Jurassic Park 3D (Post-release)

im sorry, but is this what cinema has come too? now they not only focus on doing remakes, they are actually getting too lazy to even do remakes and just slap 3d on a movie and rerelease it? in a few years, will we see mostly rereleased movies in 3d?

I would just like to point out that half of the posts in here have nothing to do with the 3D, and are focused only on "it's in theaters again, so I'll see it in theaters again".

That seemed to be the same argument for Ep. I. "I don't care about the 3D, I'm taking the kids to see Star Wars on the big screen."

So basically, yes. If they keep getting this reception, expect this to dominate the movie business for a while.
And it seems like they could slap on the crummiest 3D available (or even none at all) and folks will still be lining up.

Personally...I'll stay home.
 
I'll go see it in 2D, if they have to put out a 3D version to make it happen. I couldn't care less. Doesn't cost me a nickel. I just know I get to enjoy Jurassic Park the way it was meant to be seen on the big screen.
 
I'm not a big 3D fan--didn't love Avatar, did like Piranha, haven't seen TPM--but I gotta say, Jurassic Park could be A LOT of fun to watch in 3D, if they convert it well.

It'll be like those dinosaur pop-up books I loved as a kid...only a million times cooler! :thumbsup

The Wook
 
JP is a great B movie, and conceptually 3D is a good fit for it.

Sorry, this is just bugging me. Jurassic Park is, in no stretch of the definition, a "B" movie.

I'm glad they're doing this for fans who like 3D. Personally, I HATE 3D, but as long as there's two versions of the film (3D and non-3D) we're all good.
 
It it wasn't filmed in 3D, I'm generally turned off by films being shown in 3D. Up-converted just isn't 3D. It's just an half-assed effort and should by no means cost the same as films in 3D that was filmed in 3D.
 
JP is a great B movie, and conceptually 3D is a good fit for it.


godzillafacepalm.jpg
 
What's so hard to grasp there, Doctor, Allie? The movie works because Speilberg definetly approached it as the world's biggest budget and best looking B monster movie of all time. It sure isn't art or a film that is put out there to be taken too seriously. It's dinos going berserk and eating the cast, that's what you paid to go see. It's hamfisted, cliched, and on the nose to the point where that stuff goes beyond painful and becomes a joy in itself. Please don't tell me you're arguing about JP being a B movie, because you'd be wrong. So very wrong. Wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong wrongitty-wrong-wrong-wrong. Now, what goes better with a B movie like a Corman or Castle than 3D? If you HAVE to have 3D, B-movies are where they're the most fun. Look, the point of JP is showcasing the dinos; it's dino porn. Since the 'Berg is throwing crazy dinos in our faces as the major draw, why not make them 3D too? Conceptually 3D makes more sense here than in some other things it's been shoehorned into, like Titanic or Alice in Wonderland.

Now, notice I said I don't think this is a great idea, as the best stuff is set in the dark, which generally doesn't play nice with polarized 3D like RealD.
 
Last edited:
What's so hard to grasp there, Doctor, Allie? The movie works because Speilberg definetly approached it as the world's biggest budget and best looking B monster movie of all time. It sure isn't art or a film that is put out there to be taken too seriously. It's dinos going berserk and eating the cast, that's what you paid to go see. It's hamfisted, cliched, and on the nose to the point where that stuff goes beyond painful and becomes a joy in itself. Please don't tell me you're arguing about JP being a B movie, because you'd be wrong. So very wrong. Wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong wrongitty-wrong-wrong-wrong.

Actually, they're not:

Although there are many differing opinions as to what a b-movie actually is, there is only one real technical definition to the term. The actual technical definition is that a b-movie was the second movie on a double bill. It was typically a low budget formula type film, which fell somewhere in the suspense, horror, sci-fi, western, exploitation or gangster genres, although there were other genres covered as well.

This definition later gave way to the wider definition of b-movie, which basically encompassed any low budget film. Now I personally have a problem with this definition, because as a classic film reviewer, I've reviewed a wide variety of classic b-movies that taken as a whole, have a feel that truly sets them apart as an all encompassing genre unto themselves.


This quote is from a website that's devoted entirely to b-movies and people who love them, btw.
 
Actually, they're not:

Although there are many differing opinions as to what a b-movie actually is, there is only one real technical definition to the term. The actual technical definition is that a b-movie was the second movie on a double bill. It was typically a low budget formula type film, which fell somewhere in the suspense, horror, sci-fi, western, exploitation or gangster genres, although there were other genres covered as well.

This definition later gave way to the wider definition of b-movie, which basically encompassed any low budget film. Now I personally have a problem with this definition, because as a classic film reviewer, I've reviewed a wide variety of classic b-movies that taken as a whole, have a feel that truly sets them apart as an all encompassing genre unto themselves.


This quote is from a website that's devoted entirely to b-movies and people who love them, btw.

Well trailers are meant to be played after the movie and look how that works. :lol Definitions do tend to change over the years.

I still wouldn't exactly call JP a B-movie but I get what Timmythekid is saying. It's a fun movie but not Spielberg's best by any means.

The conversion into 3D gets me about as excited as having my liver removed through my nostrils would. Just re-release it in 2D and I will be more than happy to go see it again.
 
Picky picky picky. Fine, we'll quibble about semantics, that's always fun and productive. I still say it's a B style film, you call it 'popcorn'. We're talking about the same thing - not high art, cliched, built to showcase its monster and not much else, and unsubtle as a brick to the face. Except for production value it plays like a B should - its disposable, corny, entertainment. It's the most fun and best produced B movie of all time. Call it whatever you want, we're talking about the same thing.

Raiders was a love letter to serials, but not a serial itself. You can still say it feels like a serial. JP was a love letter to those same monster movies you quoted about FS, and I still say it feels like a B in all it's cheesey charms and hammy presentation.

The POINT being that this is a movie built to showcase dinos rampaging in your face. It's jump scares and monsters; how does 3D not work on a conceptual level with that? It's likely going to be a weak conversion (and I doubt Speilberg is onboard - he's been all about not tampering with the past lately), but it's not offensive in the same way that say, Casablanca would be offensive in 3D.









(PS - Still a B movie. I said it thrice without mentioning Nazis, so by internet law I win. :) )
 
Picky picky picky. Fine, we'll quibble about semantics, that's always fun and productive. I still say it's a B style film, you call it 'popcorn'. We're talking about the same thing - not high art, cliched, built to showcase its monster and not much else, and unsubtle as a brick to the face. Except for production value it plays like a B should - its disposable, corny, entertainment. It's the most fun and best produced B movie of all time. Call it whatever you want, we're talking about the same thing.

Raiders was a love letter to serials, but not a serial itself. You can still say it feels like a serial. JP was a love letter to those same monster movies you quoted about FS, and I still say it feels like a B in all it's cheesey charms and hammy presentation.

The POINT being that this is a movie built to showcase dinos rampaging in your face. It's jump scares and monsters; how does 3D not work on a conceptual level with that? It's likely going to be a weak conversion (and I doubt Speilberg is onboard - he's been all about not tampering with the past lately), but it's not offensive in the same way that say, Casablanca would be offensive in 3D.
(PS - Still a B movie. I said it thrice without mentioning Nazis, so by internet law I win. :) )


But the dinosaurs are in no means are portayed as "Monsters" (unless you refer to JP3, in which case I do agree with you), but as animals..

I think you mixed up JP with Carnosaur, now THAT is a B movie!
 
How 'bout we split the difference and call it a B+ movie? Or maybe an A- movie? Or a B+/A- movie? :lol

Personally, I think it's an A movie. An A-list director, a couple A-list actors in Attenborough and Goldblum, a big budget, a wide release, big haul at the box office. So it lacks the acting, writing and gravitas of a film that came out around the same time, The Shawshank Redemption, but it doesn't make JP a B movie. No more than best picture winner Annie Hall made Star Wars a B movie.

The Wook
 
A new point to bring to the table.

Here's something that everyone so far has seemed to have forgotten.
This movie was based on an incredibly complex Michael Crichton novel. This is not your run-of-the-mill "have a monster and need a throwaway plot to center around it" story. This is a serious epic narration with complicated characters, which explored complex themes about humanity, evolution, the cycle of nature, existentialism...and it tied all these ideas together in an intricate, unpredictable techno-thriller plot.

Now the movie was only based off the book. So there's things there that can be argued. But the point is that the story has pretty heavy origins.


We may in fact be arguing semantics, but this is the way I see it:

Universal's Jurassic Park = not a B movie.

SyFy channel original Raptor Island = a B movie.
 
This thread is more than 10 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top