Jurassic Park Collection 4K UHD (1993-2015)

[gigan72]

Normally I'm in for stuff like booklets and slipboxes, but this release is just lazy enough that I'm gonna pass. The slipbox art is ugly imo, the repro film cell I'm sure is just like their To Kill a Mockingbird one which means it's not really like an actual film cell and is just cheap printed plastic, the booklet doesn't seem to have much material, and the cards are Jurassic World era art. Plus I've already got the og art slip from the previous reissue + slipbox also isn't a sturdy one so I don't have any good reason to pick this up.

[WBMakeVMarsMovieNOW]

Originally Posted by MovieGuy999

On the subject, I can't think of a Studio release that has gotten a new scan after they put out the 4K. I would say it's still too early. Maybe they are using these collector's editions to clear out the old discs.

There have been a few that have used the same scan again but not done all the DNR and other stuff to the raw scan master though and/or changed the colors and regraded.

[nick4Knight]

Universal is not likely to be a studio that would do that, though. So not really much point to mention that. Nor really to keep harping on theatrical colors for home video.

It's really weird to see someone believe studio PR on face value, reciting it like its a scientific fact, with regards to scanning/resolution being true etc but then accuse them of being inaccurate with color correcting for the "4K workflow". They did the work to color correct, if you believe the PR claim.

Why would you ever think it needs re-doing?

[Uptight]

Just saw an open-matte version from the 1st JP (1993), and at the same time looked into the 16:9 one (both supposed to be 35mm scans). I thought the Widescreen version would have more image on the sides, but this seems to be that case where the OM adds needlessly more content top/bottom, and the WS simply "cuts" both and that's it.

What is odd is that I remember seeing films in which the WS adds more content:





(Probably the same exact shot)

Yet, when a scene has some special effect (for example, some bits from the T-Rex attacking the car with the kids), both 4:3 open-matte and WS are 100% the same (at least the files I checked).

Note: I haven't checked again the fullscreen version from the DVD again, only those two.

[Ben_UK]

It depends on how the film was originally shot.

WS only adds more if it’s a 2:35.1 or higher presentation (scope). So when doing a pan and scan version they would zoom in and along the frame depending on what action was being displayed. If it’s open matte, it’s a much squarer frame and then they just zoom into it afterwards. The CG shots will all likely be masked off so they will have the black bars in all likelihood if that’s how the presentation has been done.

[Gac-Man]

I've seen footage of the open matte and while it does look sharper, we also get things like the boom mic and things we aren't meant to see. So if it is released it would need to be digitally removed if they want to put in the time.

[Ben_UK]

I presume this new set there is no doubt that it’s the exact same transfers? I’ve not seen any reviews or screenshots etc

[Kyle15]

People finding the open matte print scan for the first time and posting about it like they've made a discovery nobody knows about with a side of nerd conjecture is so funny

[Kyle15]

Originally Posted by Ben_UK

I presume this new set there is no doubt that it’s the exact same transfers? I’ve not seen any reviews or screenshots etc

Same transfers, nothing new.

[Sky_Captain]

Universal UK still lying about DV being included:

[Pocketkid2]

Originally Posted by Gac-Man

I've seen footage of the open matte and while it does look sharper, we also get things like the boom mic and things we aren't meant to see. So if it is released it would need to be digitally removed if they want to put in the time.

The ideal would be the open matte scan (because it's actually filmic and natural) but cropped to the theatrical ratio of 1.85:1

[JohnCarpenterFan]

Originally Posted by nick4Knight

Universal is not likely to be a studio that would do that, though. So not really much point to mention that. Nor really to keep harping on theatrical colors for home video.

It's really weird to see someone believe studio PR on face value, reciting it like its a scientific fact, with regards to scanning/resolution being true etc but then accuse them of being inaccurate with color correcting for the "4K workflow". They did the work to color correct, if you believe the PR claim.

Why would you ever think it needs re-doing?

Just saw this. I said before coming across the "studio PR" that I didn't think it was a mere upscale so this is not me falling for studio PR on face value. The statement by Universal merely backed up my own observations.

As for accusing them of "being inaccurate with color correcting", just because color correction has the word "correct" in there doesn't mean that it's accurate at all and they never claimed it was color corrected to match the original grade so that's a strange statement. I've seen and held multiple 35mm prints from the time of its release and was describing how it originally looked way before these fan scans started appearing online. The 2D Blu-ray and UHD grades look nothing like how it did theatrically.

The 3D version which had Spielberg's involvement and which actually used prints as reference during its "color correcting" while not exactly matching the prints comes a hell of a lot closer than those other releases.

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by starmike

So what's the consensus here? I missed the boat (not really upset about it) because the new release was thrown into this thread which I ignored because I have no interest in a set. So....should I find this or not if I have the previous 4K?

I watched the first movie last night and I really didn't think it looked that bad. But it's certainly not top tier catalog treatment. It reminds me a little of how Universal handled Back to the Future. There is no question there is finer detail versus the original BD (which looks more 'digital' in general). There has been some filtering applied usually fairly mild but a little more noticeable in a few sequences. The color does resemble the vibe of the BD to JCF's point and it takes on a more nuanced look in a better way. I recall the 3D BD looking too orange in 2D although worked okay enough in 3D. I still don't feel like the UHD stems from the OCN. I could sense the 3D did even though it was in 1080p watching it. I feel the BD stems from an IP as it just has a lot of that look, but who knows despite what the press release said. It's definitely 4K though and an upgrade from the BD. The DTS-HD audio is good as to be expected, but I recall one of the prior versions feeling a little more engaging, but didn't compare to the BD and working off older memories here and different set-ups.

[Gac-Man]

Originally Posted by Pocketkid2

The ideal would be the open matte scan (because it's actually filmic and natural) but cropped to the theatrical ratio of 1.85:1

Maybe one day we can get that. I'm sure there will be an eventual day we start to get 4K re-releases or remasters because there's newer technology to get a better source of a film. Technically we already have been getting some remasters of some films.

[truecineaste]

Do you recommend getting The Lost World on LD then for the most accurate framing? How about the fidelity of the sound mix on the LD compared to the theatrical mix?

Originally Posted by Riddhi2011

As of now, The Lost World looks the most faithful to its 35mm counterpart, but has a slightly different framing compared to the 35mm, which is shifted a bit more to the right than the left. The vertical framing is about the same.

[kristoffer]

Is the 4K re-release a new transfer?
https://twitter.com/empiremagazine/s...059263489?s=20

[Daz_85]

Originally Posted by kristoffer

Is the 4K re-release a new transfer?
https://twitter.com/empiremagazine/s...059263489?s=20

Was literally about to post this too. Is this new, or is this the 3D master in 2D?

[Kyle15]

Is it just me or does the trailer footage look different than the current 4k disc? It's not orange as hell and despite Youtube compression looks better textured. Could this be a silent restoration walk-back? You'd think Universal would advertise it. If it is different idk if they'll actually put it on disc but I'd like to dream.

Jurassic Park: 30th Anniversary | Official Trailer | Park Circus - YouTube

[JohnCarpenterFan]

Could just be a degrained and sharpened HDR > SDR conversion. It looks more like the UHD than the 3D release although it looks very dark.

[JackTwist]

Originally Posted by Kyle15

Is it just me or does the trailer footage look different than the current 4k disc? It's not orange as hell and despite Youtube compression looks better textured. Could this be a silent restoration walk-back? You'd think Universal would advertise it. If it is different idk if they'll actually put it on disc but I'd like to dream.

Jurassic Park: 30th Anniversary | Official Trailer | Park Circus - YouTube

If on disc, it would have certainly made the Universal Essentials disc, well, more essential!