Jurassic Park Collection 4K UHD (1993-2015)

[mzupeman]

Jurassic Park isn’t the samw kind of upgrade The Mummy was, for sure. I’ll say that I’m content with it... not happy really, but content. It still smokes the old blu in every way.

Jurassic World looked pretty damn good.

[pawel86ck]

Originally Posted by Phreakuency

Have watched the first three and am extremely disappointed.

1 looked quite good up close but but lots of scenes, especially wide shots were rough and very low res looking.

2 looked better overall but had some visible dnr and smoothing and had some pretty bad detail in the blacks, including ugly posterization.

3 just looked average all around. No detail, soft and smoothed and washed out.

Easily the three most disappointing UHD discs I’ve watched in my 150 or so.

TLW is very big upgrade IMO. It may be not reference UHD disc, but detail increase is INSANE over BD. I was very disappointed how soft BD transfer was and I thought to myself that maybe this is how movie was shot (with blurry picture in mind), and nothing can be done about it. Yet UHD shows HUGE detail increase and I was very surprised seeing this. I also dont see problems with crushed blacks on my set (blacks looks similar like in BD), although I have to say I'm using 4K HDTV without HDR, so I'm watching UHD movies only in SDR. Maybe on HDR HDTV blacks are even darker and then I would indeed see crushed blacks but I'm not seeing this problem on my TV. For me personally TLW is as good as the first JP movie, so I'm very happy it looks so stunning now. There's no DNR that I could notice (unlike 1 and 3 jurassic park), although some scenes with dinos looks soft (but I'm guessing nothing can be done about it without redoing all CGI work).

[DJR662]

Originally Posted by mzupeman

Jurassic Park isn’t the samw kind of upgrade The Mummy was, for sure. I’ll say that I’m content with it... not happy really, but content. It still smokes the old blu in every way.

Jurassic World looked pretty damn good.

JW sure did look good but because it's a recent film, I wasn't expecting anything less. I was looking more forward in seeing how the previous movies would look.

For me personally, after having seen them all this week, the first one was okay, the second great, third one weak and the fourth great.

[Agent Kay]

So once again skip the first 3 and just buy world?

[bookcase]

I plan to watch the original trilogy (I love them all in different ways) when I have more time, so I watched Jurassic World last night and I thought it looked and sounded terrific! It's a fun film and I love all the throwbacks to the original.

[Mierzwiak]

Originally Posted by DJR662

JW sure did look good but because it's a recent film, I wasn't expecting anything less.

They could've blasted all the grain and details into Oblivion...

[mzupeman]

Originally Posted by Agent Kay

So once again skip the first 3 and just buy world?

Read the bajillions of opinions here and make a decision.

[s_har]

Originally Posted by motorheadache95

This movie needs a complete Spielberg-supervised remaster-- maybe we'll get one in 5 years for the 30th anniversary?

I hope so too. Fingers crossed.

[alull]

Watched an hour of Jurassic Park yesterday and the colours looked a bit off but there was a bit more details. Watched the middle of the film this morning, which happen at night, and I loved the look of it! Looks like they had a tougher time getting the day time scenes right. But, for that price, I'm still happy upgrading.

[geckoman31]

Originally Posted by Riddhi2011

That 35mm scan had the wrong colour grading applied. It was washed out, had pale, drained colours and black crush where there would be details in the actual cinema projection. And then it had light leakage problems. Hardly reference material. The problem with that version was they most likely did not use the correct 1993 projection lamps with the right luminance. They used modern lamps and then the scanner had its own colour temperature.

I'd trust StereoD a lot more because they actually ran a print from Spielberg and in his presence. Then they colour corrected the 4K scan to match it with the projected image. The reason it looks different and more blanket orange is because Rec 709 colour space and digital grading cannot produce the colour separation and shade variety like organic photochemical timing can. The results were close but still imperfect. The actual projected image looks less warm and more bright than the 3D version.

From what I remember reading when the Jurassic park 3d came out was that Spielberg approved the work done for that release. Stereo D worked with him during the conversion process and color grading. I do not recall his involvement with the UHD release. Maybe I'm just holding out for a release with the quality of care I see from Criterion.

[DJR662]

Originally Posted by Mierzwiak

They could've blasted all the grain and details into Oblivion...

True but at some point you just got to have faith.

[BobbyMcGee]

I watched JP1 last night and I was pleased with the picture quality. Also, I absolutely loved the DTS-X MA track. I am happy.

[bradnoyes]

Finished JP1 last night and in a lot of ways it really captures what I love so much about the format. A top tier transfer, it is not. In fact, it might be in the bottom tier of the 100+ UHDs that I own, but it still is by far the best looking version available of a movie I've seen a hundred times and it came the closest to recapturing the feeling I had when watching it in the cinema back in 1993. Even with the poorly-aged CGI and a handful of odd looking shots, it still passes muster. Sounded great, too.

I then tried watching The Lost World, and wow, that movie is even worse than I remembered. It's rare for me to not finish a UHD but I felt like my life was being actually being drained from my body. I tried skipping ahead to the cool scenes, but they also made me depressed. Maybe some day when I get dementia I will be able to enjoy this film. Looked good, though.

[RalphoR]

Originally Posted by djr662

true but at some point you just got to have faith.

511387-george-michael-yes-i-ve-got-to-have-faith.jpg

[rroeder]

Definitely thought JP looked better than bluray, especially since I've been watching in 3D lately, but the audio was the bigger upgrade to me

[Dubstar]

I'm a little ticked the Fandango code for the 'Jurassic World 2' ticket from the BB steel isn't working ~ is it still too early to do this, is that why it's not live and all?

[BDougherty]

Originally Posted by Dubstar

I'm a little ticked the Fandango code for the 'Jurassic World 2' ticket from the BB steel isn't working ~ is it still too early to do this, is that why it's not live and all?

Tickets aren't on sale yet

[BDougherty]

I'm a little irritated I don't have this yet. I pre ordered the steelbook. Best buy told me I'd have it by 5/25 but of course they shipped it via ups so it won't arrive until next week.

[motorheadache95]

Originally Posted by LSK

Sorry to hear about your tv settings. The 2011 BD doesn't even look like film, with its harsh and processed overall look.

Don't get me wrong, it is better than the Blu-Ray version. But that's more of an anti-Bluray transfer statement than a pro-4K transfer statement.

The set is so reasonably priced I'd still recommend it as long as people kept their expectations in check and you actually have any interest in the sequels, since it sounds like Lost World and Jurassic World are actually pretty nice 4k transfers (So I've read, haven't watched those yet).

[roadwarrior980]

This was probably already answered, but do the digital copy codes redeem in UHD? And are they DV also or just HDR?

If so, I'll probably sell them to here