The movie that pioneered the use of CGI in cinema, Jurassic Park kicked off one of the biggest movie franchises ever. Based off Michael Crichton's novel, Steven Spielberg's exciting dinosaur sci-fi adventure brought the image of the dinosaurs to the big screen and introduced paleontology to pop culture. Even though Jurassic Park is an undeniable classic with a superb script and amazing performances, its portrayal of the prehistoric reptiles is proven inaccurate by the scientific and paleontologic communities. However, that does not mean that the movie (and Spielberg) made a mistake.

By using somewhat accurate paleontologic knowledge available at the time, the 1993 movie was crafted in a way that tried to balance scientific accuracy and public appeal. Steven Spielberg made choices that he felt would artistically bolster the movie, adding entertainment value. For example, the dilophosaurus’ frill and poison were added to make it easier for audiences to differentiate it from the velociraptor and, of course, to make it look cool (which it did). The velociraptor is a great example of this as well. The velociraptors in the movie were actually based off another dinosaur, the deinonychus. Spielberg opted to use the name "velociraptor" because it sounded more memorable and menacing, principles that would guide the portrayal of dinosaurs in the franchise.

RELATED: Jurassic World Dominion Is A Metaphor Of The Franchise's Demise

What Did The Real Velociraptor Look Like?

Two Velociraptors in the jungle in Jurassic Park (1993)

Quite possibly the most iconic dinosaur throughout the franchise (alongside with the T. Rex), there are many differences between the actual velociraptor and the ones from the movies. Even though many features and behaviors of the Jurassic Park velociraptors are lizard-like and snake-like, the actual velociraptor was from the dromaeosaurid family, a classification that puts it very close to birds. Velociraptor mongoliensis, the main species of the velociraptor genus, was similar in size and body shape to a modern-day duck.

Looking back to the 1990s, the reconstruction of dinosaurs was very hit or miss, so it's a bit unfair to hold this against Jurassic Park. However, one thing that the movie nailed was the fact the velociraptor was likely an intelligent animal, given how its cranium had a relatively big space for its brain.

Are The Jurassic World Dinosaurs Lifelike?

Jurassic World poster showing T-Rex

A considerable amount of time passed between the Jurassic Park and the Jurassic World sagas, and as such, many new paleontologic discoveries would reveal that the dinosaurs already established in the franchise were inaccurate. However, it would make no sense to change up the visuals and identity of many fan-favorite dinosaurs of the saga. The velociraptor, for example, is now reconstructed as a feathered animal, like many other theropods (a group of bipedal dinosaurs that originated modern birds).

So, while the World trilogy revived classic dinosaurs without changing much about them, it would make sense for them to portray the yet unseen dinosaurs in more accuracy-oriented fashion. However, this was not really the case. Even though the feathered pyroraptor from Jurassic World Dominion nods at the more accuracy-loving viewers, it still not a spot-on representation of what most feathered theropods looked like. In Jurassic World, after the Indominus Rex wreaks havoc in the park, there is a dialogue between Dr. Henry Wu (BD Wong) and Masrani (Irrfan Khan) in which Wu nails down the science behind the dinosaurs in the franchise:

"Nothing in Jurassic World is natural. We have always filled gaps in the genome with the DNA of other animals. And if the genetic code was pure, many of them would look quite different. But you didn't ask for reality, you asked for more teeth."

BD Wong as Dr.Henry Wu, Jurassic World

In a way that revisits the "digging up the past" theme of the 1993 film, Wu points out the desire for spectacle that moved the scientists of Jurassic World to design unnatural, but cool-looking monsters instead of lifelike reconstructions. Taking solace in its explanation as to why the creatures in the franchise are not scientifically accurate, the Jurassic World trilogy is not short on examples of massive variations in its portrayal of extinct animals. There are charts all over the internet that illustrate the humongous exaggerations of the sizes of the mosasaur and the quetzalcoatlus in the Jurassic World trilogy. On a related note, neither of the two aforementioned extinct animals were dinosaurs. The mosasaur was a species of marine lizard closely related to modern day monitor lizards, and the quetzalcoatlus, as all the other pterosaurs, were not dinosaurs, though they were closely related to them.

There is still, however, one big inaccuracy in this franchise that, if fixed, would inevitably shake all of its films, and any that shall come, to their very core: Dinosaurs did not roar. The structure of their neck bones did not allow for vocal cords that were capable of making a powerful roaring sound. For a movie monster, the roaring makes complete sense, but for large reptiles, it makes no sense at all. Roaring is much more typical of mammals.

So, if the famous T. Rex ground-shaking roar scene of the original Jurassic Park film is scientifically inaccurate, does that make it a bad scene? Not at all. Does that make it a bad movie? Even less. In a cinematic experience, sometimes spectacle comes before accuracy.

MORE: Two Highly Anticipated Star Wars Projects Won't Be Happening Any Time Soon