Doc

18th Jan 2021

Jurassic Park (1993)

Corrected entry: In order to open a park like that to the public (and obviously it's close to the opening date) Hammond would have to convince more people than just his investors. In reality, the park would have to pass a security review, and those auditors would definitely ask questions like "What happens in case of a catastrophic computer failure?" Something tells me the answer "All the fences turn off and you have to run across the compound to turn them back on manually" wouldn't sit too well with them.

Doc

Correction: We don't know that Hammond is not going to do that. Having to convince the investors is just the first step. Without financing, nothing else matters because the park will never open.

wizard_of_gore

The park is all but finished. You convince investors at the beginning, inspectors at the end. Convincing investors after the fact is just not how it works. Thinking about what the security inspectors will ask at the end is equally bad practice, although I have seen it done that way, if not quite at that scale.

Doc

The whole manual reboot had to be done because Dennis Nedry locked them out of the system, so they had to do a hard reboot. Dennis Nedry's virus and meddling also shut the fences down intentionally. In practice the reboot would be done with more time on their hands and someone at the compound ready to reboot quickly enough that all fences go back online in time. In this situation however, they didn't have those luxuries. No system can be fully made failsafe from industrial sabotage or hacking.

lionhead

20th Jul 2008

Jurassic Park (1993)

Factual error: At the beginning of the film we are shown an amber mine in the Dominican Republic. This amber is only 45 million years old, Hammond would never bother buying the amber from there as dinosaurs disappeared from the fossil record 65 million years ago.

Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.

Suggested correction: This is assuming that Hammond would restrict himself to a specific period of the earth's history, which makes no sense. Of course Hammond would also be interested in Paleogene or early Tertiary fossil blood! All the proto-birds, giant birds (just think about a Gastornis! What a sensation in a zoo!), not to mention giant mammals like the Megatherion, proto-elephants, proto-rhinoceroses.

Doc

There is absolutely no suggestion in Jurassic Park - film or book - that Hammond has any interest in any animals except for dinosaurs. We see no facilities for cloning extinct birds or mammals, nor are they mentioned in his promotional film. The post is correct.

It's specifically mentioned in the book that Hammond was buying huge quantities of amber, even museum-quality jewelry. He was likely getting hold of everything he possibly could to increase chances of finding blood-carrying insects.

LorgSkyegon

There is also absolutely no suggestion that he wouldn't be interested. Surely these would make excellent alternatives / backups in the event he couldn't source enough mosquitos of the era he was most interested in.

As has been pointed out on this site before, inventing deux ex machina explanations for plot holes and factual errors does not invalidate them. Cloning non-egg laying mammals would require vastly different technology to that seen in Jurassic Park. Nowhere in the film is it indicated that Hammond is interested in anything except dinosaurs, nor that he is in any way equipped to clone anything but them.

Hammond buying up any mosquito-containing amber is not a plot hole. He didn't say he wanted exhibits from 45 million years ago, but he also didn't specifically say he wasn't interested. Lack of a statement in a film is not a plot hole.

Join the mailing list

Separate from membership, this is to get updates about mistakes in recent releases. Addresses are not passed on to any third party, and are used solely for direct communication from this site. You can unsubscribe at any time.

Check out the mistake & trivia books, on Kindle and in paperback.