The Gang of Five
The forum will have some maintenance done in the next couple of months. We have also made a decision concerning AI art in the art section.


Please see this post for more details.

Sharpteeth

DarkHououmon

  • Member+
  • Littlefoot
  • *
    • Posts: 7203
    • View Profile
    • http://bluedramon.deviantart.com
This is something that's been on my mind for a while. Is there a reason to hate the sharpteeth of LBT? Is acting within their nature, instinct, reason enough to condemn them?

Some may say yes to that question. Me? Personally I'd say no. Sharpteeth aren't even villains; they don't have any alternate motive for killing other than surviving; they don't kill simply to cause misery and pain. Even Dil and Ichy, though they planned on getting Littlefoot and the others, were only motivated by hunger and nothing else.

Even the original Sharptooth I could never hate, even for killing Littlefoot's mother, because even the first Sharptooth acted mostly out of instinct. Sure he seemed to want revenge on Littlefoot, but we don't know how long this grudge lasted and how much of a role it played in him running into the kids later in the movie.

In my opinion, hating a sharptooth simply for acting within its own nature is like hating a disabled person for having the disorder that they do. They can't help having that disorder no more than a sharptooth can help being how they are.

I apologize if I upset anyone with this topic.


2007excalibur2007

  • Member+
  • Petrie
  • *
    • Posts: 710
    • View Profile
I fully agree with you. I too, think that there's no reason at all to hate the sharpteeth just for their natural instincts. I mean, it's not like they did it on purpose or something, because that's what "villains" would do. Personally I would consider them as antagonists rather than villains; except for LBT VII, in which Pterano, along with Rinkus and Sierra, are the only REAL villains because they had an actual evil plot (the only evil plot in the LBT series so far, lol :p).

Yeah I know, Pterano turned good at the end, so that doesn't really count him as a "villain", but hey, he's still the movie's antagonist. :p


Cancerian Tiger

  • Member+
  • Littlefoot
  • *
    • Posts: 6961
    • View Profile
I don't hate sharpteeth.  I think, in fact, that there are a lot of misconceptions about them among humankind.  T-Rex in particular has been shown in popular culture to be a swift-moving, homicidal terrorist of a beast.  Even in "Jurassic Park", when T-Rex killed Genaro after he/she destroyed the bathroom.  T-Rex would not just kill him for the hell of it if the movie had remained true to a T-Rex's nature.  If it was correct, he/she would've killed Genaro out of hunger AND ate him.  However, something I read a couple of years ago suggests that they were not built for speed like their raptor counterparts, and that they were possibly scavengers, picking off of dead things more than hunting 'cuz they could not catch prey so easily.

Early on, humans got the idea that dinosaurs were terrorizing warmongers (hence the name we've given them, dinosaur means "terrible lizard").  As time has gone by, though, we've learned that they were living, feeling creatures that lived rather peacefully, bred and raised hatchlings, and were not stupid in the slightest.  Especially raptors, which is why I find LBT's representation of raptors/fastbiters to be a bit ridiculous.  Raptors were almost as intellectual as humans in the sense that they knew how to problem-solve, utilize teamwork, develop hunting strategies, and in their own way communicate these things to each other.  I think their intelligence compensated for their small size as hunters.  If they were stupid, they'd get whacked easily by herbivores :rolleyes:.  

I'm not so nuts about sharpteeth, considering my favorite species is Triceratops, followed by Ducky's species.  However, I do have admiration for the intelligence and abilities of raptors, and I find it sad that that they are misrepresented in LBT the way they are.  I also wish LBT would represent the more scavenger-like behaviors of sharpteeth, but I think popular belief has viewers blinded to this possibility <_<.  I see no reason for a creature to be hated based on survival instinct.


Malte279

  • The Circle
  • The Gang of Five
  • *
    • Posts: 15608
    • View Profile
    • http://www.ineinemlandvorunsererzeit.de.vu
The point has been brought up in many threads already and my opinion on this is that they can hardly be referred to as "evil" while the wish to live is their only motivation as they just don't have the biological possibilities to live on green food. I do not see any particular nurturing of "hatred" towards sharpteeth in most movies and feel more at unease about the including of incredibly stupid and harmless sharpteeth such as the ones from LBT 8, 10, and every single one that came beyond number 10.
Where personal spite and revengefulness come in (as in case of Ichty and Dill) it feels a bit easier for me to consider them villains, but I agree that the need to eat is still at the core of it.
However, I also think that the LBT movies sometimes dodge the problem. We never see Chomper eating anything that is not anonymous, we never learned about how he came to be accepted in the Valley, and nobody seems to be concerned about what is to come when he grows up. Chomper's excuse from LBT 5 (longneck for breakfast) does strongly suggest however that he does not live on butterflies only. I know it is a delicate matter (no pun intended) but I still think it is kind of odd that (even though Littlefoot mentioned his mother for the first time since the original movie in LBT 5) we do never ever see any uneasiness on Littlefoot's part in spite of all that had happened.
One scene which I found difficult to swallow without further explanation (again no pun intended) was the execution of the sharpteeth at the end of LBT 6 to the cheers of the kids. The sharpteeth were burried alive when they were no longer posing an immediate thread. I guess with some explanation or with them dying in the fight (and for goodness sake without everyone cheering their suffocating) that scene would have been more tolerable.
Finally however I see also a "movement" quite contrary to demonizing sharpteeth but much more out to glorify them. Most people love something with big teeth and claws capable of fighting and killing a lot more than something without these. If there was a pol of favorite dinosaur kinds one could rest assured that sharpteeth and raptors would be very high in popularity, possibly even far in the lead before the closest runners up (which would most likely be threehorns or other well armed leafeaters); there is not much of a chance for species of a less lethal kind to be very high on the popularity list.


pokeplayer984

  • Member+
  • Littlefoot
  • *
    • Posts: 6993
    • View Profile
However, I think a number of people out there are forgetting something else about a predator's instinct.  This is a big importance because it says a lot.

In nature, what happens when a predator fails to catch it's prey and said prey escapes?  They go after a different prey and try again with that one.

This has to be addressed when looking at the sharpteeth that are mainly hated within the LBT universe.  A number of them all pursued the kids multiple times.  The kids got away and the predators pursued them, as if they were hunting for the enjoyment of catching this one prey.  This is the concept that turns a predatory character into a villain within the eyes of most of the audience.

It is the simple fact the sharpteeth pursued them even after they got away, when nature suggests that the predator would go after something else.

As for those that didn't pursue them?  I'm guessing these earlier ones are the cause of said hatred.  They were portrayed as the villain, and it's only natural to hate the villain.


Pangaea

  • Member+
  • Cera
  • *
    • Posts: 4434
  • Contemplator of Deep Time
    • View Profile
That’s true, pokeplayer, but another fact about carnivores is that they generally prefer to hunt prey that they can kill easily and quickly, with the least risk of injury to themselves. This translates to young, old, and weak animals being the preferred targets of most predators. (I know of one scientific paper that suggests that carnivorous dinosaurs mostly fed on young prey that they could swallow whole, thus explaining why the bones of juvenile dinosaurs, and evidence of attacks on large dinosaurs, are so rare in the fossil record.) Not only does the gang fit the bill for an (apparently) easy meal from most sharpteeth’s perspectives, but usually, when the gang is attacked by sharpteeth, they are in the Mysterious Beyond or some other place where there does not appear to be a great deal of alternative prey; therefore they become the easiest available prey by default.

Furthermore, despite what you might see on nature documentaries (though the statistic may sometimes be invoked by the narrator), most of the time a hunting predator fails to catch its intended victim. I’ve heard that the success rate for polar bears catching seals is 1 in 20, and something like 1 in 25 for tigers hunting deer. Things probably weren’t much different with dinosaurs; there are, in fact, a number of fossils of herbivores that were bitten by a predator, and not only escaped, but survived long enough to heal. In short, it’s not just natural, but necessary for predators to make repeated hunts.

Granted, most predators probably don’t concentrate their repeated efforts on the same prey each time, but I don’t think they usually bother to keep track of which animals they’ve stalked before. If, by coincidence, a leopard happens upon the same antelope it failed to catch on a previous hunt, there’s no reason for it to pass it up if it has a second chance at a successful kill. And in LBT, when the gang is often the only apparent prey in the vicinity (and generally not very good at remaining inconspicuous), situations like this are virtually guaranteed.

In the first movie, the gang is just about the only prey available for Sharptooth to hunt, and they are headed in the same direction as him (though Sharptooth’s motive is to follow the migrating leafeaters that are his food source), so it’s not surprising that their paths cross repeatedly.

In LBT II, Chomper’s parents presumably entered the Great Valley because they were searching for their son, and it’s likely that they attacked the gang because they happened to be in the way. Chomper’s mother’s confrontation with Grandpa Longneck is a bit of a mystery, since we didn’t see how it started. She may have seen him first, and attacked him on the assumption that he would be easy prey. However, considering that Littlefoot’s grandparents had heard the sharpteeth beforehand, I think it’s also possible that Grandpa Longneck attempted to drive Chomper’s mother off, leading her into the water to gain an advantage. (Or she might have run into him while he was on his way to warn the other adults, in which case wither or both hypotheses might be true.)

In LBT III, the raptor pack is faced with a choice of prey: a band of well-armed full-grown dinosaurs clearly intent on fighting them (Mutt’s father notwithstanding), or a group of fleeing youngsters accompanied by a lone adult Hypsilophodon. Later, when the adults are unconscious and utterly defenseless, the raptors clearly intend to eat them, completely ignoring the gang. Things get a little chaotic (with the raptors’ apparent choice of targets switching back and forth) after Hyp’s father joins the fray, Hyp basically invites the raptors to chase him, the adults wake up, and the gang starts pushing rocks down on the raptors, but ultimately the raptors appear to lose interest in the gang, and are advancing on the adults at the time the dam breaks.

Chomper himself says in LBT V that there isn’t much to eat on his island, so it’s not much of a surprise that the Giganotosaurus chooses to go after the gang. (His attack, furthermore, is really just one prolonged chase, and he probably would have succeeded in catching the gang had it not been for Chomper’s parents’ intervention.)

While the LBT VI Allosaurus did not come off as an especially competent hunter, getting his head stuck between two trees, making a point of waiting until every member of the gang (even an uncharacteristically oblivious Cera) notices him before attacking, and missing Spike and Littlefoot by a mile to take a bite out of a log and send himself plummeting into a canyon, there again isn’t much indication that he has a lot of prey to choose from. And when he wakes up from his fall to find a small longneck inside his mouth, is it any surprise that that’s what he chooses to go after? Later, both the Allosaurus and the T. rex who unexpectedly shows up concentrate their predaceous efforts on Grandpa Longneck, paying no attention to (or possibly not noticing) the kids gathered rather conspicuously nearby.

The repeated attacks of the LBT VIII sharptooth can probably again be justified by the fact that it didn’t have a lot of prey options, and four young leafeaters with an elderly Pachyrhinosaurus appeared to be an easy target. (The nearest alternative that we know of was the spiketail herd, whose members were predominantly fully grown and probably accustomed to encounters with sharpteeth.)

The Liopleurodon in LBT IX seemingly tracked the gang down for a second attempt at catching them after it failed the first time, but again I don’t think it was doing this out of villainy. The first time it attacked them, it was in a landlocked pool where the only available prey was a single, similarly trapped ichthyosaur: probably not optimal living conditions from a giant seagoing predator’s perspective. Even though Mo was right there at the time of the attack, he was a less substantial meal (probably harder to catch as well) than the five Liopleurodon-naÔve locals waiting within grabbing distance at the water’s edge. Later, after escaping from the cave the earthshake had trapped it in, the Liopleurodon would have found that there was no prey in the pool at all (apart from several inconsequentially small fish), and, like any animal that finds itself in a territory lacking in sufficient food, moved on to find more, leaving through the same outlet which Mo and the gang had taken. Considering that there were implied to be multiple streams that could have potentially led to the Big Water (the gang’s reason for sending Petrie ahead to scout), but the Liopleurodon still ended up at the same spot as the gang, it’s not impossible that it was following them (probably by scent). However, it’s likely that it was specifically tracking Mo, who, having also come from the Big Water, would have provided a familiar scent that the Liopleurodon would have been naturally inclined to follow. I think the second attack was a case of the gang simply being in the wrong place at the wrong time. And judging from Mo’s story afterwards, after the Liopleurodon lost track of him, it completely forgot about food once it smelled its home close by.

Most of the sharpteeth that appeared beyond LBT IX suffered too much from “incompetent predator syndrome” to come off as villains OR realistic predators, in my opinion. The LBT X sharpteeth were embarrassingly bad hunters, to say the least, and demonstrated no teamwork to speak of (each going after a different adult longneck rather than ganging up on a single individual). They were at least smart enough to limit their attacks to a few scattered longnecks and several young dinosaurs, rather than go after the massive conglomerate herd in the crater, but even after all of them had taken more tumbles and pratfalls than The Three Stooges in a floor wax factory, they still tried to chase Bron up the slope (until they were frightened off by the eclipse :slap).

The two raptors in LBT XI seemed to be very prone to distraction and poor judgment (namely, attacking Mr. Threehorn head-on :bang), as well as the disconcertingly common LBT predator handicap of taking forever to strike at times. :rolleyes Again, however, I din’t think they were so much villainous as suicidally hungry. :p

While the LBT XII Spinosaurus seems to have forgotten that essential step in the feeding processóswallowingóhe does seem to follow the predatory convention of attacking the most convenient and nutritionally rewarding prey. As soon as he notices Spike, Cera, Littlefoot, and Ducky, he loses interest in the much less substantial meal offered by Petrie and Guido. Even when the two attempt to distract him, he only momentarily snaps at them, and then, after they fly out of range, continues chasing the others. Actually he is probably most unrealistic in the amount of time he spends pursuing the gang, probably burning at least as many calories as he would gain from eating them.

Finally, the four Baryonyx in LBT XIII may have been unusually persistent in pursuing their intended prey, but considering the identity of the prey in question, it could be argued that they were pursuing the Holy Grail of easy meals. :p

In my opinion, Red Claw (and by extension, Screech and Thud) is the only sharptooth in the series who could potentially be considered a villain. Judging from Ruby’s story in “The Meadow of Jumping Waters”, in which she states that Red Claw was trying to stop her and Chomper from reaching the Great Valley, it appears that he may be specifically after the gang (perhaps mainly Ruby and/or Chomper) for some reason. In at least two episodes he has made a deliberate attempt to break into the Great Valley, despite the fact that he probably wouldn’t last long there before being driven out. Unfortunately, we know so little of his backstory that it is hard to say what his motives are.



Pronounced "pan-JEE-uh". Spelled with three A's. Represented by a Lystrosaurus.


Ptyra

  • Member+
  • Cera
  • *
    • Posts: 3183
    • View Profile
    • http://z8.invisionfree.com/The_Valley/index.php?
The part about the Baryonyx that I found interesting was that Baryonyx were fish eaters and scavengers. My boyfriend was like "Well, they couldn't be Baryonyx because their jaws were very narrow" (or something like that.) I said "John, they drew Bipeisaurus like THAT. Do you think they'd really care about the way Baryonyx looks?"

My boyfriend also kept repeating that the kids were the only prey around, which might explain why the sharpteeth kept repeating their attacks.

And I QUOTE the original Dinotopia book: "Tyrannosaurus red is not evil. Only hungry by nature, with no love for society, and no stomach for green food." Ah ha ha. That sums up about half of it.


landbeforetimelover

  • Member+
  • Littlefoot
  • *
    • Posts: 8495
  • Littlefoot
    • View Profile
    • http://www.thelandbeforetime.org
That's like saying that it's not okay to hate and be angry at someone who kills someone you love.  People who kill are usually psychopathic.  In a sense, it is in their "nature" to kill and be violent.  It doesn't matter what the reason for killing was.  The individual is dead.  Psychopathic people kill because they have to.  It's in their nature.  The same goes for sharpteeth.  I will always HATE sharpteeth.  Murder is murder, no matter what the motive is.


Cancerian Tiger

  • Member+
  • Littlefoot
  • *
    • Posts: 6961
    • View Profile
But, there is a difference.  Psychopathic disorders, seen in humans, is a psychiatric condition.  In the case of sharpteeth, they simply kill based on instinct for food.  Sharpteeth were not homicidal psychopaths like some humans are.  They did not decide to be born as carnivores.  It is how they were designed, and they would cease to exist if they did not consume sources of meat for their sustainability.  Psychopaths don't kill for a food source, and they don't kill because they HAVE to.  They kill 'cuz they're pissed off at somebody or some circumstance, and they kill out of impulse, not instinct.  

Humans are on a MUCH higher level of thinking than even raptors were, and they eat other sources of food besides solely meat and animal products, so for humans, it is a choice to kill.  With carnivores, it's life or death.


landbeforetimelover

  • Member+
  • Littlefoot
  • *
    • Posts: 8495
  • Littlefoot
    • View Profile
    • http://www.thelandbeforetime.org
^^^There are a lot of psychologists that would disagree with you on that.  Some people just have to kill.  And they were born that way too.  They're not "evil" either.  Just screwed up.  But that doesn't mean that you can't hate them for what they did.


Malte279

  • The Circle
  • The Gang of Five
  • *
    • Posts: 15608
    • View Profile
    • http://www.ineinemlandvorunsererzeit.de.vu
A psychopath would not die if not given the chance to kill. In case of the Sharpteeth it is a matter of survival which it is not in case of a psychopath.
I am not out to glorify sharpteeth but personally I do not have a problem seeing them as antagonists by natures design rather than vicousness. To anyone who is chosen for the next meal they would certainly come across as enemies and possibly villains as it is really not an easy task to warm up to someone who wants to kill and eat you even if the someone does it for the own survival.


Saft

  • Ducky
  • *
    • Posts: 1421
    • View Profile
Quote
Psychopathic people kill because they have to. It's in their nature. The same goes for sharpteeth. I will always HATE sharpteeth. Murder is murder, no matter what the motive is.

 :blink:
Are you suggesting that those psychopath humans who kill because they are ingrained to kill are doing it because they are carnivourous too?

A sharpteeth's diet is carnivourous. It's not murder.  They kill for food that's the only motive if you have to have a motive.  When people kill, it is murder.  They don't kill for food, they kill for the malicous pleasure of killing and having power that's motive (if you are talking about pyschopaths).  


Anwyay I was interested in reading Pangaea's post.  Lots of good points there.:)

I haven't seen the LBT television series so I can't comment on Red Claw but the movie sharpteeth seem to just be doing what nature intended them to be.  Of course when you are little you don't really think like that...you just perceive them as the villains but sharpteeth are designed to hunt and kill for food and if prey makes up the gang then it's the reason for why the sharpteeth go after them.  It's not their fault and they aren't doing it maliciously.  

It's nature.  Not a good example of this but not long ago people believe (and still believe among the uneducated) that sharks were malicious killing machines.  No, that's not so.  They hunt for prey. They have no motive with the exception of food.  They aren't killing machines that are malicious inclined.  And interestingly enough, they don't actually intentionally hunt humans.  They hunt seals.  Humans don't have the blubber (yum;)), humans are too boney.  Hence why there are very few fatal shark attacks in the world, most shark attacks are non fatal with the shark abandoning the person after the first attack. (sorry a bit off topic there :oops ).

In conclusion, I don't think the sharpteeth are malicious and evil.  They do what nature intended them to do and that was hunt for prey. Unless you are willing to question nature? :neutral





Littlefoot1616

  • The Circle
  • Cera
  • *
    • Posts: 3883
  • The game is on; so let's play!
    • View Profile
The act of killing for sustenence in an effort to survive in an unestablished social environment (i.e the wild) is not deemed as an act of evil. It has been programmed into the human mind by many accounts and methods that the act of killing is a sin so it is easy to perceive those who actually kill (by any account; even for survival) as the bad guys. Carnivorous animals hunt live prey in order to survive due to how their bodies are adapted to life in their given area. If all animals where herbivorous, all plant material would be consumed then death would still ensue by other means via starvation or fights and battles for whatever little food would be left that could be discovered. Kind of a catch 22. Food chains are delicate systems in where producers (plants), herbivores and carnivores all keep each other in check in terms of numbers (sort of a loose rock, paper scissors affair). This is early high school biology class stuff.

Anyway, to the point of topic, sharpteeth are perceived by the audience as the bad guys because they are the opposing force to the key focal characters. That's all. It's all swings and roundabouts. There are always two sides to a conflict and one side is the enemy to the other (in varying degrees depending on the situation). It all depends on which side you are viewing the situation from. If LBT was based on sharpteeth, I'm sure the herbivores would be seen moreso as dumb animals simply there to bridge the idea gap that if you never saw the characters eat, viewers would question how they are suriviving. A stupid example (but to illustrate the point of perspective) what if LBT was based on the life of the plants? Wouldn't that then make the herbivores the enemy because they are eating the plants?! Because LBT is focused on herbivorous dinosaurs, it's easy to associate the fact that anything that DOESN'T eat plant material is a bad guy. Of course the introduction of Chomper highlights shades of grey but techincally, even Chomper is killing to gain sustenence for his own survival by eating bugs. Is he not taking the lives of the insects he is ingesting? I see the sharpteeth in LBT as enemies but that doesn't make them evil. They don't kill for pleasure. They do not invoke the notion of murder. They are just there to emphasis the struggle for survival. If the movies were just based on watching the LBT cast eat and sleep for an hour and a half, I doubt it would make a very appealing movie. :DD


Duckyfan

  • Chomper
  • *
    • Posts: 93
    • View Profile
you are right sharpteeth are not villans,they are just meat eaters and the only other meat to eat are other dinosuars  :anger RARRRRRRR lol