After the entire ‘lion vs. tiger’ debacle, I grew
tired of AFO for a while, and decided to look at another classic – ‘The Truth about
Killer Dinosaurs’ (TTAKD). It was a two-part TV program of BBC’s, aired back in
2005. In some cases it was known as ‘Dinosaur Face-off’ instead – yeah, the
connotations and connections to AFO are not obvious, but they are there.
What was TTAKD about, (if someone has forgotten)?
Well, in the first part of the program, the narrator – Bill Oddie – compared and
contrasted Tyrannosaurus and Triceratops in a very AFO-like manner too,
complete with biomechanical models of the two dinosaurs, and a CGI stimulation
of what would, or could, have happened if a Tyrannosaurus and a Triceratops
have fought each other. In the more recent dinosaur-related programs (Jurassic
Fight Club comes to mind), Tyrannosaurus is often depicted as invincible as it
is in the movies (Jurassic Park/Jurassic World franchise), a creature that
cannot be stopped by anything else (except for the main hero of the movie, for
example).
TTAKD showed that that was not necessarily so; it showed
that a Triceratops had a chance to defeat a Tyrannosaurus, especially in a fair
fight – so far so good. In fact, this was BBC beating AFO, (an American
program) at its own game – it had everything that AFO did: biomechanical
models, CGI fight, scientists to consult with and to root for ‘their’ character
– everything but the live footage, because now-a-days the only dinosaurs around
are birds, and the crocodilians are close cousins of the extinct dinosaurs
instead – not dinosaurs proper.
Of course, if you look at a Tyrannosaurus’ skull, the
family traits with the crocodiles and the caimans will be very obvious: not
unlike them, Tyrannosaurus was built for power – not just in its skull (odds
are, being bitten by a Tyrannosaurus was one of the worst things to happen to
anyone or anything), but in its entire body. Unlike a similarly sized dinosaur,
such as an Allosaurus (or any other carnosaur), a Tyrannosaurus (and its close
cousins – Tarbosaurus, Daspletosaurus, even Albertosaurus and Gorgosaurus) was
much more robust and built for power: a lion, or even a bear, as opposed to a
tiger (or even a leopard). The alternate predator – one that is built for speed
and/or finesse is a raptor; not so
much ‘just’ a velociraptor, but its’
entire family…
Back to Tyrannosaurus. It was a great, powerful
predator, but was it unbeatable? No more so than the modern lions and bears are:
just think back to AFO’s ‘polar bear vs. walrus’ or ‘African lion vs. Nile
crocodile’ episodes – there is always someone bigger and stronger lurking in
the shadows, alas!
This is especially true for carnivore vs. herbivore
interactions – whether we are talking about modern times or the Mesozoic, or
any other time period. There is proof of buffalos successfully fighting-off
lions, and if the lions are smaller than the buffalos are, it still does not
stop them from having that buffalo meal fairly regularly. Of course, as we have
talked about the ‘polar bear vs. walrus’ episode of AFO, it is the same old
story all over: the predator is usually ‘just’ fighting for its’ lunch, the
prey – for its’ life. Of course, if the predator really needs a good meal to go on living, things will be different,
but usually the herbivore has a good chance of escaping…or not. It is a
case-by-case scenario, especially in real life.
However, in dinosaur documentaries, the carnivores are
usually depicted winning – or just fighting each other instead. Yes, this goes
great over in fiction, but in real life? It is unrealistic, which is why
something like JFC (Jurassic Fight Club) is also unrealistic. Of course, JFC
has plenty of other reasons why it was unrealistic, and in the end, cancelled after
a single season (apparently cancelled, or maybe it was initially designed to be
a single-season show), but it still had 12 episodes in it. TTAKD was largely a
single-shot, (two-parter or not), and while it became fairly popular on YouTube
and the rest of Internet, it never got to be aired very often…at least in
Canada. AFO, for comparison, also really flourished even in its original run of
2004, but various episodes got to be aired in the future years, (during Shark
Week and similar tripe, but still). TTAKD? Not really. Why?
Because it did not go for the stereotypes. JFC did.
Tyrannosaurus is supposed to be invincible, especially in fiction, and so it is
– on screen. The movie ‘Jurassic World’ has certainly delivered it, and while
Tyrannosaurus was tougher than a carnosaur was, (which is what the Indominus
was, period), a fictional Tyrannosaurus
is something else. People expect a certain something when the ‘tyrant lizard
king’ comes on air, and it has nothing to do with facts. It is slightly like
the case with the lion – everyone expects a lion, (at least a fictional one) to be a hero rather than
a villain, and so it happens! As a rule…
Yet back in 2005 TTAKD actually ‘measured’ a Tyrannosaurus
and a Triceratops against each other, fair and square, very much in the vein of
AFO, and proved to the audience that a Tyrannosaurus was not invincible after all. Perhaps this is why TTAKD has not
made much of a return?..
Perhaps. Yet ‘The Truth’s’ take on Tyrannosaurus, (and
Triceratops), is nothing compared to the second part of the program, which
focused on Velociraptor – but that is a story for another time…
No comments:
Post a Comment