50

I remember seeing Jurassic Park when it first came out. And I remember a scene describing a counter that kept track of the number of dinosaurs, so the operators could detect escapees. I remember the sense of doom when, in a later scene, they realized that it had been clamped to the expected count, and when unclamped, showed the true, larger number of dinosaurs (due to their breeding).

I've seen the film a few times since, and it has dawned on me that the scenes don't appear - verified it the other day, in fact. And searching the web, the sole reference is in this answer - which suggests the counter only appears in the novel.

I did read the novel once. Was this scene in any original version of the movie, or has my imagination painted in the gaps?

Jenayah
  • 7,181
  • 3
  • 46
  • 52
SusanW
  • 552
  • 4
  • 9
  • 10
    If I remember correctly, in the movie Alan Grant and the kids stumble upon dinosaur egg shells, and that's how we learn that dinosaurs can indeed breed. – Oliver_C May 05 '19 at 18:09

1 Answers1

54

Only in the novel.

Searching subtitles from different versions of the released movie (from DVDRip, to BRRip, to Collector's Edition, to those old XViD RIPs that came in 2 CDs), I cannot find any reference to the counter.

However, in the novel, it’s a major plot point

[Total animals: 238]

“Everything accounted for, as always.” He couldn’t keep the satisfaction out of his voice.

“Now then,” Malcolm said. “Can you have the computer search for a different number of animals?”

“Like what?” Arnold said.

“Try two hundred thirty-nine.”

“Just a minute,” Arnold said, frowning. A moment later the screen printed:

[Total animals: 239]

And eventually, they reach the actual total

Table overview of dinosaurs

This part of the novel has not made it into movies, as far as I can tell. It appeared in the early script drafts, as you can see here:

MALCOLM: Of course I'm right, I'm always right. And while you're at it, search for 300 animals.

WU: Three hundred?

ARNOLD: (shakes head, hits keys) Searching for... three hundred.

The screen prints: Total Animals: 241. Talk is fast:

HAMMOND So! My kids are out there!

ARNOLD (relieved) Yeah. Looks like it, sir.

The screen suddenly prints: Total Animals: 258.

But it doesn't show in the first draft (also here), or in the final script (also here). It is also not listed as a deleted scene (also here). As far as I can tell, you remembering it is just a trick of the mind.

BlueMoon93
  • 27,830
  • 32
  • 141
  • 220
  • 17
    Typing a number is a strange search query. – Taladris May 06 '19 at 05:23
  • 2
    @Taladris They mention its for convenience, to make things faster. They limited the count to 238, since it was they were expecting. "It's a convenience, not a flaw." as Nedris puts it. – BlueMoon93 May 06 '19 at 08:50
  • The strange part is that the query system is somehow "adjusting" species counts to match the expected total across all species. When "querying" 239, why add 1 to the procompsognathids, and not the maiasaurs? How does it decide which species "accounts" for the increase in the query? – chepner May 06 '19 at 13:03
  • 4
    Maybe the algorithm searches for the expected results first, then starts finding extras after. Or they're ordered internally in the order they register, so all the lab created ones are listed first internally, then new births are registered after in the list. – IronSean May 06 '19 at 13:40
  • It seems the point of this is to show that the animals are breeding, despite supposedly being sterile. I seem to remember the movie including this point by showing hatched eggs, leading to the famous Life uh.... finds a way quote by Ian Malcolm. – Gertsen May 06 '19 at 13:58
  • 3
    They were worried about dinosaurs dieing or escaping - no one considered the possibility they might be breeding, hence no need to check for a number greater than the expected total. Nedry is also probably the kind of developer to implement exactly what was requested and nothing more (unless he's being paid overtime)... – Matt Holland May 06 '19 at 21:59
  • 1
    I've only re-watched the original movie once or twice (still love it, though), and what you say amazes me. To clarify, I'm totally with you, and I absolutely remember the scene where they increase the number on the screen and rerun the search, and their amazed horror when it returns more. IIRC, it was when they got the systems back on line, post-Nedry. – racraman May 07 '19 at 06:02
  • 1
    @racraman You remember the scene in the novel, not the movie, right? – BlueMoon93 May 07 '19 at 15:56
  • 2
    @blueMoon93 I have a vivid memory of the scene in the control room, ... but after much googling I must agree, it must be a false memory. I read the book some time after the movies, so it must have transferred. So still amazed - but now for a different reason ! – racraman May 07 '19 at 23:50
  • @racraman Uh-oh, you too? Yes, after the systems came back up ... that'd be when I remember it too. I was about to click Accept until I saw your comment! – SusanW May 08 '19 at 08:33
  • 2
    @BlueMoon93 Thank you for doing the research and writing such a good answer. Racraman's comment has slightly freaked me out - either there was a rare theatrical release with the scene included (that history has somehow totally expunged), or Michael Crichton's writing is just so amazingly vivid that he's created mass illusions... :-) I'll give this a little longer before Accepting, just in case someone is still in their archives digging out 25yr old film reels... – SusanW May 08 '19 at 08:38
  • @SusanW Of course, give the community a chance to find other evidence. I've edited my answer with scripts, your scene was there at some point. But not in the final one – BlueMoon93 May 08 '19 at 09:32
  • 1
    SusanW, yes, weird isn't it. Also, I saw the movie twice in '93 - first week in LosAngeles, then couple of weeks later in Sydney; can't remember noticing anything different. Also we agree post-nedry, but skimming the movie last night that makes no sense since Malcolm wasn't around the control room then. @BlueMoon93 - was the scene in the book before or after Nedry left ? – racraman May 08 '19 at 23:36
  • @racraman Nedry is in the novel's scene, he talks about the number limit being a feature. He only leaves later – BlueMoon93 May 09 '19 at 00:01
  • 1
    Thanks @BlueMoon93, and for all the excellent research as well. One thing's for sure - it was an awesome movie, even without that scene ! – racraman May 09 '19 at 00:31