Jurassic Park Collection 4K UHD (1993-2015)

[kristoffer]

It is baffling how bad this has been treated on home video. Same goes for the Bourne films also under Universal.
I watched the BD I own yesterday and it is way too bright leading to a lot the sets looking fake.

[Ben_UK]

Originally Posted by kristoffer

It is baffling how bad this has been treated on home video. Same goes for the Bourne films also under Universal.
I watched the BD I own yesterday and it is way too bright leading to a lot the sets looking fake.

I felt the same about Star Trek III on Genesis planet, the 4K has a better lighting balance, the planet still looks over lit but it looks better than on previous home media.

[JimRyan]

I just opened my set to do a marathon for Thanksgiving. In my 4k 6-pack, I have the Blu/DVD instead of the 4k/Blu. Is this a known issue?

[WBMakeVMarsMovieNOW]

Originally Posted by JimRyan

I just opened my set to do a marathon for Thanksgiving. In my 4k 6-pack, I have the Blu/DVD instead of the 4k/Blu. Is this a known issue?

no

[samuelkhan999]

Originally Posted by I-C-Blue

I’ve debated with many YouTube comments that don’t understand why this movie has yet to receive a definitive remaster. They keep claiming in comparison videos that the 2011 version is “how it should look” To put it simply, how is it that 1965’s Sound of Music, a MUCH OLDER FILM, received a better restoration than 1993’s Jurassic Park? Looking at these screenshots ...





It's basically how Jurassic Park should look and the 3D version is the closest thing to that. Even if you take out the colour grading aside, the clarity, albeit not as natural as it should be due to DNR, is still far more natural than the oversharpened 2011 image, especially when it comes to hair. Not to mention, the 3D version went as far as fixing that one contrast issue that bugged me for ages, in reference to 19:18 - 19:26 of the movie when Gennaro spoke to John Hammond, the contrast and saturation levels went all over the place. This occurs in both 2011 and 2018 version but NOT the 3D verison.



Which is why to date, the 3D version, albeit DNR, is by far, the MOST faitfhful restoration, involving Spielberg himself with Gary Rydstrom (sound engineering) and Dean Cundey for the 3D conversion along with StereoD. I noticed an IMMEDIATE difference when I saw the 3D trailer back in late 2012 and those short minutes wowed me more than the entire 2011 Blu-Ray. I wish Spielberg would be involved with the home video format but Universal keeps going ahead with their own “third party” (or in house) remastering, which they’re so infamous for. Peter Jackson’s King Kong on 4K is probably the worse offender with the HDR heavily modifying the original film look. Bourne Identity in 4K is also worsened to the same degree, upscaling the 2K DI master used for the DVD and just calling it a day, retraining the oversharpened image but looking worse.

Jurassic Park on the other hand post VHS / DVD release, keeps getting remastered as a trilogy. I wish they’d just treat the first movie alone with the TLC it long deserved. That’s why, albeit the DNR for the 3D version, I consider this to be my go-to format, even if I have to turn off the 3D to watch it in 2D.



Thank you for sharing these. These are beautiful. How I wish the 4K Remaster were based on these.

Amblin Entertainment’s Twister is 3 years younger and the WB 4k and Universal 4k with DV are beautiful discs. Surely one can start a petition and send it to Universal/Amblin Entertainment.

[I-C-Blue]

Originally Posted by WBMakeVMarsMovieNOW

I think he meant in the general sense of color tone and naturalness.

(On a side note, TSOM is a tricky one though in that the release prints were, warm and yellow in a way somewhat like JP can get, but the original director's grading was not like that, the studio forced him to dump his intended look, the most release re-mastering went with the colder, different colors original desired, but nothing at all like how the film was ever seen in theaters or on TV and so on for years and so totally revisionist compared to what anyone ever saw and for nostalgia purposes even if much closer to how the director had originally color timed it).

Thank you for understanding.

I don’t disagree with the bracket note for sure. And that’s my one fear of an intended element being lost whenever respective directors come to their passing and studio will do whatever they think is “correct”. But for Sound of music at least, it received a remaster that is almost free of any controversial tinkering (no over sharpening, colour grading changing from scene to scene, etc).

Originally Posted by WBMakeVMarsMovieNOW

They also seemed to have changed the framing of JP compared to how it was in theatrical.

Originally Posted by kristoffer

It is baffling how bad this has been treated on home video. Same goes for the Bourne films also under Universal.
I watched the BD I own yesterday and it is way too bright leading to a lot the sets looking fake.

All the more reason this film deserves a definitive re-release. But Universal being Universal, they are too stubborn to initiate that. And yes, Bourne Identity especially suffered with what you’ve said, the same way Jurassic Park 2011 Blu-Ray was also too bright, lacking any contrast and deep blacks.

Originally Posted by samuelkhan999

Amblin Entertainment’s Twister is 3 years younger and the WB 4k and Universal 4k with DV are beautiful discs. Surely one can start a petition and send it to Universal/Amblin Entertainment.

I just might. I even want to produce a video talking about Jurassic Park’s home video mistreatment to supplement with it because it’s hardly ever talked about (unless someone can beat me to it, please do!!!), let alone difficult for the general consumer to understand. Most people on YouTube thinks the 2011 Blu-Ray is “perfect".

[samuelkhan999]

Originally Posted by I-C-Blue

Thank you for understanding.
".

If you could do it, that would be great.

[Cremildo]

Jurassic Park was my favorite film from childhood until my mid-20s. VHS, DVD and Blu-ray are the only formats I've watched it on (I was too young when it came out in theaters). It upsets me that I've never seen one of the most important films in my life with its original, intended visual properties.

[Ben_UK]

I don’t know who was the driving force behind the recent remaster of Shaun of the Dead, but it perhaps gives me a glimmer of hope that Universal will allow / fund a remaster of JP1 (eventually), even if the perfect opportunity for that has already passed (2023 - 30th Anniversary).

[Pocketkid2]

I would pay a lot more than normal for a properly remastered Jurassic Park 4K HDR Bluray

Unfortunately I don't know if I can do anything to make it happen

[Brucaliffo]

Does anyone know if the slipcover is still included if I purchase the 4K edition on Amazon now?

[PatrynXX]

takes me till Jan 11th 2025 to find a continuity error that isn't on imdb. lol. Bar scene at the beginning 2 pinball games are being played first guy show well it's on. But Pinbot has no power lol I still like this one more than ultra violent Lost World..

[sfmarine]

Originally Posted by Brucaliffo

Does anyone know if the slipcover is still included if I purchase the 4K edition on Amazon now?

My copy didn’t come with one. However, The Lost World did.

I ordered around Black Friday.

[1924]

https://x.com/JohnDiLillo/status/1831123760373490016
is this how it looks on 35mm?

[The Rider]

Not quite, the movie had a warm golden look. The 3D Blu-ray Disc came close to the look of the 35 mm prints, but wasn't perfect either (color of the sky).

Jurassic Park III also has the wrong color grading. I don't know about The Lost World.

[The Rider]

Originally Posted by Riddhi2011

Yes, but it's a bit too reddish and does not have as good a colour separation as the release prints have. The warm tone looks like a blanket over the original image, lacking nuance. We don't have an optimal version of JP1 (or JP2 & JP3) on home video, yet. JP2 also doesn't look the same as the prints, which are very warm and have a strong green and cyan-blue cast. Many scenes have a warm, yellow glow. The UHD, comparatively, looks more neutral. I prefer the colours on the prints. They are richer.

Do you have a reference or example of what The Lost World looked like on the 35 prints?

[The Rider]

Originally Posted by JohnCarpenterFan

No need to compare it to how other films look or anything. A proper grade is simply what is required most of all. All Universal needed to do was use a reference print or multiple 35mm prints to assist with that.

Instead it looks like they just referenced a completely unfaithful old telecine, going as far as adding magenta to the UHDs of the original Jurassic Park and the third film too. The magenta we see on older telecines on modern displays wasn't even as noticeable (or sometimes wasn't even visible) while watching on CRT displays which those masters were made to be seen on.

What they did was absolutely dumbfounding, especially since Spielberg was involved in the creation of the newer 3D master which had a much better grade. Sadly color accuracy has historically never been much of a concern on home video. What's even more unfortunate is that people think that this is how the films should look and whenever a remaster comes out that looks different (even if it is confirmed to be more accuate), it is decried for being revisionist or not looking "natural" because we all know that expressive art forms such as film are always supposed to look like real life.

I largely agree with you here. However, the consumer never knows whether a new restoration is authentic or revisionist. As a rule, the restoration companies always say their work is correct, take for example the restoration of The Good, the Bad and the Ugly or Rambo I-III by Studiocanal. A sad example here is The Godfather, Robert Harris restoration was so authentic and supervised by Gordon Willis and Francis Ford Coppola. The new restoration for the Ultra HD Blu-ray Disc is indeed revisionist.

[JohnCarpenterFan]

Originally Posted by The Rider

I largely agree with you here. However, the consumer never knows whether a new restoration is authentic or revisionist. As a rule, the restoration companies always say their work is correct, take for example the restoration of The Good, the Bad and the Ugly or Rambo I-III by Studiocanal. A sad example here is The Godfather, Robert Harris restoration was so authentic and supervised by Gordon Willis and Francis Ford Coppola. The new restoration for the Ultra HD Blu-ray Disc is indeed revisionist.

If it's home video, then it should be assumed to be "revisionist" and realistically the best one could hope for is something that tries to remain faithful to the original intent while embracing all the other revisionist aspects.

If someone wants an authentic representation of a film's original photochemical look, then they'd be better asking for preservation masters like what's performed by film archives. I see a lot of posts from people claiming to know the original look of films (some of which have no known surviving unfaded references), but I doubt a lot of them have even seen the original photochemical look on film. Instead many just seem to assume that their favorite home video releases or inaccurate fan scans are correct when that's usually far from the truth.

[Infallible Presence]

Just realized this line could be a reference to the famous "where's the beef?" ad.

[d3nt0n]

Originally Posted by Infallible Presence

Just realized this line could be a reference to the famous "where's the beef?" ad.

Or, just hear me out, maybe she didn't see the goat and was just inquiring where it was.