Feature films about insects

Your expression "still good" is inappropriate here, since the above - mentioned films from an entomological point of view are all trash and fumes.

Any feature film will not be scientific. I'm also interested in documentaries, this one is very interesting http://www.fast-torrent.ru/film/zhivoj-mir...-shershnej.html with rare shots, just like this one http://www.fast-torrent.ru/film/bolshe-chem-myod.html he raises a very important topic about the decline in the bee population. By the way, is there a topic on the forum that raises this question?

There is a good movie about giant spiders.

Artistic? I saw one about giant spiders, but it wasn't very high-quality, it was cheap. But I really want to watch a documentary about big spiders, tell me the name if you know.

This one I tried to watch, funny))
Is there a topic on this forum where they throw off links to documentaries? There are probably not many interesting feature films on this topic.

Usually they draw all sorts of freaks, for example, with four chelicerae and a sting in the ass (you know what kind of movie it is).

No, I didn't see such a movie (and well!), but I meant "The Lord of the Rings" .

Well, "The Lord of the Rings" is a fairy tale) And "Jurassic Park" I really love, really very original and quite realistic idea of recreating dinosaurs.

And the frame from above is like from the film adaptation of the work of Staiven King "Mist", there were creepy insect-like creatures from a parallel world. Including the ones with the size of a skyscraper. The film is very atmospheric and creepy, and the ending is simply dark, very tough.
Recently, we started broadcasting a series based on the same work, it seems not very successful, look at the ratings TV series Mist but I recommend watching the film only if you are not afraid to darken your mood.

This post was edited by librusek - 02.08.2017 15: 44

Who has read the work of fiction "Ants" by Bernard Werber? They say och is a decent book, but I don't know the details about it, it seems to be about the ant community.

Good movies

.. And I love Jurassic Park very much, it's really a very original and quite realistic idea of recreating dinosaurs...

Are you sure about that?" So, the idea only seems original and only for the layman, infinitely far from paleontology.
Even the mammoth cannot be cloned due to the lack of suitable DNA. But this is only 10-12 thousand years. But even the most" young " amber like the Dominican amber is at least 15 million years old, while the Baltic or Rovno amber is already at least 30-40 million years old.
So it turns out that inside the amber of any (!) age there is no active DNA or proteins. There's not even an insect there, just the charred remains of a calf, and all you can see is the outer print. So nothing can be extracted from there...
In addition, blood-sucking mosquitoes appeared on Earth when the dinosaurs were already extinct. So, even if there was blood in the intestines of "amber" mosquitoes, it would not be dinosaurs.
Finally, blood is unsuitable for DNA extraction because its main blood cells-red blood cells-do not have a nucleus and, accordingly, do not carry genetic information. Just their role in something else.
Therefore, "Jurassic Park" is also a fairy tale, which has the same relation to reality as the flat Earth on elephants, whales and turtles.
Sorry if I disappointed you.

Molbiologists and criminologists will be very surprised... On the forum, by the way, there was a topic about human blood from mosquitoes. Not single red blood cells...

The English-speaking Pedivikia believes that the culicids did catch the dinosaurs.

I agree on the rest of the points, but still the fantastic resurrection of dinosaurs in the" Park " looks much more scientific and realistic than almost any Hollywood (and not only) film with insects or spiders.

Well, they'll be surprised, so what? Moreover, when analyzing blood, criminologists work mainly with serology, while DNA is obtained from mucosal cells, etc. This is easier and more reliable than driving it out of the lymphocytes.
It's true, but you have to look at the root of it. Of the approximately 25-27 known mosquito species that "caught" dinosaurs (i.e., those dating from the Jurassic-Cretaceous), the vast majority were short-nosed vegetarians. By the way, even now there are a lot of vegetarians in this family. Including, and the most "elderly" of the known - Burmaculex antiquus age of about 80 million years (i.e., when the dinosaurs were almost at an end), had a short proboscis. If there were bloodsuckers among the Jurassic mosquito-like culicids, they most likely cohabited with some small milks like multituberculates. In general, the evolution of culicids is associated with the evolution of warm-blooded animals (milks and birds), but not reptiles.
As for the "resurrection" of dinosaurs in the "Park", it is especially touching when a male anopheles sticks in the resin, and the blood is taken with a needle inserted into the back end of the abdomen (i.e., where it should already be digested) also male, but tipulid.
As the saying goes, people get better...

Dinosaurs, or at least theropods, were closer to birds than to reptiles, and most likely warm-blooded. But even modern cold-blooded reptiles are quite bitten by mosquitoes, in particular crocodiles suffer very much from them, I saw in the documentary. Mark it in the eye area. That's who and how the blood was taken in the movie at the very beginning, I do not remember. But, of course, getting blood out of amber is pure cinematic deception, like jumping over a blown-up bridge bus or catching a parachute in free fall. But the rest of the film looks quite realistic. With the appearance of velociraptor/deinonychus, however, they lied a little (the real one, most likely, was in feathers or down), but we'll put it down to frog genes. If you take absolutely any feature film with the participation of insects or spiders, then there is completely deception on deception and deception drives. It seems that the creators did not even bother to read a general article from Pedivikia about the subject, but were guided solely by their own narcotic hallucinations.

This post was edited by ENO-08.08.2017 13: 34

Dinosaurs, or at least theropods, were closer to birds than to reptiles, and most likely warm-blooded. But even modern cold-blooded reptiles are quite bitten by mosquitoes, in particular crocodiles suffer very much from them, I saw in the documentary. Mark it in the eye area. That's who and how the blood was taken in the movie at the very beginning, I do not remember. But, of course, getting blood out of amber is pure cinematic deception, like jumping over a blown-up bridge bus or catching a parachute in free fall. But the rest of the film looks quite realistic. With the appearance of velociraptor/deinonychus, however, they lied a little (the real one, most likely, was in feathers or down), but we'll put it down to frog genes. If you take absolutely any feature film with the participation of insects or spiders, then there is completely deception on deception and deception drives. It seems that the creators did not even bother to read a general article from Pedivikia about the subject, but were guided solely by their own narcotic hallucinations.

Yes, there were, presumably, warm-blooded and feathered, but not all of them. As for suffering crocodiles, suckers are mostly attracted to "tears", not blood.
By the way, in the" Park " with deinonychus, the problem came out. In fact, this feathered animal was at most waist-high at the withers. That's probably why they call it a velociraptor, which was somewhere up to a man's shoulder. True, but it lived on the territory of modern Mongolia and was distinguished by an elongated crocodile head. Oh well, who knows?
But dilophosaurus there, on the contrary, and the growth did not come out, although in reality it was almost 3 meters high. And the hood flared up like a cloaked lizard, although there is no evidence of its presence. Finally, for some reason, he spat "poisonous" saliva. In short, passion-mordasti, although a complete mess.
But the special effects in the Park are really impressive. Not like the early lizards at One million years B.C., where you could only look at Raquel Welch in a hide bikini. Well, it's better not to think about Godzil in the Japanese version at all.
So it is with hypertrophied arthropods. Banal exploitation of human phobias. People like to shiver in the dark of the cinema hall. And smart books to read somehow does not come to mind. Otherwise, they would have realized that with the current humidity and oxygen concentration, such" creatures " with their passive gas exchange would not last even a couple of minutes-they would simply suffocate.

You're confusing something: velociraptors were small, deinonychus was bigger, just like in the movie. It is explained that velociraptrom in the book, which, it turns out, is the basis of this kin, is called deinonychus, because some taxonomist was reducing it at that time. Here's the famous claw, they say, not so they wielded-stabbed, not cut. But, in general, reconstructing the appearance of fossil vertebrates is more than half a fantasy. So it is quite possible to get away as if dilophosaurus was also hooded and venomous, but neither one nor the other has been preserved. Poison is generally a dark thing, until recently, who would have thought that monitor lizards have it? Well, the small size is explained quite simply: they didn't have time to grow up.

As for the limitations of the size of insects, the question is very complex and ambiguous. Scorpions and spiders whose oxygen is carried by the hemolymph have almost exactly the same "ceiling" as insects with their tracheae. And the palm thief, who is generally new to breathing atmospheric air and uses gills in the old-fashioned way, is several times larger. So it's definitely not the respiratory system. Personally, I hold the hypothesis that the main restriction is molting, and, first of all, molting in the world of hostile vertebrates. By the time a hypothetical insect the size of a dog would have solidified after molting, which would probably take two weeks, it would have already been eaten a hundred times. And even in the absence of predators, it would be very risky for such a giant to molt at Earth's gravity. It is much more promising for modern insects to be small; with such a "standard size", much more favorable ecological niches open up for them. And those where a large size is preferred are firmly occupied by vertebrates.

I confess that I confused velociraptor with Austroraptor or Utaraptor. But here's the fact that deinonychus was waist - deep to a person, and not like in the movie-that's for sure.
With dilophosaurus, it doesn't work - it didn't have the right bony processes of the cervical vertebrae to support the hood. As for monitor lizards, they still do not spit poison.

Well, it depends in what position. A brown bear in its usual manner of movement will also be waist-deep to a person. As far as I remember in the movie "velociraptors" to look into a person's eyes (before eating, of course), they were not weak, but on the run they were much lower than him, b. m. corresponding to this picture (only without feathers):



Although, maybe I didn't remember it well, I watched it for a long time.

And about the miracle-spitting monitor lizards, you should have mentioned in vain: suddenly, some movie director wanders in and steals the idea for another horror story With ordinary, but hefty scary monitor lizards already had something, they will do it with spitting ones .

This post was edited by ENO-08.08.2017 19: 16