Jurassic Park 3D (Post-release)

Discussion in 'Entertainment and Movie Talk' started by jcoffman99, Mar 16, 2012.

  1. jcoffman99

    jcoffman99 Sr Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    2,466
    Just saw this posted over at Dark Horizons:
    "Universal Pictures has confirmed a 3D re-release is in the works for Steven Spielberg’s original "Jurassic Park" with a July 19th 2013 release date set - a little over twenty years after the original opened in June 1993."

    It will be awesome just to see JP on the big screen. It amazes me how the effects still hold up after 20 years, and look better than most current films.
     
  2. EyeofSauron

    EyeofSauron Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    2,671
    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?

    as much as i like jp, i dont want to see post-production 3d on any movie.
     
  3. hankey01

    hankey01 Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,476
    I'm looking forward to it. I'm one of the few here who like 3d. Great film, great effects and will be great to see in a theater.
     
  4. Scareb

    Scareb Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    2,010
    This won't even be real 3D though, it'll be that crappy clash of the titans "the movie title shot has more 3d then the entire movie" style 3D
     
  5. Vivek

    Vivek Master Member Community Staff RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    3,181
  6. hankey01

    hankey01 Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,476
    Post converted 3D worked for Thor, Captain America, etc etc etc. Star Wars episode I seems a bit flat to me. It CAN be done well...and with Speilberg behind it I hope it is.
     
  7. Jedifyfe

    Jedifyfe Master Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    4,550
    Lol. This is actually a movie that I would see in 3D.
     
  8. EricHart

    EricHart Member

    Trophy Points:
    191
    Has it really been twenty years? I remember lining up to see that in the theater on the day it opened.
     
  9. cayman shen

    cayman shen Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    3,080
    Yup. First time I've been remotely excited about any movie in 3D. Normally I hate it, but this one I'm pretty psyched about. Hopefully it isn't too dark...
     
  10. firesprite

    firesprite Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    2,596
    I love Jurassic Park, but I'm so sick and tired of 3D already. I'd love to see it on the big screen again (like Eric, I was there opening day, and saw it half a dozen times over the course of that summer), but I do NOT want to deal with 3D.
     
  11. Timmythekid

    Timmythekid Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,355
    I actually have a feeling this isn't going to look so good. Too much of where you really want the 3D effect in this movie is very, very dark. 3D doesn't help that at all....eh, at least it beats Titanic 3D for an idea. JP is a great B movie, and conceptually 3D is a good fit for it.
     
  12. allosaur176

    allosaur176 Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    2,205
    I saw JP 3 times on opening day, I will definetely be there again
     
  13. cpltony

    cpltony Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,306
    I'll be there in the Jeep....I've STILL yet to see a 3D movie.
    Not got to see Episode 1 yet
     
  14. GrenadeKing

    GrenadeKing Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,046
    I saw JP 7 times as a kid. I remember the theater having dinosaur bones and all kinds of nifty stuff set out. This was before most theaters started sucking hard and not doing cool stuff anymore obviously. The old theater is long gone sadly but, it'd be cool to see on the big screen again, 3D or not.
     
  15. CB2001

    CB2001 Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    3,155
    Question: Why does it need to be in 3D?
     
  16. Timmythekid

    Timmythekid Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,355
    Because it can pull in $20 million (no way this is doing even as much as the 'meh' business as TPM, sorry SW still has the brand power that JP lacks for the general public) for universal with virtually zero expenditure. Plus they get to write off the various expenses associated with bringing it back to theaters. Why does anything need to be converted to 3D?
     
  17. MooCriket

    MooCriket Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    3,366
    I would not mind seeing this is 3d at all:)
     
  18. SmilingOtter

    SmilingOtter Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    2,560
    I am grateful to 3D technology for forcing Michael Bay to slow down his cuts in Transformers 3, since the brain needs longer to process a 3D image than a 2D one.

    Other than that, Avatar is pretty much the only 3D movie I've seen (out of maybe 4 or 5) that was worth spending the extra money.
     
  19. Shadow345

    Shadow345 Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    566
    I will be there just to see Jurassic Park on the big screen again.
     
  20. Goonie

    Goonie Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,505
    I'm in! Would love to see the T-Rex chase in 3D! :cool
     
  21. Lutso

    Lutso Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,307
    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.
     
  22. micdavis

    micdavis Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    3,326
    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.
     
  23. azheat01

    azheat01 Sr Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    1,881
    I'd love to see it in 3D, as long as it doesn't turn out as underwhelming as TPM.
     
  24. The Wook

    The Wook Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    3,166
    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
     
  25. TheDoctor

    TheDoctor Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,036
    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.
     
  26. Too Much Garlic

    Too Much Garlic Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    3,615
    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.
     
  27. allosaur176

    allosaur176 Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    2,205

    [​IMG]
     
  28. Timmythekid

    Timmythekid Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,355
    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: Mar 17, 2012
  29. clancampbell

    clancampbell Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    2,160
    Wow, cash-in or what?

    much as i adored JP, i don't want to see it in 3d.......

    Rich
     
  30. firesprite

    firesprite Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    2,596
    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.
     
  31. micdavis

    micdavis Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    3,326
    Not a B-Movie at all. Sorry.
     
  32. Too Much Garlic

    Too Much Garlic Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    3,615
    Popcorn movie, yes, B-movie, no. Not in the slightest.
     
  33. Mola Rob

    Mola Rob Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,685
    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.
     
  34. Lutso

    Lutso Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,307
    Popcorn movie, there's another term that I hate...
     
  35. Timmythekid

    Timmythekid Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,355
    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. :) )
     
  36. micdavis

    micdavis Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    3,326
    It's not a B Movie.

    (I just need to be the last one to say it. That's what makes you right on the Internet, newbie)
     
  37. allosaur176

    allosaur176 Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    2,205

    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!
     
  38. The Wook

    The Wook Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    3,166
    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
     
  39. Lutso

    Lutso Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,307
    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.
     
  40. Lutso

    Lutso Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,307
    Oh man, now you've done it. Who will be the first to come in and say that Star Wars is a B-movie? :lol


    Actually, if you go waay back... :confused
     
  41. micdavis

    micdavis Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    3,326
    :lol

    Star Wars IS just patterend after B-Movies and was thought of by the studio as a B-Movie, but isn't.

    They were wrong as is Timmy.
     
  42. MooCriket

    MooCriket Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    3,366
    Did someone say Tiiiiiimy?!
    [​IMG]
     
  43. notaek

    notaek New Member

    Trophy Points:
    2
    I was there opening day as well as kid. I'll never forget the roar from the T-Rex through the speakers of the theater. As much as I'd like to share that experience with a younger generation to appreciate...I'm not sure how much they can work in the 3-D after the fact. The Star Wars re-releases just feel like milking a cash cow and I hope Universal isn't trying to do the same with all of their classics as well. The only 3-D movie that has truly justified the experience so far IMO has been Avatar which I'm glad I was in the theater for (the story in it...meh but the effects were glorious up close and first hand). Obviously that was filmed precisely with 3D in mind with 3D cameras so I really can't imagine how much postproduction they can do on a thirty year old movie to make it jump at us.

    I don't need to see a literally 3D round Dennis Nedry nor Ray Arnold's hand fly through the screen as he flips the switch, lol:

    Hold on to your butts - YouTube

    I hope it works out and introduces a whole new generation to a great film but consider me very very guarded in any optimism.
     
  44. MooCriket

    MooCriket Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    3,366
  45. omassix

    omassix New Member

    Trophy Points:
    2
    Down with JP, but not with 3D.

    Can't wait to get my Cryocan!
     
  46. omassix

    omassix New Member

    Trophy Points:
    2
  47. Lutso

    Lutso Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,307
    Exactly. And this kind of strengthens that side of the argument.

    Even when someone tries to make a B-movie, it doesn't always turn out to be a B-movie. Because it doesn't work like that.
     
  48. goapebilly

    goapebilly Active Member

    Trophy Points:
    341
    not a b movie,and lets stop with the 3d nonsense it doesnt make a crappy movie better, and more expensive to see
     
  49. Jeyl

    Jeyl Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    2,670
    As much as it pains me to say it, Jurassic Park has not really aged that well for me.

    It mostly has to do with the whole man vs nature bit. I don't buy into the whole "We should never mess with nature!" or "Do we have the right to do this?" stuff that gets brought up time and time again. Everyone treats nature in this film like it's some godly self-aware entity that purposefully selects species to become extinct, and we should not interfere with it's process at all. Really? And as for messing with nature, we mess with nature ALL THE TIME! When someone gets a disease that is fatal unless cured, we don't do nothing and say "Nature is selecting that person to die", we grab a syringe and shout "Get me 10 ccs of cure, STAT!".

    And zoos. We already have zoos. MANY ZOOS! Some even with endangered animals in them. And like many zoos, things tend to go wrong. But just because some greedy idiot decides to sabotage the entire park and set all the Dinosaur's loose, the conclusion our characters come to is "We have no right to make a zoo that has dinosaurs in it!". It's like the problem is hunger, and the solution is to drink water.

    Now in 3D!
     
  50. allosaur176

    allosaur176 Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    2,205

Share This Page