Should LBT make Sharpteeth look better?

[LittlefootAndAliTogether]

I'm going to admit, one of the reasons why, other than the cool plot for LBT 7, and Petrie's uncle, is that it has actual non-reforming Flattooth villains in it (I still believe that Rinkus and Sierra are Leaf Eaters.  Others, Hyp for instance, have had teeth too.)  

I guess maybe it's my falling in love with Chomper that made me do this, but I think that Sharpteeth should be portrayed better in future releases.  

[DarkHououmon]

I'm going to admit, one of the reasons why, other than the cool plot for LBT 7, and Petrie's uncle, is that it has actual non-reforming Flattooth villains in it (I still believe that Rinkus and Sierra are Leaf Eaters. Others, Hyp for instance, have had teeth too.)

I have very little reason to think that Rinkus and Sierra are flatteeth.

Also, having teeth isn't proof enough of being a leafeater. I believe I recall saying this before, but the shape of the tooth matters. In general, leafeaters will have rounded, flat teeth, like what Littlefoot and his friends typicallly have, which is good for grinding food. Meateaters will have pointed teeth, good for tearing up prey. There are some exceptions to this rule, but in LBT, that's usually how it goes.

The other problem with the "Sierra and Rinkus are flatteeth" is that, well, we've seen teeth in the flyers before, like when Petrie's teeth chatter in LBT4, and I am pretty sure they were flat. But Rinkus and Sierra's are sharp. If they are intended to be flatteeth, then why would they possess sharp teeth when other flyers (like Petrie) have flat teeth?

[LittlefootAndAliTogether]

My biggest argument: Why would Pterano be hanging around them if they were Sharpteeth?  There's that.   (Knowing how nuts Sierra can be, Pterano would have to be blind not to see that he could end up being eaten by that guy.)

What seems most in your favor though of the argument that they aren't Flatteeth are Sierra's attempts to attack Ducky with his beak, which seems weird for a Flattooth.  

Unless Rinkus and Sierra are omnivores.  Then his teeth would e sharper than a Leaf Eater's but not bad enough to freak Pterano out.  

Anyway, it's not states what their type is so it's certainly possible that they are, at least in LBT universe, Leaf Eaters who just happen to have weird shaped teeth and extra pointy talons.

We've never seen Rinkus and Sierra's species before this though.  

[LittlefootAndAliTogether]

Well, there is this type of dino that was a Flattooth yet had pointy teeth:  http://landbeforetime.wikia.com/wiki/Heterodontosaurus

Also, what stinker voted that last one?  

[DarkHououmon]

Also, what stinker voted that last one?

What point is having the choice up if no one is allowed to check it? If you really didn't want anyone checking an option about Chomper going bad, you had the choice of excluding that choice entirely.

As for heterodontosaurus, yes, it is true that some herbivores have sharp teeth, but there's a bit more to the story than that. Heterodontosaurus may have a pair of sharp teeth, but it also has molars in the back, which is something you'd find in chewing animals. In dinosaurs, it is the herbivores that have these. Therapods (the meat eaters) lack them.

If Rinkus and Sierra were intended to be leafeaters, they would not have been given nothing but sharp, pointed teeth in their mouths. They would have been given the molars present in Petrie. The creators of the movie transformed Petrie's kind into leafeaters and they gave him molars to back it up, but this detail is left out of Rinkus and Sierra. They cannot eat leaves that well with teeth like that. Sharp, pointed teeth aren't good for munching on leaves.

[Malte279]

I think Sharpteeth have been watered down too much in LBT already. I'm not refering to Chomper here, but to the fact that compared to the original Sharptooth I really don't think on can feel much of sense of threat or danger from Sharpteeth that can be defeated by little kids  tripping them by crawling under their feet (as Shorty did in LBT 10), hurling little pebbles at them (same movie), which leave no mark whatsoever when actually biting someone (Bron in the same movie), who are getting tickled into submission (LBT 11) even by someone already in their mouth (LBT 12) or are falling victim to dinosaurs causing rockslides by hopping around (LBT 13).
If LBT goes down that road any further it will seriously take away some of what makes the stories exciting. I think Sharpteeth as opponents should be depicted like a force of nature. They are not "evil" for wanting to live and following nature's design, but same as a force of nature they should be taken serious and not be degraded to mere entertainment for leafeater kids.

PS: And yes, if you add that option, people may pick it without being called "stinker" for it and if you didn't add that option it would hurt the objectivity of this thread. However, I could well imagine someone may have picked the option with a degree of snide against you, because your inability to stand the opinions of others (which you just demonstrated once again) is a red rag to some people here

[Ducky123]

Greetings from the "stinker"  <_<  By allowing such options you ask for people to vote for them just to point out they're pointless or unneccessary.  

[DarkHououmon]

To add to my post earlier, I'll explain a bit more about the molar thing. I had wanted to write about this last night, but I was too tired.

Anyway, while dinosaurs don't have, far as I know, any full carnivores that have both pointed teeth and molars, it is true that in mammals, we do have those. And yes, some herbivores will have sharp teeth. But if you look carefully at the teeth as a whole, you'll have a better idea of what they ate.

Here is a skull of a wolf, a carnivore: http://www.boneclones.com/images/bc-020a-lg.jpg

Here is a skull of a muntjac deer, a herbivore: https://www.boneroom.com/img/idPics/2810_1large.jpg

Here is a skull of a grizzly bear, an omnivore: https://www.boneroom.com/img/idPics/2611_1large.jpg

And here is a skull of heterodontosaurus, classified as an herbivore: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm...derate_gape.jpg

You'll notice how heterodontosaurus's skull is more like the skull of the muntjac deer, an herbivore.

You'll also notice that, despite all of them having sharp teeth, they each have different diets, and you can see that reflected in the back teeth. Notice how the wolf has mostly pointed teeth and very few molars, and the molars it does have are greatly serrated. This is ideal for tearing off meat. The wolf doesn't worry about chewing its food. It bites, swallows, repeats.

The muntjac deer, on the other hand, has many molars and while they do have a pointiness to them, it's subdued compared to the teeth of the wolf, and they are flatter. This helps with crushing and munching tough plants in its jaws.

Finally, the bear. Its teeth are a mix between the two. It has sharp canines perfect for tearing into flesh, but it has more molars than the wolf, less than the deer. A couple of them are flatter for grinding plants, but a couple of them are slightly more serrated. Not to the same degree as the wolf, but enough that it could use those teeth to help rip off flesh.

Now it is true that Rinkus and Sierra could still eat plant material while having nothing but sharp teeth, since I believe that's what they believe troodon did (https://qilong.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/zanabazar-junior-skull-med.jpg) , but it wouldn't be their main diet. Having nothing but pointed teeth is not good if you're going to be living off of nothing but plants for all your life. You need something to help pulverize the plants. Rinkus and Sierra could be omnivorous, but they probably aren't leafeaters.

I do hope that clears up any confusion regarding the teeth.

You can continue believing they are leafeaters if you want, but don't expect others to agree with you.

[fanciful_flyer]

I wouldn't be averse to sharpteeth being portrayed better, except that...well, it'd have to be done believably.
Chomper, imo, is believable because he's young, he was hatched and raised by Littlefoot and the others for at least a little while, so the first experiences he ever had on earth were with leaf-eaters, and mostly positive, at that.
Grown sharpteeth? Not sure.
I'm positive that it could be done, and done well, if they just put their backs into brainstorming a way to do it without it seeming ridiculous or cheesy...
The episode that came kinda close which I enjoyed was "Escape From The Mysterious Beyond," (at least I think that was the name of it.) Thud didn't become "good," but he did let Chomper and his friends off the hook because Chomper set him free. At least, that's how I interpreted it. So far, that's about as far as I'd dare take sharpteeth being portrayed in a better light.
It'd be interesting if there were actually villainous sharpteeth that had a motive other than trying to get a meal, but I guess maybe that would make them seem too human? 'Course, it is a fictional world here. Anything goes, kinda.

As far as Rinkus and Sierra having sharp teeth, it's always kinda puzzled me, too.
Personally, I think they probably just ate fish. It's not a plant, and yet again it's not as though they're attacking and eating longnecks or threehorns or other fliers (wait, is it "fliers" or "flyers"?)
The sharp teeth would make sense for that, but not, I'm afraid, for eating plants.
Can't explain Petrie eating plants - I thought all pterosaurs ate fish. But again, we're not entirely in reality.  

[Ducky123]

Yeah, Rinkus and Sierra are clearly no leafeaters (Pterano, Petrie and the rest of his family shouldn't be either but they are as you pointed out ). Their sharp teeth indicate that they are eating flesh of some sort. Fish is the most likely source of food. I also think they eat carrion sometimes or small mammals though that impression might be influenced by a fanfiction I've been reading