Jurassic Park Collection 4K UHD (1993-2015)

[Geoff D]

Tell you what tho, I still get chills from the Brachiosaurus reveal in JP.

[VickPS]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

The way people talk about this disc you'd think it was one of the worst catalogue disasters out there and mai word, that's just all kinds of wrong.

Just need a proper frame of reference. Then it would naturally come:

Originally Posted by Cvalda

The 35mm archival print I saw of this a few years back direct from Universal's archives (so pristine that the projectionist was forbidden from threading the reels together and we had to wait like 5 minutes between every other reel change!) was one of the most vibrant and beautiful prints I've ever seen and it's so sad this movie continues to look like dogshit on home video, just so bizarre and inexcusable

Originally Posted by JohnCarpenterFan

I've seen plenty of prints over the years and they outclass the old Blu-ray and similar-looking UHD when it comes to color by a considerable margin. Some adjustments here and there is not going to bring back the splendor that I'm accustomed to seeing since 35mm is mainly how I've experienced this film.

I'm sure there's plenty of people that have never seen how good this film can look

This film could, easily, be the single best UHD on the market. And one of the most beautiful looking movies to boot.

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Even its reputation as Magenta Park seemed to melt away when simply being watched on its own without any direct method of comparison, skin is nice and warm a lot of the time, the jungle greens are plenty vibrant and there's even a bit of good old Cundey blue on the darker shots.

Wow, got a good chuckle here.
I might be particularly sensitive to the matter, but I know I personally wouldn't need direct methods of comparisons to perceive such thing as completely f*cked.

[Show spoiler]

All UHD screenshots from HighDefDiscNews, UHD captures excellence.
I also find the concept a little puzzling in the first place when in absence of direct comparisons 90% of the UHD market wouldn't probably need to exist.

Originally Posted by The Rider

Very interesting as always. Apparently JP III was once a good film, at least visually (although I find JP and ILW even stronger here) and on home entertainment it became aesthetically completely boring. The contrast is lacking, everything is washed out and far too much magenta.

Do you own the old Ultra HD Blu-ray Disc and could you compare your 35 mm images with it?

I do own it, but I don't think I have means to reproduce any UHD on my PC.
But all those posted here used UHD screenshots posted by jpilla415 here, you can just replace the new master with the old UHD version he shared.

Originally Posted by The Rider

Regarding The Lost World, how much does the color grading of the 35 mm copies differ from that of the Blu-ray Disc and Ultra HD Blu-ray Disc? And where is the Ultra HD Blu-ray Disc less accurate than the Blu-ray Disc?

I'd say in the usual way you described in the previous message. Although the two TLW prints differ in color, they both offer generally more teal blues and a warmer picture at times (with more pleasing curves), the ending shot being the most noteworthy example.
I don't think TLW UHD is less accurate than the BD.

I'm actually not the biggest fan of how TLW looks on 35mm to be honest.
For the entirety of my Home-Video-only days, I believed Jurassic Park had an extremely dated, flat, TV-like cinematography and regarded The Lost World as a stunning and modern looking movie, Kaminski being on a whole different league than Cundey.
Which turned out to be total nonsense. Both JP and JP3 have a timeless aesthetic and look very modern and vibrant while Kaminski and Spielberg shot TLW as a vintage, stylistic noir-ish movie.

Which is probably what saved it in Home-Video. They couldn't rape it (even though it looks like they tried with this new release) because there is simply not enough flexible information in the source.

Originally Posted by Ben_UK

I am curious as to the origin of the scan / master used for JP1. Was the 2013 3D version created by performing a new scan of the OCN?

They claimed they did. It never quite struck me as OCN, but something was definitely scanned back then. This is what Universal used to promote the release:

Jurassic Park 3D - Trailer - YouTube

[Show spoiler]

Originally Posted by Ben_UK

If so where did the 2018 release come from? To me it looks like an old(er) scan so could it be that the 2018 was derived from a scan pre-2013 or maybe just after?

As tragicomic as this would be, there is a chance the UHD came from this new scan, prior to any edit and Spielberg grading supervision and fixes, regraded by butchers to resemble the old Home-Video version.

[RalphoR]

I think I have those great Zavvi 4k steelbooks for most of my JP/JW movies so ordered this set for the (hopefully included) digital codes. Plus, may as well keep the original DTS:X track on hand for JP (if it's on the first 4k release).

[Streetlight]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Fair enough that you liked it, but the movie has only a few minutes of actual CG. Not kidding, literally just a few minutes' worth. So the "oh, the CG was low-rez, the movie will never look better!" reasoning as to why the whole movie couldn't look better is fundamentally incorrect. Even the CG itself looks better in scans of frames taken from prints and old magazines, and Universal's own promotional stills derived from the 4K transfer done for the 3D look a damned sight better than this UHD IMO.

How does the current 4K fare against the print scans, magazines, and promotional stills?

[suspiciouscoffee]

Originally Posted by Jedi247

I find it ironic how people complain about Colin Trevorrow’s directing style and “blocking,” when Steven Spielberg himself personally chose him to direct. Same thing with James Mangold directing Indiana Jones 5. So who are we to judge?

Well gee now that you mention it this totally looks in line with Spielberg’s masterful direction. I can’t even tell the difference.

[Ben_UK]

Originally Posted by accountsareapain

The steelbook is being released also in Germany and Italy, so there will be a different disc for those countries, because the American disc doesn't have German or Italian. Whether the video encode is different, we don't know, but there's a chance. If you see the back pic in
https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Juras...lu-ray/390403/ it lists the four major European dubbing languages, so I think the steelbook will be released also in France and Spain eventually, and in the Nordic countries and in the Netherlands because of the subtitles. The Amazon UK listing mentions the same languages as the Italian pic, so I think UK will get the European version, meaning there's a chance UK has an alternative video encode. But yes, the languages listed in blu-ray.com for the UK steelbook are wrong and come from the previous disc.

It would make sense for the UK to get the same disc as the US, but im aware that common sense doesnt always come into these things.

[Buckster666]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4t04x75on34

Shane Lee's review is up

[Hedrox]

Originally Posted by accountsareapain

The steelbook is being released also in Germany and Italy, so there will be a different disc for those countries, because the American disc doesn't have German or Italian. Whether the video encode is different, we don't know, but there's a chance. If you see the back pic in
https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Juras...lu-ray/390403/ it lists the four major European dubbing languages, so I think the steelbook will be released also in France and Spain eventually, and in the Nordic countries and in the Netherlands because of the subtitles. The Amazon UK listing mentions the same languages as the Italian pic, so I think UK will get the European version, meaning there's a chance UK has an alternative video encode. But yes, the languages listed in blu-ray.com for the UK steelbook are wrong and come from the previous disc.

Universal only do separate encodes for the EU market when the movie has on-screen text, such as locations or subtitles for foreign dialogue. They'll be burned in on the US disc and player generated on the EU one (including UK).
That won't be the case here, as the previous 4Ks also used the same encodes across all releases.

[Piriven]

Originally Posted by RalphoR

There is the McDonald's order while dangling off a cliff that almost brings that super intense scene to a grinding halt for me. It's much worse than a silly nightmare vision. Talk about a wet blanket....

The burger order always makes me chuckle, especially Vaughn’s delivery of ‘no onions on mine!’.

That genuinely funny quip is a far cry from a goofy dream sequence in which a raptor calls Grant ‘Alan’

[Ben_UK]

Originally Posted by Hedrox

Universal only do separate encodes for the EU market when the movie has on-screen text, such as locations or subtitles for foreign dialogue. They'll be burned in on the US disc and player generated on the EU one (including UK).
That won't be the case here, as the previous 4Ks also used the same encodes across all releases.

Yea, I really hate player generated captions because most of the time they implement them with zero effort to match the font / timing / colour/ fade in or out etc.

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by VickPS

This film could, easily, be the single best UHD on the market. And one of the most beautiful looking movies to boot.

The point he and I are generally making is that you and a few others are so focused on how this could be so amazing that you're exaggerating how bad it currently is. You talk about it like it's a True Lies or 3:10 to Yuma and it's not at all.

Also that pink was gif is pretty rough, but that's a big thing this release seem to help with! I watched a movie the other day with an old pink master and it bugged me considerably, but I popped in the new JP disc for a quick look last night and there was nothing like that in that brachiasaur scene. It's way more neutral now. The effects shots are still soft af, but I will say the grain is so much more refined that it makes the effects shot DNR less obvious.

[Ben_UK]

This JP CGI effects shot has (in my opinion) never looked great.
https://slow.pics/c/GCRZrJlR

I want to believe that a different colour grade could improve it but I am not sure.

[BluProofie]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Watched the old UHD of JP again just for gits and shiggles. And...yeah. If that was the last word on JP on home video then I wouldn't be too cut up about it, I just wouldn't. Even tho we've had all these amazingly faithful indie transfers of whatever movies - with a few decent studio ones thrown in too - over the last seven years the UHD of JP doesn't disgrace itself amongst that company, and given how some majors are still heavily 'grain managing' their catalogue stuff (*cough* Warners) it looks surprisingly natural all things considered.

Good solid detail, stable too (with that odd little image stabilisation error when Hammond is talking to Grant in the trailer at the dig site), very fine grain, no blatant grain management outside of the very few opticals and VFX (even tho we know it has been slightly filtered as per the old vs new screenshots, it doesnt have horrible magnetic grain everywhere), well-balanced HDR grade (with the burnt-out dynamic range of the early CG filmouts being the only issue, them not having been finished in a log-type space), and I had zero problems with the colour, that coming purely from my own personal taste and not from any inklings or notions of what it *should* look like. Even the encode is excellent.

The way people talk about this disc you'd think it was one of the worst catalogue disasters out there and mai word, that's just all kinds of wrong. Even its reputation as Magenta Park seemed to melt away when simply being watched on its own without any direct method of comparison, skin is nice and warm a lot of the time, the jungle greens are plenty vibrant and there's even a bit of good old Cundey blue on the darker shots. As mentioned before, something verr weird happens just before the "I'll be accepting your apology" line with Hammond in the jeep, the shot of Gennaro seems to seamlessly blend from a negative scan into something a lot dupier, like they did a digital dissolve from one source to another because the neg was too badly damaged or something. Be interesting to see if the new UHD fixes these quirks.

If the new UHD does indeed let out a bit more visible grain and detail because they undid the filter then I'll take that all day long, it'll make a good transfer that bit betterer. Gotta wait a couple weeks for the UK versions however.

I got the disc for $10 because of your review and was happy with it. Definitely much better than the blu.

[VickPS]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

The point he and I are generally making is that you and a few others are so focused on how this could be so amazing that you're exaggerating how bad it currently is. You talk about it like it's a True Lies or 3:10 to Yuma and it's not at all.

I talk about it for what it is, simply:

• A pink CRT grade in 2018, emulating a look that only exists as a mistake.

• For a movie that received 12 years ago a modern grading supervised by its director.

After that, it's all a matter of priorities.
If a filmic grading ranks high on someone's list of what makes a good transfer, you could rarely do worse than this. And for some it's at the very top.

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

Also that pink was gif is pretty rough, but that's a big thing this release seem to help with! I watched a movie the other day with an old pink master and it bugged me considerably, but I popped in the new JP disc for a quick look last night and there was nothing like that in that brachiasaur scene. It's way more neutral now. The effects shots are still soft af, but I will say the grain is so much more refined that it makes the effects shot DNR less obvious.

And I'm glad to read this, and wish you and others will find some enjoyment out of this release.

Not sure if clear, but this endeavor of us is ironically born from altruistic tendencies only, as a proper release would do next to nothing for me personally because, no matter how good, it surely would never surpass in terms of enjoyment the 4K scan, cinema DTS version I watch, or the immersion and spectacle of JP3D on a VR set.
I just feel it sucks for others.. but hey, if you're happy with I should stop raining on your parade.

There just should be awareness of the fact it could easily stop being:

"It's actually not THAT bad"

And be instead:



Which is what the movie deserves.
And already is on 30+ years old film. That's all.

Originally Posted by Ben_UK

This JP CGI effects shot has (in my opinion) never looked great.
https://slow.pics/c/GCRZrJlR

I want to believe that a different colour grade could improve it but I am not sure.

That shot looks phenomenal on 35mm, still totally believable and awe inducing. Rex in particular looks legit real to this day, especially on the old Poita scan (3:59):

Jurassic Park - ILM Visual Effects | Original 35mm Presentation - YouTube

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Streetlight

How does the current 4K fare against the print scans, magazines, and promotional stills?

I don't know, you'd have to aks the people who keep mentioning such things incessantly and decree any deviation from them to be one of the most "ghastly", "shocking", "dreadful" and "completely f*cked" grades of all time, anywhere. Except that they're not saying it should look exactly like the 35mm prints, not at all, no. Except that they keep mentioning the 35mm prints and keep directly comparing them back and forth. I is verr confuse

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

The point he and I are generally making is that you and a few others are so focused on how this could be so amazing that you're exaggerating how bad it currently is. You talk about it like it's a True Lies or 3:10 to Yuma and it's not at all.

Also that pink was gif is pretty rough, but that's a big thing this release seem to help with! I watched a movie the other day with an old pink master and it bugged me considerably, but I popped in the new JP disc for a quick look last night and there was nothing like that in that brachiasaur scene. It's way more neutral now. The effects shots are still soft af, but I will say the grain is so much more refined that it makes the effects shot DNR less obvious.

And yet an instant gif comparison is how no-one ever would actually watch anything. Ever. The human mind has a gift for adapting to colour - if it's not being browbeaten into submission by an almost religious level of furvor that something is "wrong", natch - and on a properly calibrated set (to D65 for white) then JP's old UHD simply doesn't present that way in isolation.

I know that goes against my entire ethos of UHD reviewing, that comparison is king, but I do always watch whatever on its own first. No comparisons, no distractions. Take it as it comes. If anything stands out then I'll go back and spot check, then A/B next to whatever other version(s). In that context then the old JP UHD may well come unstuck vs the new one, and that's re: my own personal taste, nothing holier than that, but equally without that frame of reference then it looked rather nice to me. Could've done with some more warmth in the Badlands and the Nedry Dodgson scene looked very dull and pale, but the rest? Not a problem.

[jess1581]

I don't have Geoff's prowess, but to put it simply, when I had the 2018 UHD I felt it coulda looked better. When I watched the 2025 UHD, it was smooth sailing.

[VickPS]

"Beautiful vs ugly" constantly turning into "35mm vs UHD", for some bizarre reason.

As if it's somehow problematic to compare the latest release of a movie to the best looking version of it.
Which just happens to be the original.

[Ben_UK]

I thought the colours in the original UHD were somewhat anaemic, particuarly skin tones, and for some reason the colour of Dr Sattler's shirt has always bothered me in this movie, quite irrational I know.

[Streetlight]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

I don't know, you'd have to aks the people who keep mentioning such things incessantly and decree any deviation from them to be one of the most "ghastly", "shocking", "dreadful" and "completely f*cked" grades of all time, anywhere. Except that they're not saying it should look exactly like the 35mm prints, not at all, no. Except that they keep mentioning the 35mm prints and keep directly comparing them back and forth. I is verr confuse

Detail-wise, to clarify.