a more visible neck. Of course it’s oversized,no Pliosaur exceeded 13 meters while the Pliosaur is shown to be as long.if not longer than the 14-15 Meter Spinosaurus,in fact the only Mesozoic sea reptiles that exceeded the length of Spinosaurus were large Icthyosaurs,but no time jumping here since Pliosaur were still pretty dominant predators during the early-mid Cretaceous
I’ve got good news and bad news: Good news is that “Prehistoric Planet” is getting a season two in May (which you may have already heard). Bad news is so does this series that you just covered that is going to be released globally later this month in March. So you probably need to wait a little longer before getting the final score for PP. Plus, it would actually make it a four parter in case you haven’t already finished your part two of the review.
I forgot to realize that Pachyrhinosaurus and Pachycephalosaurus both have a thing in common that isn’t because they’re both dinosaurs, nor they’re both herbivores
I like this documentary only the expansions of feather dinosaurs among other things 1. Theropod having intelligence compared with birds: hunting in small pack and using bait to catch prey 2.having a creature that can kill a spinosaurs 3. Showing Mosasaurus history Though I agree while the pachyrhinosaurus body look real it head not so much
I think that may have been a pliosaur attacking the Spinosaurus, but I’d have to rewatch. B- was more generous than me though, I’m squarely in C at best territory 😂
I think they made the mosasaurs kill T rex and Spinosaurus because they wanted to show it was really cool, but I think if T rex got one bite it would be game over for the mosasaurs and in a fight with Spinosaurus, whether or not it won it would probably bleed to death after the fight because of those claws.
which pachy design is worse? JFC: the one that has a less defining spike, yet they still acknowledge it has a boss instead of a horn or AD: the one with a fucking massive and defined spike
15:03 I just think the pachy is a simple minded animal attack when threatened by something bigger of when the young is hurt but not wanting to attack something smaller.
I would say that the Pachyrinosaurus going away the troodontids nest is similar in behaviour to an animal not bothering a southern lapwing. The way the narrator said it is completely wrong, but the behaviour is kinda awesome
You must get this request a lot, but have you any plans of covering 'Walking with Cavemen' one day? I know it's quite different from the other three main docs, but I'd love a review of what they got right and wrong!
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS - The fake terrestrial mosasauroid looks too similar to a modern monitor lizard, when it should look more like a smaller terrestrial version of derived mosasaurs, similar to aigialosaurus -I'm sure someone else already commented this, but Monsters Resurrected of all things gave their mosasaur a forked tongue. -We get our first dinosaur from appalachia in hadrosaurus, but they put it in laramidia so it can get eaten by T. Rex. They could have at least used dryptosaurus as it lived in New Jersey along with Hadrosaurus, but they lived at different times so it's still wrong. We need a Dryptosaurus documentary anyway though. -ADW: "Pachyrhinosaurus are herbivores. They wouldn't attack "troodon"." JFC: "As plant eaters, they were not natural aggressors." At least Prehistoric Planet corrected past mistakes.
And when it goes down into the water to get the fish and it can use it’s arms and legs to grab the bottom of the lake then when it needs to go back to the surface of the water,it just…let’s itgo
wow 2019, i feel like i have been Letting the days go by, let the water hold me down Letting the days go by, water flowing underground Into the blue again, after the money's gone Once in a lifetime, water flowing underground
Red raptor I forgot to say this, but, the testudines being the turtles are part of archelosauria which includes dinosaurs so tortoises and turtles are related to dinosaurs, birds, and crocodilians.
@@dudotolivier6363 jurassic world dominion is stupid, the only herbivore that was somewhat shown as threatening was therizinosaurus, and even then they changed its design to resemble more carnivorous dinosaurs
@@OK-wh5vt No, is not stupid. Only the Parasaurolophus is portrayed as no offensif, thus all the others herbivores, Therizinosaurus, the Ceratopsid species who appear in the movie, and even the tiny Lystrosaurus (completely by a shocking way by cutting without effort the Oviraptor head) are shown as creatures that can be dangerous. Thé Therizinosaurus don't look more like a carnivores, he's just depict to be threatening in appearance. He is even shown eating bushes after killing the deer to clearly shown that he's an herbivores. Plus, outside the head shape, the rest of his body is very accurate (and the fact he has feathers compensate everything bad we can possibly said about him).
@@dudotolivier6363 bro what Ceratopsian just mindlessly wander around and bump out of fear against cars The lystro thing was a stupid gag and it wasn't even in the movie, oviraptor is literally treated like a chicken And irl theri looks more like a giant turkey, in the movie it ate plants but it also behaved like a carnivore Also dreadnoughtus was there also it didn't do anything
@@OK-wh5vt Now he is in the movie, with the extended version. Dinosaurs being very close to birds, especially the Coelusauria ones in which belong the Therizinosaurus and Oviraptor, it's not a weird thing that they look, are portrayed and act like birds like chicken or turkeys. If the Therizinosaurus also behave time to time like a carnivore, it's because he's a territorial animal, like rhinos and hippos, who attack any others animals who are close to them if they get too close to them.
I have a question: is dacotaraptor a valid genus. Cause i found plenty of internet sources, stating, that dacotaraptor is a chimera of anzu, another species of dinosaur (i don't remember which one) and even a turtle
Will you reveiw the upcoming series such as Surviving Earth, Dinosaurs with Steven Fry, and Life on Our Planet (AKA the most generic name possible) when they come out?
This can’t be the next documentary after the last one you reviewed before this because that was 2016 this is 2019 and ever since Walking With Dinosaurs in 1999 there’s been 1 or more Dino documentaries each year and this would mean both 2017 and 2018 don’t have any and besides I know a documentary from 2018 which is called Adventures Of Cerotops why did you not review that
Wait a minute. Why the heck is that an unnamed Pliosauroid? Do they just introduce Pliosaurs and Spinosaurus then do nothing with them. I thought that was the Mosasaurid intro.
what
The sequence between 13:54 and 14:15 have anything wrong since they any accuracies.
You made a mistake Red Raptor.
But it's not a big one. Everybody do mistake time to time, even you.
Plus, it's, I think the firs and only mistake and error like this one you made in your DinoDocs review. So, anything to really blame you here.
Yes, this sequence with the Spinosaurus who go on sea and who is killed by the Pliosaurus is the opening of the second episode centered on the Mosasaurus, "The World of Sea Monsters".
It's truly a pliosaurid we have here, maybe not Pliosaurus itself, but definitely a Pliosaurid at least. However, his screen time is to 26 seconds in total, and we in addition not have a good look on him so the scene is quick and the pliosaurid is in black due to the shadow underwater, and the few close shot at him only show is head from not a good perspective.
So, it's not surprising that you, and many people I can guess, have mistake him with a Mosasaurus, or a relative, even more since the subject of the episode is with Mosasaurus itself.
But it's really a Pliosaurid because he have a short tail, four long flippers and a slender elongated snout. But even here, I don't think the reconstitution is perfect (BBC WWD have a good reconstitution of a pliosaurid with the Liopleurodon, in term of shape, with just the size who is an innacuracy, to compared).
I appreciate the fact and the overall idea of the scene, to show that terrestrial dinosaurs and marine creatures have many more interaction between them that we usually imagine, to open the episode with a badass but realistic scene (Spinosaurus lived at the same time than pliosaurid species) where a mighty, big and terrific dinosaur is killed easily by a more mighty, big and terrific creature on the sea, and as an introduction with sea marine reptile, because she work in this way. etc...
But however, like she was used in the episode and done, sadly, it's a little a mess and a waste.
Because as an introduction to mosasaurid specifically, that don't work since they were two unrelated non-dinosaurs reptiles families. So, why doing a scene like that by using a pliosaurid thus the episode speak about a mosasaurid. Should have not more relevant, and appropriate to use an actual mosasaurid instead to open on the mosasaurid ?
Plus, instead of Spinosaurus, they could have used instead of him the T-rex, to be killed by the Mosasaurus, since the two genus and species lived at the same time and places ! (in Hell Creek formation at least).
Which they did in the actual second episode ! In which a Mosasaurus, the female protagonnist we follow, attack and kill a T-rex when this latter was attacking, feet in water on a beach, a sauropod with another T-rex.
They should use this specific sequence for the opening of the episode instead of the Spinosaurus and Pliosaurus one. That would have work and made sens better.
Plus, the Spinosaurus don't look very threatening, see a little goofy even, and thus the overall idea of a scene where a awesome predators id killed by a more awesome one don't work too.
Yo, can we call this series "red raptor rants"? It'd be hella funny.
Why would a Spinosaurus even set foot into the ocean!? Who made this!? XD
No matter where it ranks, that name will always be goofy as hell
Yes
It sounds like a knock off of something called "Jurassic Park".
[Inserts Goofy's laughter]
The Amazing World of Dino
The name is cringier than period ah period uh
The fact that the Pachyrhinosaurus bears more resemblence to an ice age rhino than a ceratopsian is the most hilarious thing in any of these dino docs so far. It’s so bad it’s actually good.
Gives me an idea for a new ark dino
I adore the deinocheirus design, a close second to my favourite, the Prehistoric Planet one.
Honestly although Prehistoric Planet is by far the better documentary I think the Amazing Dinoworld design is better. I doubt it was nearly as shaggy as in Prehistoric Planet due to its size. The feathering in Amazing DinoWorld seems more plausible
Agreed. The only problems are the hands being pronated sometimes and it being more colorful than you would expect from a large animal.
8:51 Prehistoric Planet Actually did show the Mosasaurus having a forked tongue and mentioned it as well.
Monsters Resurrected did as well.
Update to my recommendations list:
1. Animal Armageddon
2. Morphed
3. Prehistoric Predators
4. Dino Lab
5. T-Rex Back to the Cretacous
and T-rex: ultimate survivor
@@vitsvoboda2803 and I forgot T-Rex: Warrior or Wimp
A few other ones to do are giant monsters hosted by Jeff Corwin dinosaurs hosted by Christopher revve and dinosaurs those terrible lizards
6. Leaps in Evolution
Or just whatever is listed on Dinopedia/Wikipedia
"grass is weird"
guess I ain't touching grass for awhile
The deinocheirus episode was beautiful.
Wenomochainasama
Yeah but it's also quire ridiculous that the Deinocheirus permormed a SUPLEX against a Tarbosaurus. XD
@@cintronproductions9430 To be fair it wasn’t intentional. Seems as though it just fell over.
I am SO looking forward to the Prehistoric Planet review!! Please take your time and make it as long as it really needs to be. This masterpiece deserves it.
(Part 2)
- “Paleoworld” (“Jurassica” in Europe, TLC, 1994-1997, 244 minutes) and “When Dinosaurs Rules” (1999, The Learning Channel). A 50 episodes divided into 4 season American documentary and his spin-off, dedicated on paleontology. It was the first television series on that subject that spanned multiple seasons. The serie was famous for using numerous paleoart, using musical element with a calm and relaxing tone, before becoming a more conventional-style nature documentary.
- “The Dinosaurs!” (PBS, 1992, 56 minutes). A 4 episodes mini-serie documentary about some of the then-modern theories about dinosaurs and how they lived. The serie was mainly focused about the fossil elements and the dinosaurs sequences, in 2D, were rather rare in comparison, but the slow tone and the palaeontologic level is good, and the level of species depicted onscreen is high.
- “Wild New World”/”Prehistoric America : A Journey through the Ice Age and Beyond” (BBC, 2002). A 6 episodes documentary focused on the North America Ice Age Megafauna from the arrival of humans to the welcome of the Ice Age. The documentary is very detailed, with a great number of prehistoric species on screen along always alive extant species that also lived along them during the Ice Age. Each episode has a huge cast of creatures species (almost 15-20 species per episodes, whatever extinct or alive), thing rare for a documentary of the early 2000’s.
- “Monsters We Met” (BBC, 2003). A 3 episodes mini-series documentary about the last moments of the latest megafauna species of the Ice Age in the last isolated stronghold of Earth and their encountered with the early humans when these latter arrived in these latest unoccupied landscapes. Featuring (at reason) humans as the main reason for the extinction of all great animals, this documentary shows a great number of animals, both extinct and alive, all living species being live-acted by a real animal and some extinct animals being live-acted by an actual representative (ex: the American lion is live-acted by an African lioness). But the human actors are also good with accurate depictions of early humans (how they look, what was their cultures, behaviors and traditions), and the aspect to show the world and the animal from their own perspective is an interesting choice that this documentary made.
- “Ice Age Giants” (BBC Two, 2013. 60 minutes). A 3 episodes mini-series documentary who take place during the Ice Age in both North America and Europe. Thus, the information the documentary gives are pretty generic and well-known to the public, the CGI/3D of the creatures along with their sequences are really well-made.
- “Prehistoric Assassins” (Discovery Channel, 2010-2011). A two-part documentary about Mesozoic and Cenozoic prehistoric predators. The two episodes are “Blood in the Water” who talk about the predators of the seas, and “Claws and Jaws” who talk about the terrestrial ones. The CGI and animations of the creature are decent, the blood effect is correct, the animals are depicted overall enough accurate (the raptors have feathers !). Outside that, not very different or innovant compared to all the other documentaries that speak mainly about prehistoric predators, and like every of them, focused and show mainly predators killing other animals a bit too much. But at least, like every other documentary of the same subject, the level is way far from the one of Jurassic Fight Club.
- “Deadly Dinosaurs” (BBC, 2018, 29 minutes). A 10 episodes with English naturalist Steve Backshall who feature dinosaurs and their skills, which he compare and test with modern objects and tools. A correct documentary, with decent CGI animals even if some of them have not many screen-time.
- “When Crocs Ate Dinosaurs” (National Geographic, 2009). A TV movie about the prehistoric land and water crocodiles during the time of dinosaurs.
- “First Apocalypse” (2009). A TV movie documentary about the K-T extinction and focused on other explanations than the meteor impact and point out the fact that a new mass extinctions creating by us have already begin.
- “Titans of the Ice Age 3D” (2013, 40 minutes). A short TV movie documentary about the ice Age fauna. Despite the info about the creatures and the setting are pretty generic for an Ice Age documentary, the GCI is amazing looking, with very detailed animals !
- “Dino Death Trap” (National Geographic, 2007). A TV movie documentary who turns around dinosaurs fossils dated from the Jurassic era and discovered in natural predators traps. While the subject is interesting and the info stand well, the CGI dinosaurs is just correct.
- “Age of Big Cats” (Curiosity Stream, 2018, 49-50 minutes). A mini-serie documentary of 3 episodes around the evolution of modern big cats and their sabertooth relatives during the Pleistocene. The CGI of the extinct big felid specie are good and the cinematography of the real animals is good.
- “Supercroc”(National Geographic, 2001, 1h 36min minutes). A documentary specially dedicated about Sarcosuchus, and everything we know from him.
I know that is a long list, and that you will don't made a review on all of them, which a shame, but hope that will leave you with less work at least, and that you will find interesting subject to discuss among these !
Do you have a link to prehstoric assassins
@@dudeplayer7510 Not really sadly.
Unlike many prehistoric documentary (like "Walking with..." franchise, or "Animal Armagedon") there any episode available on UA-cam.
Just screen time videos by Shin Goji channel about each creatures' screen time in the documentary.
It's available on Discovery Channel and by Google play.
There is some streaing services online if you want to watch.
Quick addendum at 13:55, that’s actually not Mosasaurus that’s fighting with Spinosaurus, that’s a pliosaur. Not sure exactly why they decided to depict it in an episode dedicated to mosasaurs, maybe they just really wanted to show Spinosaurus somehow so they shoved it into the one about aquatic reptiles, but yeah this technically isn’t an inaccurate scene since large pliosaurs were definitely still around when Spinosaurus was.
What Pliosaur do you think it is then? Are there any described species around where Spinosaurus lived?
@@legodan1815 it’s really hard to say. I personally would go with Brachauchenius since it was in Morocco around the same time as Spinosaurus and was possibly large enough to take one on in open water if the specimen suggested in the paper by Delphine Angst from 2015 is anything to go by.
@@JurassicJustice Brachauchenius is small sized Pliosaur actually, at the 3-4m range. The bigger specimen is now reassigned as Megacephalosaurus
@@Tiamat_Stan24 that’s why I referenced Angst’s paper from 2015, it noted that the mandible alone was about 1.5 m and likely represents a larger individual size than is typically assigned to it. This is even compared to Megacephalosaurus whose entire skull is 1.75 meters in length (and whose teeth suggest it wouldn’t go after very large prey). So I think Brachauchenius is a valid guess.
@@JurassicJustice hmmm, i see. Thanks for the information! Never heard about skull that large from Brachauchenius, it would be around 7m range at life (assuming 1:5 head to body ratio). Pretty large Pliosaur indeed.
17:15 In all fairness, it's realistic to assume that ornithischian dinosaurs this far north would've needed some filament-like covering for insulation. Plus: I thought the show was very conservative on how much "wool" was given to the pachyrhinosaurus.
I also think that feathers on pachyrhinosaurus is okay, but the real problem is that the narrator calls it fur. And seriously, what dinosaur, let alone, reptile, has fur?
When they animated Spinosaurus, they didn't thought "Wait, that's stupid"? Like, it was already stupid looking on images, but with the animation of how he walks, he looks like a wounded animal, not a healthy predator ^^'
Even if the quadruped Spinosaurus was attested, it was definitely not how he would've walked, mechanically, I'm pretty sure putting a fourth of your weight on the articulation like that is just gonna break it....
I’m from Japan, and I recently saw the sequel to Amazing Dino World! You should definitely rate it when it comes out overseas!
17:48 Dude the random splits in the cladogram is actually comedy gold
The way the lizard branch just shoots off into infinity and they put mosasaurs and lizards in a whole separate branch away from the lizards... It's just so wild...
And oh my god, the crocodile part... it's so hard to read I can't even tell what's going on
1. Protoceratops and Halzskaraptor did live in the same time period as deinocheirus
2. what fought and killed spinosaurus was a pliosaur not an mosasaur
3. Andrea Cau argues that Halszkaraptor had characteristics that allowed it to spend time both in water and on land, including strong hindlimbs for running and smaller flipper-like forelimbs for swimming.
And T-rex: the ultimate survivor is missing too. It's a very accurate documentary, you shouldn't skip it.
Maybe he won’t because he did say that he doesn’t want to do any more documentaries about T.rex.
Hey! I requested this video a while ago! Thank you for making this possible and I’m glad you had fun reviewing it even though there are some things that aren’t scientifically accurate.
Happy Thanksgiving!
Also, here’s my accuracy review request.
-Animal Armageddon
-Natural History Museum Alive
-Out of the Cradle
-Extinct (2001)
-The Real T Rex with Chris Packham
-Monsters We Met
-Dinosaurs: The Final Day with David Attenborough
Also also, the sea monster that’s attacking a Spinosaurus is an African pliosaur species.
I just got my wisdom teeth out as well and I totally get why you delayed this. Take care of yourself and thank you for providing content for us!
Same here. I had my wisdom teeth removed not long before this episode.
I really enjoyed it. Everything they talked about was something new I learned. I loved watching that deinocheirus (0:32) smacking other small ones around defending its eggs haha
And now, the sequel is about to be released. Looks like a lot more of the same, but I’m very excited to see your review!
I expected this to be a C+, C, or C- because of the wrists being sometimes pronated.
And Rugops being called Abelisaurus
Hell yeah, a new accuracy review. Could you please review the animated UA-cam series Dinosauruia?
On Dinosauria ? It will be AWESOME !😆😆
Red Raptor Writes your my favourite UA-camr!
He’s the Unlucky Tug of the dino community.
I’ve only ever seen small clips from this documentary to be honest. I didn’t even realize that it was a whole film.
Man I remember watching this show and hearing them refer to that nest as “oviraptor” eggs and thinking to myself “have ya’ll ever even seen an oviraptor?!?!” This video was cathartic lol
Funny part was I completely called your B- review before you even did it hahaha. I've watched every one of your dino reviews are my favs and I have watched all of them many times. I've learned so much from your videos. But I won't lie I am Uber excited for prehistoric planet
Also the debunking of Halszkaraptor being semi aquatic in 2022 actually got debunked itself in the same year as it turned out that swans also have hollow bones.
Giant-horned Pachyrhinosaurus has been around as an idea since the 80s. It pops up every now and then. The design in this doc looks almost identical to the Dino-Riders Pachyrhinosaurus toy from 1990. This was very much considered a credible idea back then. The bony base of ceratopian horns are known to support larger keratin structures of unknown size, so this has never actually been ruled out, just never became mainstream due to being considered too speculative.
It's a relevant argument you mention here.
However, since many decades, from early 2000's, we know for sure that Pachyrhinosaurus have a bump nose and any real horns.
The differences between Ceratopsid and animal such Rhinoceros 🦏, is that, in rhinos, their horns are enterely made of keratine who grow on a structure predisposed for the horn. The shize and shape of the horns can highly varied following the specimens.
Thus, in Ceratopsid, the horns are actually complete part of the skull, being bones, and are recovered by a simple layer of keratine, to protect the horns and the shull as an effect.
In every animals, mostly ongulates today (Cattles, Antilopes, Sheep or Goat), who possess the same disposition than the Ceratopsid, the layer of keratine don't made most of the time the horns larger or longer, at least not extraordinary.
To a point that, with or without keratine, we don't see the difference from far distances.
Because, due to that, the Ceratopsid haven't horns very differents from what we know how these latter were in every species. Not specifically larger or longer for every of them.
Outside some additional inches/centimeters, the overall shape and longer of the horns were not differents with or without keratine.
13:55 actually I'm fairly sure that marine reptile is supposed to represent a pliosaur (which were almost entirely extinct by 95 Ma anyway)
14:33
The Tarbosaurus: Why do I hear amazing music?
The Deinocheirus: RULES OF NATURE
Always a pleaser to watch your reviews!
I saw this documentary not long ago, but it was the french cut : "Au temps des Dinosaures", wich is a bit different. The segments featuring hadrosaurus and spinosaurus are absent, but a new one about the french dinos appears, where Ronan Allain explains many things about the "Angeac Ornithomimid", and its herd lifestyle. Also, the abelisaurus is just called an "abélisaure" (abelisaur), wich is less specific, just like protomosasaurus. At the end, i was in the same mood : there is many good, many bad, and i explained all to my father with who i watched the documentary.
Nice video btw
Yeah, I see it more or less too. I'm french so.
Thus the cut is acceptable in the big lines, I don't thing that the differences and edits you mentionned were very relevant.
For me, the main issues I have was the title, very generic and that many others dinos production have too.
But also the fact that they add size comparaison with a human illustrations onscreen when the name of each creatures appear, things who isn't in itself bad, but most of the time don't depict the real size of the specie for most of them.
The Nanuqsaurus is depicted as way more giant than he was in real life.
Moreover, their silhouettes are most often not exactly in profile, in good position, which don't help to have a good idea of their size.
When you start going back to older documentaries, I highly recommend "Dinosaur!", a 1985 TV movie/documentary narrated by Christopher Reeve with stop-motion animation by Phil Tippett and appearances by Bob Bakker and John Horner. A family of Edmontosaurus are the main focus, with Tyrannosaurus, Monoclonius, Brontosaurus, Struthiomimus, and Deinonychus also having appearances.
Another one: "Jurassic Giants: Dinosaurs and More" from 1993.
I love that one, it might be one of the few pieces of Dino media to have a hadrosaur beating a theropod
Did young tyrannosaurids have something similar to fur that disappeared before full growth, leaving single hairs in adults?
Although no proven evidence indicates that theory to be true, it seems extremely likely considering modern birds.
We don't know. Currently it's best to assume they lacked feathers at any point in their life since we have no evidence of any dinosaurs having feathers as babies and losing them as adults, let alone evidence of this happening in specifically tyrannosaurids. Honestly if it happened in tyrannosaurids it would probably happen in other dinosaurs too, so that gives more reason to assume it didn't happen at all since it's never been observed in any animal.
That said it's not physically impossible so it's whatever if someone includes it in their art. Kind of the same situation as including wattles on dinosaurs. Not necessary but it's something we can rarely actually find out about so the inclusion of them on random dinosaurs doesn't really harm the art.
If Red doesn't add an S tier to his list for Prehistoric Planet, I will cry.
He didn't.
@@jeffreygao3956 No shit Sherlock.
“Amazing Dino World” (NHK World, 2019, 49 minutes). A 2 parts documentary, the second production of this same Japanese channel, and probably the most well-known and famous production of her. For the best… and the worst. If this documentary has greatly made a lot of noise about himself inside the paleo fans community, it’s mainly due to how a mix bag of everything he is, in term of scientific accuracies and inaccuracies, with also dubious choices. The first episode talks about the marine creatures and the second talk about the feathers on dinosaurs. Thus, the cinematography and CGI are awesome looking and incredibly well-made, same for the dinosaurs behaviors (really, near the “Prehistoric Planet” level, any problem on that), the narration is correct, the creatures description are good and the production budget was high, however, a good half of the dinosaurs have inaccurate and not very realistic designs (the most famous black sheep of the bunch being the Pachyrhinosaurus, exactly in the same situation than in Jurassic Fight Club). Plus, time to time, the show takes looks more of a prehistoric fiction story time to time rather than a documentary, with also dubious scenaristic choices (ex: the Deinocheirus protagonist who die after her battle with a Tarbosaurus, leaving her chick unsafe), with also some choice favorizing the actions sequences stories at the sacrifice of logic and scientific knowledge (ex: the big T-rex sized dinos who fall from a high heigh and survived with any broken bones, many times). Like his previous successor, this documentary also received a poor diffusion outside the Asiatic realm, and even on UA-cam there almost not very clips or extract from him (these latter being very scarces), even from the Official UA-cam channel of this latter. NHK World also made other dinosaurs shorts/clips, but they are scarce too.
About the current video, personnaly, you resume pretty well how this documentary is.
Red Raptor: And so far, no documentary has shown us a fork tongued mosasaurid. 8:50
Me: You forgot monsters resurrected.
In my head, halszkaraptor might have swam like a duck floating
I think the creature that fights the spinosaurus is a pliosaur. It has large flippers, a larger and longer head, and a short tail not normally associated with mosasaurs
I'd like to recommend a documentary:
First Life (2010) by BBC
This is a two part documentary that is primarily focused on the Ediacaran and Cambrian, with some additional animals from to Ordovician and Silurian. Not too many other documentaries cover these time periods that much (especially the Ediacaran), so this might be a good pick.
I also remember some old documentary about Torosaurus's possible synonymity with Triceratops, but can't remember its name. Maybe you could have better luck finding it.
When you go back to check the ones you missed. Please. Give a try to "Flying Monsters" from NatGeo is a full documentary about Pterosaurs and IMO is pretty great
I still think you should do an accuracy review of The Magic School Bus: The Busasaurus (S2E3)
13:59 the silhouette shows a Pliosaur body instead of a Mosasaur body,a longer,less curved head,thicker body,shorter build,shorter tail,proportionally longer hind fins and a more visible neck.
Of course it’s oversized,no Pliosaur exceeded 13 meters while the Pliosaur is shown to be as long.if not longer than the 14-15 Meter Spinosaurus,in fact the only Mesozoic sea reptiles that exceeded the length of Spinosaurus were large Icthyosaurs,but no time jumping here since Pliosaur were still pretty dominant predators during the early-mid Cretaceous
I recommend doing a review for the Christopher Reeve dinosaur documentary from 1985, if nothing else to reflect on how much we've learned since then
I really hope you can rate the Forgotten bloodlines Agate and the Netflix documentary when this documentary comes out
I’ve got good news and bad news:
Good news is that “Prehistoric Planet” is getting a season two in May (which you may have already heard).
Bad news is so does this series that you just covered that is going to be released globally later this month in March.
So you probably need to wait a little longer before getting the final score for PP. Plus, it would actually make it a four parter in case you haven’t already finished your part two of the review.
The “friendly herbivore” thing is a old stereotype in cartoons only with bull being short tempered BEASTS THAT KILLS THINGS THAT ARE RED?!?!?!
I forgot to realize that Pachyrhinosaurus and Pachycephalosaurus both have a thing in common that isn’t because they’re both dinosaurs, nor they’re both herbivores
I like this documentary only the expansions of feather dinosaurs among other things
1. Theropod having intelligence compared with birds: hunting in small pack and using bait to catch prey
2.having a creature that can kill a spinosaurs
3. Showing Mosasaurus history
Though I agree while the pachyrhinosaurus body look real it head not so much
I think that may have been a pliosaur attacking the Spinosaurus, but I’d have to rewatch. B- was more generous than me though, I’m squarely in C at best territory 😂
"swimming spinosaurus"
So uh... Who wants to tell him?
This pachy is the most horrifying thing I've ever seen
Amazing dinoworld In 2019 same year for that endgame one
13:55 that doesn't look like a mosasaur. It looks like the spinosaur is attacked by some kind of pliosaur
13:49 it’s actually misidentified in the show, it’s supposed to be Rugops
At long last, we’re getting to life-like dinosaurs, but we’re not fully there yet.
That Line about Herbivores being Pacifists is so Weird lmao. The Most Dangerous Things on this Planet are almost Never Things that will Eat You.
Pachyrhino got jealous of elasmotherium and decided to grow horn
I think they made the mosasaurs kill T rex and Spinosaurus because they wanted to show it was really cool, but I think if T rex got one bite it would be game over for the mosasaurs and in a fight with Spinosaurus, whether or not it won it would probably bleed to death after the fight because of those claws.
Lets go my favorite paleo youtube just posted another great video
which pachy design is worse?
JFC: the one that has a less defining spike, yet they still acknowledge it has a boss instead of a horn
or AD: the one with a fucking massive and defined spike
JFC they used a completely different animal for pachy
13:55 Apparently it’s a Pliosaurus which, in my opinion, doesn’t make it ANY BETTER.
Whoops it’s actually 13:54
The first time u showed pachyrhinosaurus, I thought it was a woolly rhino millions of years too early
15:03 I just think the pachy is a simple minded animal attack when threatened by something bigger of when the young is hurt but not wanting to attack something smaller.
I would like to see you do Dino Lab 1 and 2 on your revisit once you're done with Prehistoric Planet.
I would say that the Pachyrinosaurus going away the troodontids nest is similar in behaviour to an animal not bothering a southern lapwing. The way the narrator said it is completely wrong, but the behaviour is kinda awesome
You must get this request a lot, but have you any plans of covering 'Walking with Cavemen' one day? I know it's quite different from the other three main docs, but I'd love a review of what they got right and wrong!
I really think that you should review a documentary called prehistoric predators
after all the modern docs are finished, you could do the old vintage ones that used stop motion
You should do one on Dinosaurs of Antarctica
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
- The fake terrestrial mosasauroid looks too similar to a modern monitor lizard, when it should look more like a smaller terrestrial version of derived mosasaurs, similar to aigialosaurus
-I'm sure someone else already commented this, but Monsters Resurrected of all things gave their mosasaur a forked tongue.
-We get our first dinosaur from appalachia in hadrosaurus, but they put it in laramidia so it can get eaten by T. Rex. They could have at least used dryptosaurus as it lived in New Jersey along with Hadrosaurus, but they lived at different times so it's still wrong. We need a Dryptosaurus documentary anyway though.
-ADW: "Pachyrhinosaurus are herbivores. They wouldn't attack "troodon"."
JFC: "As plant eaters, they were not natural aggressors."
At least Prehistoric Planet corrected past mistakes.
So RRW how do you feel about the new study on Edmontosaurus growth this year, & it’s new size estimates?
And when it goes down into the water to get the fish and it can use it’s arms and legs to grab the bottom of the lake then when it needs to go back to the surface of the water,it just…let’s itgo
2:11 I always knew red raptor was a rapper
wow 2019, i feel like i have been Letting the days go by, let the water hold me down
Letting the days go by, water flowing underground
Into the blue again, after the money's gone
Once in a lifetime, water flowing underground
17:35 well there was a 30 foot long oviraptor at some point, can't remember where it lived but there was one that could lay eggs that big
You have returned
Red raptor I forgot to say this, but, the testudines being the turtles are part of archelosauria which includes dinosaurs so tortoises and turtles are related to dinosaurs, birds, and crocodilians.
13:55
I’m pretty sure that’s actually a pliosaur, not a mosasaur.
That's what I'm saying
The timid protoceratops is likely a direct copy of bahavior found in rhinos. Rhinos can be surprisingly easy to scare.
There is another Korean dino doc called Dinosaur X which is does have the focus be partially on Deinocheirus.
Large tyrannosaurids and Abelisaurus with full feathers and Tyrannosaurus with wings?
WHAT THE HELL?
"Pachyrhinosaurus was a herbivore it wouldn't attack troodon..."
Even though we glued a big derpy horn on it's face
This is why Jurassic World Dominion is amazing and great !
Him, he present plenty of herbivores being dangerous, mainly the Therizinosaurus !
@@dudotolivier6363 jurassic world dominion is stupid, the only herbivore that was somewhat shown as threatening was therizinosaurus, and even then they changed its design to resemble more carnivorous dinosaurs
@@OK-wh5vt No, is not stupid.
Only the Parasaurolophus is portrayed as no offensif, thus all the others herbivores, Therizinosaurus, the Ceratopsid species who appear in the movie, and even the tiny Lystrosaurus (completely by a shocking way by cutting without effort the Oviraptor head) are shown as creatures that can be dangerous.
Thé Therizinosaurus don't look more like a carnivores, he's just depict to be threatening in appearance.
He is even shown eating bushes after killing the deer to clearly shown that he's an herbivores.
Plus, outside the head shape, the rest of his body is very accurate (and the fact he has feathers compensate everything bad we can possibly said about him).
@@dudotolivier6363 bro what
Ceratopsian just mindlessly wander around and bump out of fear against cars
The lystro thing was a stupid gag and it wasn't even in the movie, oviraptor is literally treated like a chicken
And irl theri looks more like a giant turkey, in the movie it ate plants but it also behaved like a carnivore
Also dreadnoughtus was there also it didn't do anything
@@OK-wh5vt Now he is in the movie, with the extended version.
Dinosaurs being very close to birds, especially the Coelusauria ones in which belong the Therizinosaurus and Oviraptor, it's not a weird thing that they look, are portrayed and act like birds like chicken or turkeys.
If the Therizinosaurus also behave time to time like a carnivore, it's because he's a territorial animal, like rhinos and hippos, who attack any others animals who are close to them if they get too close to them.
I have a question: is dacotaraptor a valid genus. Cause i found plenty of internet sources, stating, that dacotaraptor is a chimera of anzu, another species of dinosaur (i don't remember which one) and even a turtle
0:25 I’ve been waiting for someone to point that out
Prehistoric Planet accuracy review
"I've been looking forward to this."
Next could be When dinosaurs ruled form 1999.
The thing fighting the Spino has large flippers, I would argue too large, and not enough tail to be a Mosasaurus.
Pachyrhinosaurus in this documentary looks like a Styracosaurus figure from Walmart on sale. Who the hell designed this thing?
Will you reveiw the upcoming series such as Surviving Earth, Dinosaurs with Steven Fry, and Life on Our Planet (AKA the most generic name possible) when they come out?
Will you do reviews on dino games?
You should rate the David Attenborough documentary flying monsters 3D from 2010 as it focuses on pterosaurs
8:53 bro forgot monsters ressurcted
13:55 Bro that’s a Pliosaur, not a Mosasaurus. What have you done Red?
17:33 there is a oviraptorosaurid that could lay big eggs, preferably gigantoraptor.
The Hadrosaurus and Abelisaurus are actually probably different dinosaurs and only use the names of Hadrosaurus and Abelisaurus.
Yeah, the Abelisaurus is actually supposed to be Rugops in the original language.
This can’t be the next documentary after the last one you reviewed before this because that was 2016 this is 2019 and ever since Walking With Dinosaurs in 1999 there’s been 1 or more Dino documentaries each year and this would mean both 2017 and 2018 don’t have any and besides I know a documentary from 2018 which is called Adventures Of Cerotops why did you not review that
When you rewind back, do Animal Armageddon