Since we do not want the same guy who complained about the lack of the T. Rex vs raptor scene from JP1 to request us to remove this page, make one for that scene, please. I cannot do it my own at this time.-- Xeno 00:27, July 16, 2012 (UTC)

I don't know precisely what you mean, but ok. My plan is that each scene/sequence of all movies should have an article.MismeretMonk 09:38, July 16, 2012 (UTC)

I simply can't believe that fans are STILL arguing as to who should have been the victor of this fight. It's been more than ten years since this movie was made, and this controversy is still going on! Both Spinosaurus and T.rex are dead, so we'll never really prove who is the true victor unless we invent a time machine and go to North Africa 97 million years ago, capture a Spinosaurus, go forward to North America 65 million years ago to grab a T. Rex and then put them both in an arena together. Even then, they'd probably just ignore each other, since big predators usually avoid confrontation.CyborgIguana 01:11, July 19, 2012 (UTC)


I have seen alot of aurguments about this movie, and personally, I think either of them could win. T-Rex has the head ad jaws as the main weapon, and if the head is damaged, it will ultimately kill it. The Spino has a very, and I meen VERY weak bite compared to a T-Rex, but the Spino has a HUGE fish hook like Claw used for impaling Fish, and use THAT on the head of the T-Rex, which would be the primary target for any Carnivore in a fight.... So i thought I should just point these things out to help...

SpaceGodzilla935 (talk) 16:54, August 8, 2013 (UTC) SpaceGodzilla935

Ok. I just wanna know, what evidence is there that the Tyrannosaurus was a "sub-adult"? I've always argued that both of them could win, and I don't like the scene (for its brefiety), but every time I talk to a Rex Lover/Supporter, they always say "sub-adult" as a way of saying that T. Rex should have won or something. Its obviously a Bull (coloring), but where does this "sub-adult" information come from? If it doesn't come from an official source, I think the wiki should be indifferent/neutral to the debate. PipProductionCo (talk) 21:14, June 14, 2015 (UTC)

Since the T. Rex in Jurassic Park 3 was smaller than Rexy and the two adults seen in the Lost World, I'd imagine that's where the "sub-adult" thing came from. However, while I also didn't like the fight (pretty traumatic for a six year old T. Rex lover at the cinema!), calling the JP3 Rex a "sub-adult" isn't really a strong argument in favour of a fully grown Tyrannosaur killing the Spinosaur in the same situation, as the size difference between the "sub-adult" and the adults seen in the other films isn't exactly extreme. In short, while I don't think there's any official information explicitly saying that the Tyrannosaur in Jurassic Park 3 is a sub-adult, the fact that it clearly isn't fully grown (the official size chart for the film has the size at 37 feet, rather than the usual 43 feet), is why fans refer to it as a sub-adult. --Cyrannian 21:51, June 14, 2015 (UTC)

Thought the New Quadrupedal posture is still in Debate; and not accepted as Entirely Accurate

Why there is Primal Carnage trailer; On Jurassic Park wiki?  What kind of nonsense is this ?!

I think the "sub-adult" thing had to have come from either the JP3 movie storybook or the junior novel. Used to have them myself. Anyone else have those? Long live the Sith (talk) 03:02, January 11, 2016 (UTC)

I do not have these, but I believe the sub-adult is just fan speculation. Nowhere that I have seen links an official source for the JPIII rex being a sub-adult. --The Collector 03:31, January 11, 2016 (UTC)

Spino had to fight on two legs.

The new finding of Spinosaurus suggested that it walked on fours while on land. It has only been suggested, I know that it was front heavy and all that, but still, Spinosaurus is basically crippled if walking on fours forever. Spinosaurus, regardless of the new finding, there probably would be another finding, but Spino had to walk on its hind legs, eventually at some points, and a lot it did. If the way Spino fished, like in Planet Dinosaur, Spinosaurus had to stand up because either the Onchopristics as featured as an example would cut/slice the Spinosaur's arms if on fours much more easily. Or Spino would simply not have the force it needed to grab the fish and sink its teeth into it. Another reason why Spino had to walk and stand on fours is that it fought with Carcharodontosaurus for food at some point if really needed, such as rivers disappear or flood. And Spinosaurus would simply be a bee to a hornet if it couldn't stand up efficiently. Spino's jaws and teeth were not for crushing or slicing or tearing at any way. Its jaws weren't developed to fight, though its teeth can be really sharp. The only thing it can use is its claws. And it had to. Otherwise Spino would be completely unprotected and unable to fight. In planet Dinosaur, Spinosaurus used its claws for the whole fight, that could happen, but people keep saying T.rex would win because Spino's bite or what happened in JP3. I think T. Rex would win overall honestly, but Spino would definitely put up a good fight. If it used its powerful arms and claws more, it could severely injure the Tyrannosaurus. So basically, Spinosaurus DID stand up on its hind legs, and it had to. Someone add it to the accuracy, that Spino wasn't fully quadrupedal.

Thank goodness it can be put to rest.

Since before Fallen Kingdom came out, that DPG site thing and the Masarani Backdoor had looked back at things, realized how they got some stuff wrong, and answered in the usual manner: The Spinosaurus is now proven to have been overly modified. Please add that in somewhere to the page, as it's the nail in this age old coffin. Accuracy irrelevant, truth overriten, it's not a real spino, that's why it won. And we can all be bloody thankful someone cared enough to put it down in writing.

P.S. Can someone add the shitty game *Jurassic: The Hunted* to the influenced media? It has a fight that is literally move for move stolen from the movie. Thank you!

Est Nikkas Oth Mithas (talk) 19:53, July 6, 2018 (UTC)

Spino Rex rematch in JW3, not to the death?

How would you guys like in JW3 a rematch between Spino and Rexy, where it ends in a draw, where neither die and we see Rexy and Spino constantly snapping at each other throughout the film without killing each other whenever they are together? I think that might work without pissing half either side of the fanboys. Keeping them relatively even and not dying is one way of pleasing everyone, however one should keep them separate most of the time just to avoid people arguing over how they fight, who has the edge where and any inaccuracies. The first fight, Rexy owns Spino and Spino gets up and runs off. Then there will be plenty of scenes of them in their own scenes by themselves and the second fight, it's just a slight scuffle for a person's pieces. Animalman57 (talk) 00:48, January 25, 2019 (UTC)

No, no. I may have to disagree with you, AnimalMan57. I believe that Jurassic World III is better off without a rematch and without the Spinosaurus. Go here to see why I don’t think the Spinosaurus should be featured in Jurassic World III. https://jurassicpark.fandom.com/d/p/3133623658086654325

Dinosaurus1 (talk) 16:20, January 23, 2019 (UTC)

Aside from I doubt Universal would bring in the Spino and not have Rexy beat it, I don't think fans would be pleased with this approach either. People would complain that Universal teased us the whole movie and never truly delivered. It'd be like having Freddy and Jason in a movie together and not actually fighting, something like that. KamikazePyro (talk) 20:00, January 23, 2019 (UTC)
Exactly. Just leave the Spinosaurus alone and have another large theropod be the main dinosaur of Jurassic World III (maybe Giganotosaurus). Dinosaurus1 (talk) 00:24, January 24, 2019 (UTC)
Well, what about bringing Spino in without them fighting, maybe to go more into the backstory of the creature from Dr. Wu, as thought of by Klayton Fioriti? Also, I don't want it as the main dinosaur cause I don't want a main dinosaur, or at least a large one. Animalman57 (talk) 00:48, January 25, 2019 (UTC)
No, it's like how Kamikaze Pyro said. Fans would expect the Spinosaurus to fight Robertarexy, and they would be disappointed if that didn't happen. I would like Jurassic World III to play it safe and not risk featuring the Spinosaurus. Dinosaurus1 (talk) 01:52, January 25, 2019 (UTC)
While people are expecting a rematch, why do that when you could just bring Spino in and not do that. Just cause fans want them to fight doesn't mean there has to be one, but that they should ignore the Spino entirely is stupid. I liked Spino more or less. Personally, my problem with the fight was less that Spino won, more of the people's attitude to the Rex behind the scenes, basically being condescending to T. rex even though there probably wouldn't have been a third film without the Rexes. And I think that was most of the fan's problem with the fight, too. Also, people say they want a fight, but they may just be saying that. In the right hands, like Colin, Spino's return should be celebrated, not just wanting a rematch of a stupid fight anyway since they never met in life anyway. That's all I'm going to say now. I'm done with that. Animalman57 (talk) 02:48, January 25, 2019 (UTC)
Look, I know you want the Spinosaurus to return, but for me, I think it's safer if Jurassic World III doesn't feature it. First off, it just isn't necessary. Sure, Jurassic World III takes place 20 years after Jurassic Park III, but it doesn't focus on an island anymore; instead, it is focusing on dinosaurs on mainland, as well as open sourcing, and a Spinosaurus being the main dinosaur would be a little unnecessary (I didn't want to say "forced" by the way). And that leads me to my next point; people will complain and predict that Jurassic World III is a "ripoff" of Jurassic Park III (just like they did with JW and FK where their plotlines were slightly similar to JP and TLW:JP but had largely different aspects that distinguish the four films apart that people don't notice). Sure, you'll have people complain that Jurassic World III should have had Spinosaurus in it and even say that the film missed out the opportunity to return it, but I would say that Jurassic World III is better off without the Spinosaurus, in my opinion. Dinosaurus1 (talk) 04:05, January 25, 2019 (UTC)
I know I said I'm done, but I just want to say, how is this movie being on the mainland have anyway against Spino returning? Makes no sense, even if Wu just cloned another one. Also, as I've already said, I don't want a main dinosaur at all, he'll just be in a scene. Also, it's not that I absolutely want him, but I'm saying I'm not against it. Also, those people are gonna be pissed and try to find things to complain about JW3 anyway, so why the hell not bring him back? Alright, that's truly all. Animalman57 (talk) 04:13, January 25, 2019 (UTC)


Spinosaurus has already been teased in both JW and Fallen Kingdom (in FK concept art shows that they at least imagined it having a comeback against the good Rexy) but I wouldn't want it to have a death duel against Rexy again in JW3. The most I'd like to see would be a brief confrontation. However, I would want it to return. I think it could be instrumental to the plot, and that way the creature would be redeemed from being a mere B-movie-esque replacement for Tyrannosaurus to an essential element of the story, what with it being rumoured to be the original hybrid and all. Lonious (talk) 13:40, May 7, 2019 (UTC)

This should be removied

In the article this last section of this paragraph should be removed.

Paul Sereno said that when Spinosaurus emerged on land, it probably didn't brawl with other predators. "Big predators would likely have stayed away from fighting each other," Ibrahim says. "Whichever one got in the first big bite would have probably won a fight."[2]' In the film it is the Tyrannosaurus that got the first big bite and should have won the fight. Moreover, with a bite force of 3.5-23.5 metric tons[3] the T. rex should have bitten the Spinosaurs head off.



The whole point of this article is supposedly to not argue one way or the other. But this comes off as an attempt to support one side. The statment on getting the first bite in should not be taken as an argument for the Rex, but a general rule in all animal fights, the first hit usally wins. Even then it's just usally, not always. The final part "Should of beittne the Spinosaur's head off" really sells this as an arguemnt for one side.

User:Swg66-Cambria ne'er can yield! (talk) 23:28, October 11, 2019 (UTC)

I agree that this should also be removed. Also, I would also argue that the statement about the recreations should also be adjusted. Fan animations are not really relevant, so it should really be official only. Also, "Prime Survival" isn't properly capitalized, even if we do decide to keep it. CrashBash (talk) 05:22, October 12, 2019 (UTC)

Updated Real Life info of Spinosaurus

Not sure whether topic regarding Spinosaurus Vs. T-Rex Scene had been concluded but, does anyone here learned that latest study on Spinosaurus confirmed to be decently competent when it comes about bipedal terrestial commotion almost as good as in movie and had a keeled tail that was well adapted to propelling the animal through water? Just wondering cuz while real-life creature could swim like in JP3 film, Spinosauruses are supposedly as competent as crocodiles, if no more. For more info, see here:

If these discoveries are indeed the case, the only way for Spinosaurus to win against T-Rex or other theropod dinos with equal size is by dragging them underwater. You know, like how Mosasaurus dragged Indominus into water?

Black Soulstone (talk) 12:36, June 12, 2020 (UTC)

The Bipedalism and Compotent Terrestrial Locomotion of Spinosaurus is valid as the legs are confirmed to being Robust; however the tail being used for active water propolsion is currently determined to being invalid, the elongated spines are appearently extremely unfit for active propolsion against the water currents; shadowing the NatGeo PR's claims 

Two different Paleontologists've raised disagreements and counter-thesis/theories already 

Mark Witton's conclusion https://mobile.twitter.com/MarkWitton/status/1255814025931296769

Michael Milbourne's counter thesis

1c695464-164d-4848-ab65-1d297ddc7285

72a71ea1-e3a5-4ea3-870e-7d57716126df a3df2b6e-4ac6-4f1a-a88d-c6dee7a92ab7

The Dragnor 

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.