MovieChat Forums > Jurassic Park (1993) Discussion > Plot hole that highly respected paleonto...

Plot hole that highly respected paleontologists had no idea a dinosaur park was being built?


Apologies if this has already been discussed. I went back a few pages and couldn't see anything.

I don't know if this was better explained in the book or just something you have to accept for the entire film to work but how did Grant and Ellie literally have no idea a dinosaur theme park had been built? A couple of highly respected paleontologists and they didn't have a clue.

The sheer level of construction meant a lot of people were involved and even taking into account NDAs for the construction workers, they had to source all the scientists to work on developing the dinosaurs which would surely have raised an eyebrow within the scientific community. Not even any rumours about the island. Nothing.

reply

Pre-internet era, remote Island near Costa Rica. Probably mostly built by south american workers long before dinosaurs were ever cloned. Important people likely to talk were well paid and signed secrecy agreements.

reply

I was thinking more about this earlier. How long to build the park? 10 years? How long for species like T Rex, Triceratops, Brachiosaurus etc to get to adulthood? Take whales for example. 6-10 years. So it's been kept a secret during the construction phase and growth phase. Potentially kept secret for 20 years.

reply

Pretty sure someone is building a theme park somewhere in the world at this very moment, and we don't know anything about it.

reply

But not because it's intentionally being kept secret. Just that no one cares about another theme park.

reply

That's NOT a plot hole.

reply

How so?

reply

Where is the "hole" in the plot? The movie makes it quite clear that it's a secret project and that Hammond has hired his own scientists to work for him. You may think it's not realistic nothing would be leaked, but it's no plot hole.

reply

Well, according to the definition of plot hole, it is. There is zero chance you could build something on that scale with so many people involved and not have it leak. Not even rumours. Remember, this is an entire island we're talking about. Not a secret underground lab where someone is growing Human clones or a Chinese underground nuclear submarine building facility (which is a bad example as we know about them). It's not beyond reasonable doubt that Isla Nublar would become a place of interest and be checked out by Chinese and U.S.S.R. spy satellites.

reply

"Well, according to the definition of plot hole, it is."

Well, no, it isn't, actually:

"In fiction, a plot hole, plothole or plot error is a gap or inconsistency in a storyline that goes against the flow of logic established by the story's plot"

So what logic of the story's plot does this go against?

reply

And now read the second sentence of the definition which I have already posted.

reply

Okay, one, the first sentence makes reference to the Oxford dictionary, a legitimate source. The second sentence makes reference to some internet article that actually tries to explain away a bunch of supposed plotholes, which doesn't even say anything that comes close to that sentence. Wikipedia is probably not the best source, I can post similar definitions from other legitimate dictionaries, if you want.

Two, the second sentence is not the definition but gives examples of what it includes. Not ALL "illogical, unlikely or impossible events" are plotholes. They still have to go against the established logic of the plot.

I mean, the whole concept of this movie is "impossible" and "unlikely", but it does not go against the logic of the plot, so no problem.

reply

It's fine. We see things at different levels of probability. NBD.

reply

"We see things at different levels of probability"

No, that's not really the issue here. You could be right that it's unlikely no info was ever leaked, the point is that it just isn't a plot hole.

Chinese or Russian intelligence agencies having no knowledge of the project does not go against the established logic of the plot, nor does it have any bearing on the plot. Who knows, maybe they were actually aware something was going on the island. It's simply unimportant.

reply

It's still an inconsistency in the narrative that goes against the flow of logic. I see it as a bigger deal than you so we're going to have to agree to disagree here.

reply

Inconsistent with what part of the plot exactly?

The movie actually never makes any definite statement on how many people are aware of the true nature of the project. We do know a group of "investors" know something. But to the rest of the world Hammond has put on the front of a "biological preserve" for the past 5 years. Hammond is established as filthy rich and the project as top secret. Wouldn't the logic of the plot suggest his employees were paid top dollar to stay quiet?

Unlikely or not, I see no inconsistency in logic that Grant and Ellie have no knowledge of the extent of the project.

reply

We're just going around in circles here. I think the whole thing is implausible enough to stay a secret to be a plot hole.

When you take into account the number of people involved in the project, the scrutiny the island would be under from foreign powers due to them thinking some sort of military base could be being built and just how long it stayed a secret for. The truth would leak. I just don't buy it.

reply

Well, if we're going in circles, it's because it's still not clear to me how it's inconsistent with the logic of the movie (which is something different than implausibility). Like I said, Hammond claimed to the outside world it was a biological preserve (which it actually was). What exactly would make anyone think it was a military base? And again, we don't know how many people knew, we just know Grant and Ellie didn't know. The truth actually did leak, Nedry told a rival company about the project.

Anyway, I think dinosaur cloning is implausible, so I guess the entire movie is a plot hole?

reply

I don't see why this is so difficult for some people to understand.

It's simply not logical a project like that could be built in near total secret.

I think it's incredibly naive to think you could get away with building a project of such magnitude without catching the eye of military rivals and them thoroughly investigating what is going on. They would want to establish what it is exactly that you're building. Is it a command bunker, is it a weapons cache, ICBM launch site, training facility, T&E grounds for experimental weapons/craft, conventional or CBRN weapons manufacturing facility etc. All easily monitor-able with satellites and drones.

Our intelligence communities know when stuff like nuclear submarines etc are being built from material acquisitions etc. Sourcing millions of tonnes of concrete and steel are going to throw up some red flags to respective countries intelligence agencies.

reply

"I don't see why this is so difficult for some people to understand."

I don't see why it's so difficult for some people to understand that this isn't a plot hole. Everything you've said are assumptions based on your ideas of the real world. Nothing has to do with the the established logic of the movie's plot. The Costa Rican government allowed Hammond to build a biological preserve and everything related to the project pointed to that. I don't see why Grant and Ellie had to have known they were actually cloning dinosaurs.

Intelligence agencies play no role in the movie, we don't know what they did or didn't know. But North Korea is a good example that they often have no clue.

reply

We don't know how much the world's governments and militaries know about the project. That's not shown in the film.

What we ARE shown, is that Grant and Ellie, two paleontologists who've been out working in the hinterlands of Wyoming or Saskatchewan or wherever, don't have a clue, and that's what's plausible! Grant and Ellie are out of any loop you'd care to name.

reply

I don't understand what you people are arguing about. It's a friggin movie. Enough said.

reply

Arguing? Don't exaggerate. The OP started a thread calling it a plot hole and I simply disagreed. What we're doing is having a discussion on a MOVIE site.

reply

It's not a plot hole. A plot hole is a huge gap in a sequence of events. In other words, it's an issue where the screenwriter leaves out important details that don't explain how the movie jumped from one event to another or how an incident happened.

A classic example of a plot hole happens in the movie, Vertigo. Detective Scotty (Jimmy Stewart) follows Madeleine (Kim Novak) into a hotel. We see her check into the hotel. We see her in her room from a window after she checks in. Stewart goes inside right then and there to ask what room Madeleine is staying in. The concierge says that she never checked in at all that day.

At no point does the concierge sound snarky or as if she's trying to hide something. At no point is it established that Madeleine asked the concierge to lie for her. At no point is there a twist where there are two concierges who happen to be twins and they changed shifts in between the time Madeleine checked in and Scotty came in to inquire about her.

This is a plot hole because the movie doesn't explain how it is that Scotty and the audience plainly saw Madeleine checking into the hotel, talking to the concierge, etc. but in the very next scene has the concierge saying that she never checked in.

reply

i think it's very possible because if they aren't looking for it; they won't know about it. It was explained earlier that in the book, Grant was only given Need to Know information. For a movie verse explanation, we are just told it was top secret. If the media isn't told about it, they won't report it. If the government are backing the project, most likely secretly, they will have the funds and power to keep the project hush hush. It's not a major plot point for me, so I can take the suspension of belief pretty well for this. The movie isn't about the hiding of the park, we are being brought in during a much later stage. I don't think it's really a plot whole as much as the production team trying to keep a well paced movie.

I WILL say, that based on how far along the park seems to be (company logos, guest building, they have a gift shop already...I could be wrong about that; it's been a while...) I am surprised media buzz hasn't started yet. But I forget if they mention how far a long they are before letting the public know.

It is a interesting topic, to think about the logistics of this happening. but that's definitely info saved for the book, deleted scenes, prequels.

reply

"The movie isn't about the hiding of the park, we are being brought in during a much later stage."

It would, actually, make for an interesting prequel(s). The research, trials and errors, discovery, brainstorming, theories, building of the park, logistics, the sheer magnitude of the whole thing..

reply

What about the fact that the paleobotanist was able to tell that the triceratop's pupils were dilatated, but the medical staff on site had no idea lol, even though the paleobotanist has never seen a dino eye in her life.

reply

I don't recall that but it's a good point.

reply

I read the book, but years ago and can't recall.

I don't think it's that big of a plot hole. If Hammond had the means to build it in the first place, he probably had the means to ensure and enforce confidentiality. Or maybe he rotated crews regularly and none knew what they were building. Or maybe he used crews who didn't care because they were too poor or too unintelligent. Or maybe he hired crews that didn't speak the same language as each other. Or maybe it was an exceptionally smaller crew for a longer time. Maybe he lied for a while and played it off as a theme park resort. And being on a distant island, managed to go unnoticed.

Additionally, the internet was not as commonly used then, and certainly not to today's level.

I see where you're coming from but respectfully disagree.

reply

There was no internet back then... nor everybody had cameras with them 24/7.

reply

Sorry, but "no Internet back then" is a weak ass explanation.

reply

If you think “no internet” is a weak ass excuse then I’ll going to guess you’re under 30 and don’t remember a world without it.

Yes it’s a bit of a stretch that Dr. Grant and Dr. Sattler hadn’t even heard rumors of some big project in Costa Rica. But I think a movie about dinosaurs being resurrected because of a mosquito requires the audience to make some stretches.

reply

You'd be incorrect. I remember the time before Internet.

reply

Also, even if word got out that they were building a dinosaur theme park, it's doubtful that anyone would think they had actual cloned dinosaurs there. Most people would probably think its just another educational park about dinosaurs, with maybe some cheap animatronics standing around.

reply