My question is: would Ingen REALLY have allowed him to do that? To kill a multi-million dollar investment -- not to mention easily one of their most bankable assets (A T-Rex)? You would think with Ingen counting on the San Deigo JP to "bail them out" of all their debt from the failed first park/numerous lawsuits that they'd want to keep both rexes for maximum potential profit.
I mean how much money do you think they had invested in just that ONE male T-Rex? Ten million? More?
INGEN had no intention of bringing predators back to the mainland (the two Compys aside); Ludlow might have been arrogant, he wasn't entirely daft. The expedition exlusively captured herbivores (Stegosaurus, Triceratops, Parasaurolophus, Gallimimus, etc.).
Only after Nick and Sarah freed the animals and in the process destroyed the hunters' camp, bringing the adult Tyrannosaurus back to San Diego became a last resort option.
I do believe Ludlow would have given Roland permission to kill the dinosaur; after all,
INGEN had not been in control of the island for years, with Hammond having veto rights - they would not have been able to protect the dinosaur(s) from illnesses or death - for all the knew, before they took satellite images, the Tyrannosaurs could all have died.
Well as it turns out Roland didn't kill the Rex anyway he only knocked it out with tranquilizers. So i'm assuming No, Ingen would not allow him to kill it but as a big game hunter, he just wanted the satisfaction of being able to say he took one down.
Nick took the bullets from Roland's weapon - you may remember them discussing the gun while trekking across the island, then Roland leaves the weapon for a moment as they take a break in the forest. It's in this moment Nick empties it unseen. As the Tyrannosaurs attack the makeshift camp, Roland is left with nothing but the tranquilizer gun and darts. Roland never intended for
INGEN to bring back the Tyrannosaurus, but for Ludlow it was a last, desperate attempt to save the company.
reply
share