Disambiguation Links – Version 4.4 (C/N)
Cloning Process – The Version Numbers
InGen‘s process was always under constant refinement as indicated by the dinosaur fetuses present in the third film. As evidenced in the films numerous times the dinosaurs were genetic manipulations that were the result of the public perception of dinosaurs at that point in time, thus theme-park monsters, as said by Dr. Alan Grant in the third film. We can tell this not only in the differences from the Velociraptors between the first, second and third films but in the differences between the Pteranodons seen in The Lost World: Jurassic Park and Jurassic Park ///. Jurassic Park’s dinosaurs clearly have some shortcomings when compared to their real life counterparts. For example, most modern theropods are considered feathered and assuredly all lack the rotated ulna and pronated hands present in the film series.
So how do we know there were version numbers? What evidence is there for this? Well first off let’s look at the in-film snap to your left. Notice where the red circle is, that’s your version number right there. For those who have trouble seeing it reads: “2.05” for the Stegosaurus (incorrectly spelled “Stegasaurus”) embryo. Part of any process in anything is placing it under constant revision. These dinosaurs, being a science project themselves, indicated in the films were under constant revision by InGen. We can safely assume that some of the science from the novel canon obviously carries over in some capacity otherwise there would be no film/plot in this instance. So the question is how do we know for certain? We take a look at Jurassic Park /// next to see evidence of the revision process.
To your right you’re seeing the aborted fetus of two dinosaurs seen in the Embryonics Administration scene along with a prop used in the production. These are obviously failed attempts at the dinosaurs that InGen studied to learn more about their process, likely to refine/revise how they were producing dinosaurs. These would not likely exist if the process was either squeaky clean (which would be unrealistic) or not under constant revision to make the “perfect” theme park inhabitant. Thus variation and the carry over of version numbers do in fact translate over into the film end of the continuity.
In Jurassic World, the fourth film, this is further alluded to in a conversation between Henry Wu and Simon Masrani regarding that the dinosaurs would look a lot different if they were using the full genome when Masrani confronted Wu about the Indominus.
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.
The InGen Conspiracy – The morality of a company pushing the limits
Several people believe InGen was up to “no good” based off comments made by Joe Johnston and the character of Alan Grant in Jurassic Park ///. Some of this could be presumed from the dinosaur fetuses seen in Jurassic Park /// itself and the fact InGen had to experiment with the dinosaurs in order to make the “perfect” theme park inhabitant. The fact to this rumor is that “the InGen was up to no good” is a matter of opinion more than anything. InGen’s own actions under the direction of John Hammond says otherwise given the character’s disposition in the films over those of his novel counterpart who is drastically different and less pleasant of a person.
John Hammond’s goal was to design a theme park, not for people to get injured or worse, killed, by his “attractions” though. Novel Hammond’s goals were roughly the same, but it was accompanied with the desire to make a lot of money doing it and basically extorting the science involved to his advantage. This is different from the film counterpart of the character as Hammond was portrayed more congenially as a sympathetic dreamer with the best of intentions involved in with wanting everybody to enjoy his attractions. This personality is eventually carried over by Simon Masrani in Jurassic World itself with Henry Wu representing the ambiguous morality.
With all scientific experimentation and moral implications considered with InGen’s actions in bringing the dinosaurs back to life, the aim was always to create a theme park enjoyed by all. The only “evil” moment shown by InGen the films was in The Lost World: Jurassic Park, with Hammond’s nephew, Peter Ludlow. Ludlow wasn’t in the position of CEO long enough to enact any devious secret projects aside from the secret project of harvesting dinosaurs from Site B to open up and complete Jurassic Park: San Diego.
The questions of morality that InGen should be faced with in the eyes of the public were the following:
1. Is it right to clone an extinct ecosystem and sell it as a product?
2. Is it right to disrupt an established extinct ecosystem?
3. What about the welfare of the recreated animals as well as the welfare of the current animals and their ecosystem?
The “up to no good” suggestion is something purely in the eye of beholder in some respects. Often what one considers good or evil here is a matter and subject to people’s beliefs or feelings. As such, this concept is again explored in Jurassic World regarding the implications of making a hybrid such as the Indominus, but Masrani clearly wanted a new exciting attraction, while Wu was interested in expanding and pushing the limits of the science, simultaneously Hoskins was using the whole affair to push up the relevance of his branch of InGen where it is tied to the security units as well as military contracts and applications.
The Jurassic series of media tends to focus on the morality of resurrecting long extinct species through the miracle of bio-engineering along with pushing the limits of the science. Such morality observations are showcased through characters like Ian Malcolm, Alan Grant, and recently original characters such as Owen Grady. It does this to encompass a rich story that serves as a cautionary tale of man pushing the limits of science for less than noble purposes, trying to control nature, and even overcome nature themselves.