Dinosaurs Had Cancer, Too, According to a Staggering New Study
Here's what you'll learn when you read this story:
Over the years, scientists have found examples of cancerous tumors within the fossilized bones of ancient dinosaurs.
A new study analyzes the fossil of the duck-billed hadrosaurid Telmatosaurus transsylvanicus and found proteins that help pinpoint molecular marks of disease in ancient species.
This animal's particular cancer—a benign tumor of the jaw called ameloblastoma—also impacts humans, so scientists are exploring whether understanding the disease in its ancient context could lead to novel therapies in our current epoch.
Whether depicted in textbooks or Hollywood films, dinosaurs are often portrayed as powerful beings with sharp jaws, thick hides, and indomitable strength. But just like us, it turns out, dinosaurs were susceptible to a variety of illnesses, diseases, and cancers.
Over the years, scientists have actually discovered cancerous tumors clinging to fossilized bone, giving us insight into the ancient life of this deadly malady. In 2016, a team of U.S. and Romanian scientists announced the discovery of a tumorous fossil belonging to a 70-million-year-old duck-billed hadrosaurid (Telmatosaurus transsylvanicus) that once roamed the Hateg Basin in present-day Romania.
Finding tumors along with dinosaur fossils is relatively rare, and cancer specialists at Imperial College London and Anglia Ruskin University (ARU) in the U.K. had different interests in this particular specimen.
'We wanted to see if this tumor in the dinosaur could give us any information about any parallel with human cancers,' Biancastella Cereser, a co-author of the study from Imperial College London, told The Independent, 'because the tumor that this dinosaur had was an ameloblastoma, a benign tumor in the jaw, which humans have as well.'
The results of their inquiry, published in the journal Biology, found that using advanced techniques like scanning electron microscopy (SEM) could recover structures resembling red blood cells, proving that soft tissues and cellular components are more common in fossils than previously believed. And before any Jurassic Park fans ask, that does not include DNA.
'Jurassic Park isn't right, because what they said is dinosaur DNA could be recovered and cloned to resurrect dinosaurs, but we can't get DNA out of this because it's broken down by weathering and time,' Justin Stebbing from ARU told The Independent.
Luckily, proteins found in calcified tissues are much more stable, and provide the perfect opportunity for studying the ancient history of cancers that inflict us today. By analyzing how cancers impacted extinct species, the authors hypothesize that they might be able to uncover new methods of cancer suppression.
'Dinosaurs, as long-lived, large-bodied organisms, present a compelling case for investigating how species managed cancer susceptibility and resistance over millions of years,' the authors wrote. 'The identification of tumors, such as the ameloblastoma in Telmatosaurus transsylvanicus, suggests that cancer was not an anomaly but a recurring biological challenge in prehistoric ecosystems.'
The researchers are also stressing the importance of preserving specimens for molecular investigations like this. They hope that the information hidden in the fossils of these long-dead animals can now help protect the lifeforms that inherited the planet these dinos once called home.
'Our research, using relatively underused methods, invites further exploration that could hold the key to future discoveries that could benefit humans,' Stebbing said in a press statement. 'It is crucial that long-term fossil conservation efforts are co-ordinated to ensure that future researchers have access to specimens suitable for cutting-edge molecular investigations.'
You Might Also Like
The Do's and Don'ts of Using Painter's Tape
The Best Portable BBQ Grills for Cooking Anywhere
Can a Smart Watch Prolong Your Life?
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scientific American
5 days ago
- Scientific American
This Company Claimed to ‘De-extinct' Dire Wolves. Then the Fighting Started
For months, researchers in a laboratory in Dallas, Texas, worked in secrecy, culturing grey-wolf blood cells and altering the DNA within. The scientists then plucked nuclei from these gene-edited cells and injected them into egg cells from a domestic dog to form clones. They transferred dozens of the cloned embryos into the wombs of surrogate dogs, eventually bringing into the world three animals of a type that had never been seen before. Two males named Romulus and Remus were born in October 2024, and a female, Khaleesi, was born in January. A few months later, Colossal Biosciences, the Texas-based company that produced the creatures, declared: 'The first de-extinct animals are here.' Of 20 edits made to the animals' genomes, the company says that 15 match sequences identified in dire wolves (Aenocyon dirus), a large-bodied wolf species that last roamed North America during the ice age that ended some 11,500 years ago. On supporting science journalism If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today. The company's announcement of the pups in April, which described them as dire wolves, set off a media maelstrom. The ensuing debates over the nature of the animals — and the advisability of doing such work — have opened a chasm between Colossal's team and other scientists. 'I don't think they de-extincted anything,' says Jeanne Loring, a stem-cell biologist at the Scripps Research Institute in La Jolla, California. She and many others say that the hype surrounding Colossal's announcement has the potential to confuse the public about what de-extinction technologies can achieve. Colossal, meanwhile, has taken an increasingly combative tone in addressing criticisms, issuing rapid rebuttals to researchers and conservationists who have publicly questioned the company's work. The firm has also been accused of taking part in a campaign to undermine the credibility of some critics. The company denies having played any part in this. Colossal stands by its claims and insists that it is listening to dissenters and seeking advice from them. 'We have had this attitude of running towards critics, not away,' says Ben Lamm, a technology entrepreneur and co-founder of the company. Colossal ambitions De-extinction is an emerging field that represents the meeting point of several groundbreaking biotechnologies: ancient genomics, cloning and genome editing, ostensibly in the service of conservation. The field has roots in science fiction, with the term seeming first to have appeared in a 1979 novel by Piers Anthony called The Source of Magic. And Michael Crichton's 1990 novel Jurassic Park — itself inspired by ancient-DNA investigations — popularized the possibility that long-dead organisms could be cloned from preserved DNA. There has never been perfect agreement on what counts as de-extinction — such as whether it means cloning exact replicas of extinct species, creating proxies that fulfil their roles in ecosystems, or something in between. Some count the birth of a cloned bucardo (Capra pyrenaica pyrenaica), a type of wild goat, as a first example. The animal's genome was transferred into goat (Capra hircus) egg cells from frozen cell samples taken from one of the last living bucardo specimens in 2000. (The resulting creature died within minutes of birth.) But this pathway to de-extinction isn't an option for most species. DNA degrades over time, and without a sample of carefully preserved DNA, researchers would have to engineer the whole genome. The advent of CRISPR–Cas9 genome editing in 2012 provided another option. Researchers can identify genetic variants that contribute to key traits of extinct animals and edit these variants into cells of living relatives. They can then use that manipulated DNA to create a new animal through cloning. Plans to bring back animals such as the passenger pigeon (Ectopistes migratorius) and the woolly mammoth (Mammuthus primigenius) began to flourish. Even though there was interest among researchers and the public, funding was an issue. 'We had been unable to get really any philanthropic interest in de-extinction,' says Ben Novak, who leads a passenger-pigeon de-extinction effort at the non-profit organization Revive & Restore in Sausalito, California. But in 2021, geneticist George Church at Harvard Medical School in Boston, Massachusetts, who was working with Revive & Restore, caught a break. He teamed up with Lamm to launch Colossal Biosciences with US$15 million in funding, much of which came from venture capitalists. De-extinction of the woolly mammoth would be the firm's flagship project, using elephants as surrogates. Beth Shapiro, an evolutionary geneticist who is chief scientific officer at Colossal, was initially sceptical that there was a strong conservation argument for creating elephants that had key mammoth traits. In 2015, she told Nature that her book on de-extinction, called How To Clone A Mammoth, might have been more accurately titled 'How One Might Go About Cloning a Mammoth (Should It Become Technically Possible, And If It Were, In Fact, a Good Idea, Which It's Probably Not)'. Shapiro turned down an offer to join the company at first, but started seriously entertaining the idea when Colossal expanded its de-extinction ambitions. It began projects to bring back the dodo (Raphus cucullatus), which was wiped out in the seventeenth century, and to restore thylacines (Thylacinus cynocephalus), the Australian marsupials that are sometimes referred to as Tasmanian tigers and that were hunted to extinction in the 1930s. She was especially interested in seeing de-extinction technologies applied to existing endangered species. Shapiro joined Colossal in 2024 as its chief scientist. 'This is an opportunity to scale up the impact that I have the potential to make,' she says. 'Maybe it's a mid-life crisis.' The company, now valued at around US$10 billion, has attracted celebrity investors, including the media personality Paris Hilton and film director Peter Jackson, alongside a handful of leading scientists as staff and advisers. Dire disagreements The dire-wolf project was different from many of Colossal's other efforts because it proceeded quietly. Few people knew about the work until this year, and that irked some researchers. 'They didn't invite any kind of conversation about whether or not that is a good use of funds or a good project to do,' says Novak. Shapiro says the secrecy around the dire-wolf project was designed to generate surprise, and to counter public perceptions that the company overpromises and under-delivers. She also says that the company talked extensively to scientists, conservationists and others about the project and how it should proceed. The firm has not released the full list of edits that it made — 20 changes to 14 genome locations. Fifteen of the changes were identified in two dire-wolf genomes obtained from the remains of animals that lived 13,000 and 72,000 years ago. The genome differs from that of the grey wolf (Canis lupus) by about 12 million DNA letters. Colossal says that other edits, including changes that led to the creatures' white coats and contributed to their large size, were intended to replicate dire-wolf traits using gene variants found in grey wolves. Many scientists say that the coat colour in particular was probably inspired more by the animals' appearance in the fantasy television series Game of Thrones than by reality. 'There is no chance in hell a dire wolf is going to look like that,' says Tom Gilbert, an evolutionary geneticist at the University of Copenhagen and a scientific adviser to Colossal. He says he agrees with other scientists who have argued that, on the basis of what is known about the dire wolf's range, it 'basically would have looked like a slightly larger coyote'. Colossal notes that the coat colour is based on the discovery of variants in two dire-wolf genomes that it says would have resulted in light-coloured fur. According to an update from Colossal in late June, Romulus and Remus weigh around 40 kilograms, around 20% heavier than a standard grey wolf of the same age, and Khaleesi is about 16 kilograms. They live on an 800-hectare ecological preserve surrounded by a 3-metre wall. Colossal plans to make more of the animals, and to study their health and development in depth. It says it will not release them into the wild. Shapiro argued in her 2015 book that forming a wild population is a requirement for successful de-extinction. She nevertheless considers the dire wolves to be an example of de-extinction, and says that creating them will have conservation benefits for wolves and other species. Many scientists disagree. A group of experts on canids that advises the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) issued a statement in mid-April rejecting Colossal's claim that gene-edited wolves could be considered dire wolves, or even proxies for the extinct species. The statement cites a 2016 IUCN definition for de-extinction that emphasizes that the animal must fill an ecological niche. The work, the group said, 'may demonstrate technical capabilities, but it does not contribute to conservation'. Colossal has disputed this on the social-media platform X (formerly Twitter) saying that the dire-wolf project 'develops vital conservation technologies and provides an ideal platform for the next stage of this research'. Novak says: 'The dire wolf fits the Jurassic Park model of de-extinction beautifully.' The animals have the traits of extinct species and are, to his knowledge, not intended for release into the wild, he says. 'It is clearly for spectacle.' Gilbert, who was a co-author of a preprint describing the ancient dire-wolf genomes, says he is concerned that Colossal is not being sufficiently clear to the public about what it has done. 'It's a dog with 20 edits,' he says. 'If you're putting out descriptions that are going to be so easily falsified, the risk is you do damage to science's reputation.' Lamm rejects the idea that Colossal's messaging undermines public credibility in science, pointing to what he says was an overwhelmingly positive reaction. Loring, who is part of an effort to use stem-cell technology in conservation, says that she sees merit in Colossal's work. It has, she says, changed her views on how to repopulate northern white rhinoceroses (Ceratotherium simum cottoni). But she worries that Colossal's messaging overshadows those contributions. 'It may create an opportunity for us to educate the public,' she says. 'More often, it creates an opportunity for us to be ignored.' To Love Dalén, a palaeogeneticist at the University of Stockholm and a scientific adviser to Colossal, the controversy is 'a storm in a teacup' that detracts from Colossal's achievement. 'It makes me a little bit sad there is this huge debate and angry voices about the common name,' he says. Dogfight Shapiro says she was surprised and saddened by the strength of reactions to Colossal's announcement. 'It was harder than I thought it would be, and the questions were getting meaner and meaner,' she says. But she and Colossal were quick to respond. 'Some of y'all are real mad about this,' she began in a video posted on X in April. 'You can call these animals proxy dire wolves or Colossal's dire wolves. All of that would be correct. We chose to call them dire wolves because they look like dire wolves and reflect the key traits we found by sequencing their genome.' A statement by Colossal to reporters in early April struck a more defensive tone. 'It's obvious most critics would rather complain than contribute,' it said. It asked critics to 'maybe also take a breath and think about what the birth of these technologies means to the future of our planet instead of nitpicking terminology'. Lamm insists that Colossal is willing to listen to scientists' criticisms. He points out that Gilbert is part of its scientific advisory board. But he also questions the legitimacy of some of Colossal's detractors. 'We have a couple of consistent critics that don't have the highest levels of credentials,' he says, 'people who haven't contributed to their fields in quite some time.' Meanwhile, one of Colossal's critics, evolutionary geneticist Vincent Lynch at the University at Buffalo in New York, has accused Lamm and the company of mounting a campaign to discredit him, after Lynch discovered several mostly anonymous web pages and posts questioning his expertise. In a series of posts on X and the social-media service Bluesky, Lynch said he suspects that Colossal and Lamm are responsible for the material. Nature has identified similar posts targeting other critics: Victoria Herridge, an evolutionary biologist at the University of Sheffield, UK; palaeoecologist Nic Rawlence at the University of Otago in New Zealand; and Kristofer Helgen, an evolutionary biologist at the Bishop Museum in Honolulu, Hawaii. Lynch acknowledges that he has no direct evidence that Lamm or Colossal were involved. But he says he thinks that the articles targeting him and others were timed to undermine them just as the company was making major announcements, including those about the dire wolf and a gene-edited 'woolly mouse' that the company says lays the groundwork for its woolly mammoth de-extinction efforts. A Colossal spokesperson said the firm was unaware of the posts aimed at Herridge, Rawlence and Helgen, and became aware of those mentioning Lynch only when he accused Colossal of having a hand in them. The company and Lamm deny any involvement. 'It's unclear to the company who would write critical articles about Vincent Lynch, but given his obsession and aggressive behaviour, the company believes it's safe to assume he may have a few enemies,' says a spokesperson. Lynch says: 'Colossal clearly doesn't know anything about me or my life.' On 19 June, he received a letter from Colossal's lawyers, accusing him of defamation against Lamm and threatening legal action. Lynch says that holding companies and their founders accountable for their words and actions should not be considered defamation. 'It is our responsibility as scientists,' he says. Forging ahead From Colossal's perspective, the dire-wolf announcement was a success. Lamm says that the company tracked thousands of articles and social-media mentions about the achievement using artificial intelligence, and that they are overwhelmingly positive. 'I wouldn't change one thing,' he says. In July, Colossal announced controversial plans to de-extinct moas, a group of giant flightless birds that vanished not long after humans first arrived in New Zealand. And the company remains bullish on its other efforts, predicting that mammoth-like elephants could arrive as early as 2028. Some critics are becoming concerned about how the company will conduct its work in the future, and what the impacts of that might be. In a 2021 opinion piece in Nature, Herridge, who had previously turned down an invitation to serve as a scientific adviser to Colossal, wrote that she felt the company's founders were 'driven by a real desire to help the world'. But after the dire-wolf roll-out, she's concerned about Colossal's approach and its priorities. 'We have a company that is only listening to people who agree with them, who is pushing forward with statements that they aren't backing down from,' she says. This 'is not really where we want to be with a technology that has the potential to change the way our world will look'. Lamm disagrees. 'We happily engage with critics,' he says. 'As scientists, we will absolutely consider new data presented and adapt our hypotheses and conclusions.'
Yahoo
13-08-2025
- Yahoo
Greenwich LifeSciences Announces Expansion of Flamingo-01 into Romania
STAFFORD, Texas, Aug. 13, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Greenwich LifeSciences, Inc. (Nasdaq: GLSI) (the "Company"), a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company focused on its Phase III clinical trial, FLAMINGO-01, which is evaluating GLSI-100, an immunotherapy to prevent breast cancer recurrences, today announced the addition of clinical sites in Romania. The Company's application to expand Flamingo-01 into Romania has been formally approved by European regulators, thus adding Romanian sites to the approximately 150 approved sites in Spain, France, Germany, Italy, Poland and the US. At present, there are approximately 123 actively enrolling sites globally. According to the latest data collected by the European Cancer Information System (click here), a total of 12,861 new cases of breast cancer were diagnosed in Romania in 2022, which is the most common cancer diagnosed in women, representing approximately 28% of all cancers in women. Breast cancer is the leading cause of death from cancer in women in Romania with 3,877 deaths in 2022. The Company is collaborating with Dr. Nicoleta Antone, who is leading one of the largest academic breast cancer focused centers in Cluj Napoca, Romania, and her colleagues from at least 3 other sites in Romania. The Romanian clinical sites will be listed here with an interactive map. Dr. Antone will be serving as the national principal investigator in Romania for FLAMINGO-01. She is Head of Breast Cancer Centre at the Chiricuta Institute of Oncology in Cluj Napoca, Romania. She has been the Chair of the Romania Breast Cancer Group since 2021 and a member of the Women's Empowerment Cancer Advocacy Network since 2015. CEO Snehal Patel commented, "Romania is the first of several additional countries in Europe that we hope to add to Flamingo-01 as we now focus on mid-sized population countries with large population centers. We have visited the sites in Romania multiple times to assess study feasibility and provide training, and we are impressed with their facilities and commitment to the study. We look forward to working with Dr. Antone and her colleagues and have sufficiently advanced start-up activities this summer to be potentially screening and enrolling our first Romanian patients in the coming months." About FLAMINGO-01 and GLSI-100 FLAMINGO-01 (NCT05232916) is a Phase III clinical trial designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of GLSI-100 (GP2 + GM-CSF) in HER2 positive breast cancer patients who had residual disease or high-risk pathologic complete response at surgery and who have completed both neoadjuvant and postoperative adjuvant trastuzumab based treatment. The trial is led by Baylor College of Medicine and currently includes US and European clinical sites from university-based hospitals and academic and cooperative networks with plans to open up to 150 sites globally. In the double-blinded arms of the Phase III trial, approximately 500 HLA-A*02 patients will be randomized to GLSI-100 or placebo, and up to 250 patients of other HLA types will be treated with GLSI-100 in a third arm. The trial has been designed to detect a hazard ratio of 0.3 in invasive breast cancer-free survival, where 28 events will be required. An interim analysis for superiority and futility will be conducted when at least half of those events, 14, have occurred. This sample size provides 80% power if the annual rate of events in placebo-treated subjects is 2.4% or greater. For more information on FLAMINGO-01, please visit the Company's website here and here. Contact information and an interactive map of the majority of participating clinical sites can be viewed under the "Contacts and Locations" section. Please note that the interactive map is not viewable on mobile screens. Related questions and participation interest can be emailed to: flamingo-01@ About Breast Cancer and HER2/ Positivity One in eight U.S. women will develop invasive breast cancer over her lifetime, with approximately 300,000 new breast cancer patients and 4 million breast cancer survivors. HER2 (human epidermal growth factor receptor 2) protein is a cell surface receptor protein that is expressed in a variety of common cancers, including in 75% of breast cancers at low (1+), intermediate (2+), and high (3+ or over-expressor) levels. About Greenwich LifeSciences, Inc. Greenwich LifeSciences is a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company focused on the development of GP2, an immunotherapy to prevent breast cancer recurrences in patients who have previously undergone surgery. GP2 is a 9 amino acid transmembrane peptide of the HER2 protein, a cell surface receptor protein that is expressed in a variety of common cancers, including expression in 75% of breast cancers at low (1+), intermediate (2+), and high (3+ or over-expressor) levels. Greenwich LifeSciences has commenced a Phase III clinical trial, FLAMINGO-01. For more information on Greenwich LifeSciences, please visit the Company's website at and follow the Company's Twitter at Forward-Looking Statement Disclaimer Statements in this press release contain "forward-looking statements" that are subject to substantial risks and uncertainties. All statements, other than statements of historical fact, contained in this press release are forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements contained in this press release may be identified by the use of words such as "anticipate," "believe," "contemplate," "could," "estimate," "expect," "intend," "seek," "may," "might," "plan," "potential," "predict," "project," "target," "aim," "should," "will," "would," or the negative of these words or other similar expressions, although not all forward-looking statements contain these words. Forward-looking statements are based on Greenwich LifeSciences Inc.'s current expectations and are subject to inherent uncertainties, risks and assumptions that are difficult to predict, including statements regarding the intended use of net proceeds from the public offering; consequently, actual results may differ materially from those expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. Further, certain forward-looking statements are based on assumptions as to future events that may not prove to be accurate. These and other risks and uncertainties are described more fully in the section entitled "Risk Factors" in Greenwich LifeSciences' Annual Report on the most recent Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024, and other periodic reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Forward-looking statements contained in this announcement are made as of this date, and Greenwich LifeSciences, Inc. undertakes no duty to update such information except as required under applicable law. Company ContactSnehal PatelInvestor RelationsOffice: (832) 819-3232Email: info@ Investor & Public Relations Contact for Greenwich LifeSciencesDave GentryRedChip Companies 1-800-RED CHIP (733 2447)Email: dave@ in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Digital Trends
13-08-2025
- Digital Trends
A Jurassic Park sequel is one of the Netflix sci-fi movies you need to watch (August 2025)
Netflix movies have been setting viewership records this summer. KPop Demon Hunters is now the streamer's most popular animated film ever. Plus, Golden, one of the film's singles, is currently No. 1 on the Billboard Hot 100. Meanwhile, Happy Gilmore 2 generated the biggest U.S. opening weekend for a Netflix film with 46.7 million views. Aside from the in-demand movies, Netflix offers an eclectic selection of entertaining movies, especially in the sci-fi genre. One of our top picks this month is The Lost World, the underrated sequel to Jurassic Park. Recommended Videos We also have guides to the best new movies to stream, the best movies on Netflix, the best movies on Hulu, and the best movies on Amazon Prime Video. Weird Science (1985) John Hughes penned three scripts in 1985: National Lampoon's European Vacation, The Breakfast Club, and Weird Science. The latter two, which he directed, fall under Hughes' memorable coming-of-age movies in the '80s. The link between the two films is Anthony Michael Hall, who stars in both. In Weird Science, Hall and Ilan Mitchell-Smith play Gary and Wyatt, two nerdy teenagers who want to be popular. One night, the duo creates the perfect woman on Wyatt's computer. After a magical power surge, the boys' creation comes to life as Lisa (Kelly LeBrock), a beautiful superhuman who serves Gary and Wyatt. With Lisa by their side, the teens gain the confidence they need to throw a party in hopes of winning over their high school crushes. Despite being inferior to The Breakfast Club, Weird Science is a funny and charming version of a Frankenstein story. Stream Weird Science on Netflix. Journey to the Center of the Earth (2008) From the late '90s through 2008, Brendan Fraser was a legitimate action star thanks to The Mummy franchise. One month before The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor was released in August 2008, Fraser headlined Journey to the Center of the Earth, an updated adaptation of Jules Verne's 1864 novel of the same name. Professor Trevor Anderson (Fraser) embarks on an expedition to Iceland with his 13-year-old nephew, Sean (Josh Hutcherson), to search for his missing brother. With the help of an Icelandic guide (Anita Briem), Trevor discovers Verne's novel is a legitimate map to the center of the Earth. Although they reach the Earth's center, the trio realizes they must escape or face the same tragic fate as Trevor's brother. Fraser's stoicism and comedic timing stand out in this sci-fi adventure film that kids will love. Stream Journey to the Center of the Earth on Netflix. The Lost World: Jurassic Park (1997) What more can be said about Jurassic Park? The movie remains a landmark achievement in sci-fi filmmaking. The sequel was never going to reach the heights of the original. However, The Lost World: Jurassic Park deserves more credit for being an exciting blockbuster. Four years after the events in Jurassic Park, the greedy capitalist, Peter Ludlow (Arliss Howard), becomes the new CEO of InGen. Feeling like there's a market for dinosaurs, Ludlow sends a group of mercenaries to Isla Sorna, aka Site B, to save the remaining dinosaurs in hopes of opening Jurassic Park in California. Learning about InGen's new plans, John Hammond (Richard Attenborough) recruits Ian Malcolm (Jeff Goldblum) and a small team to disrupt Ludlow's mission. Even with inferior characters, Steven Spielberg's sequel still soars when the movie features numerous battles between man and dinosaur. Those pesky raptors remain as terrifying as ever. Stream The Lost World: Jurassic Park on Netflix. Lost in Starlight (2025) South Korean filmmaker Han Ji-won successfully helmed a sci-fi anime romance made for adults in Lost in Starlight. Set in 2050, Lost in Starlight explores the budding relationship between Nan-young (Kim Tae-ri) and Jay (Hong Kyung). Nan-young is an astronaut who dreams of leading an expedition to Mars. Jay is a musician and handyman. After Jay agrees to fix Nan-young's record player, the two begin spending more time together. What starts as a worker-client relationship eventually transforms into a loving partnership. For the first time in her life, Nan-young might have something to live for other than a life in space. Lost in Starlight puts some of your favorite adult dramas to shame because of its moving depiction of love and affection. Stream Lost in Starlight on Netflix. Sound & Fury (2019) Sturgill Simpson is no ordinary country singer. The Grammy-winning artist is more of an outlaw musician, like Johnny Cash, than a traditional country singer, like Garth Brooks. Simpson is fearless in his pursuit of new sounds, experimenting with different genres along the way. In 2019, Simpson released his fourth album, Sound & Fury, accompanied by a dystopian Netflix anime movie of the same name. Set to the songs on the album, Sound & Fury follows an enigmatic driver who battles several deadly opponents in a post-apocalyptic world. Think of Sound & Fury as Mad Max mixed with anime. The result is an impressively unique visual album that could stand alone as a triumphant anime film. Stream Sound & Fury on Netflix.
