Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom (2018)

[Predatorix38417]

Originally Posted by jayman3

Jeez. People already judging a film on 30 seconds of footage.

I think it's fair game. If there's an issue with CGI or aspect ratio, people are obviously gonna point it out.

[Riddhi2011]

runtrailertease18n0ss4.jpg

So they went for 2.39:1 after all. I already see how small the characters look in the frame. The CG, though early, looks awful!
I still can't accept that they went with 2.39:1. I guess I was too attached with this series' every single aspect and expected it to stick by its pre-established look. This just looks wrong to me.
They completely ignored the reason why Spielberg had chosen 1.85:1.

I don't think the IMAX ratio will be 1.89:1. Because, this is a ALexa 65 shot movie. Scope films are almost always shot in the open gate mode, which is 2.1:1; only slightly taller than 70mm 2.20:1 ratio. If they have a 1.89:1 IMAX version, they'll have to crop the sides significantly.

However, they can shoot select scenes in 1.78:1 and then crop down to 1.89:1 for a shifting aspect ratio in IMAX digital.
Anyway, my heart sunk the moment I saw the teaser clips. It's a personal thing though. And I can understand everyone's excitement here.

A note on the image quality - I realise it's Youtube compression, but the faces look completely devoid of any textural complexity. It looks like a regular digitally shot feature. Nothing filmic about it.

runtrailertease33qs9b.jpg

As for the CG, I hope it's not finished yet, as it looks awful and fake. Rexy was supposed to be an animatronic, inside the container. But she looks completely CGI in the other teaser. Like most of you, I am also worried about her fate.

[Bates_Motel]

Originally Posted by Predatorix38417

I think it's fair game. If there's an issue with CGI or aspect ratio, people are obviously gonna point it out.

Since everyone knows it's early and probably not finished, there's 100% no reason for anyone to point it out, or cry foul. So really, it shouldn't be fair game to any one who knows how movies are made. It's just one more thing the outrage culture can complain about today before the next thing tomorrow, when in reality it's a non-issue.

[wonderer99]

I guess I am one of the few who really does not notice what aspect ratio a Jurassic Park film is in.

[levcore]

Originally Posted by jayman3

Jeez. People already judging a film on 30 seconds of footage.

Yet that's what the average tv spot requires us to do

[Blu-Benny]

[Cremildo]

I was going to say that the CGI looked (unsurprisingly) unimpressive yesterday, but after being torn apart for not thinking the computerized images in the last two movies were Oscar-worthy, I decided to stay quiet. Nice to see other people did it for me instead.

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by wonderer99

I guess I am one of the few who really does not notice what aspect ratio a Jurassic Park film is in.

I don't really notice it either but I am pretty ignorant as to what aspect ratios are other than a number.

[Todd Tomorrow]

Originally Posted by Riddhi2011

[Show spoiler]Attachment 187890

So they went for 2.39:1 after all. I already see how small the characters look in the frame. The CG, though early, looks awful!
I still can't accept that they went with 2.39:1. I guess I was too attached with this series' every single aspect and expected it to stick by its pre-established look. This just looks wrong to me.
They completely ignored the reason why Spielberg had chosen 1.85:1.

I don't think the IMAX ratio will be 1.89:1. Because, this is a ALexa 65 shot movie. Scope films are almost always shot in the open gate mode, which is 2.1:1; only slightly taller than 70mm 2.20:1 ratio. If they have a 1.89:1 IMAX version, they'll have to crop the sides significantly.

However, they can shoot select scenes in 1.78:1 and then crop down to 1.89:1 for a shifting aspect ratio in IMAX digital.
Anyway, my heart sunk the moment I saw the teaser clips. It's a personal thing though. And I can understand everyone's excitement here.

A note on the image quality - I realise it's Youtube compression, but the faces look completely devoid of any textural complexity. It looks like a regular digitally shot feature. Nothing filmic about it.

[Show spoiler]Attachment 187892

As for the CG, I hope it's not finished yet, as it looks awful and fake. Rexy was supposed to be an animatronic, inside the container. But she looks completely CGI in the other teaser. Like most of you, I am also worried about her fate.

I don't see what the drama about the aspect ratio is about. J.A.Bayona shoots all of his films wide, that's just how he rolls. He is a director with a particular aesthetic and its his film, not Spielberg's. Maybe you are taking Fritz Lang's remark that Cinemascope is for snakes and coffins a little too literally. I'm just glad that Trevorrow isn't doing this one, at least it won't look like a TV movie.

How anybody can judge the CGI from an early youtube trailer is beyond me. They are still going to work for months on this.

[NegaScott128]

Originally Posted by Riddhi2011

A note on the image quality - I realise it's Youtube compression, but the faces look completely devoid of any textural complexity. It looks like a regular digitally shot feature. Nothing filmic about it.

Attachment 187892

The iTunes version has a higher bitrate, and you can see a bit more detail in the faces.

[postmodel]

To me this movie is a lot more than just a film to review and critique (please note this is not me critiquing people who critique this film!). I was about 6 or so when I saw the original (twice in theaters) and I saw all the other sequels in the theater as well, with my dad pulling me out of school early to surprise me with tickets to see The Lost World (straight up thought there was a family emergency!).

Fast forward, I have a 7 year old son. He loves dinosaurs. He loves the Jurassic Park franchise and even loves critiquing (!) how they got the designs wrong based on semi-recent scientific discoveries. However, he cannot wait to see this. I showed him the recent clips and June cannot get here fast enough.

These movies inspired him to begin writing and designing his own type of Jurassic Park/World story about a hybrid pteranodon/velociraptor

[Show spoiler](which may be the Indoraptor in The Fallen Kingdom?!?)

who escapes on an island that to him combines Isla Nublar and Isla Sorna. And now he is prepping a sequel about a volcano blast threatening to take out the "good" dinosaurs...

[Show spoiler]and there may be some Tom and Jerry and Pokémon in there too.

This is why I love these movies no matter how the CGI looks and no matter how hollow a plot may feel. It is an experience, one that now, for me, crosses generations. My dad never looked so happy watching Jurassic World on Blu-ray with his grandson as my son schooled him on dinosaurs the whole time.

Magic I tell you!

[imsounoriginal]

Originally Posted by Riddhi2011

Attachment 187890

So they went for 2.39:1 after all. I already see how small the characters look in the frame. The CG, though early, looks awful!
I still can't accept that they went with 2.39:1. I guess I was too attached with this series' every single aspect and expected it to stick by its pre-established look. This just looks wrong to me.
They completely ignored the reason why Spielberg had chosen 1.85:1.

I don't think the IMAX ratio will be 1.89:1. Because, this is a ALexa 65 shot movie. Scope films are almost always shot in the open gate mode, which is 2.1:1; only slightly taller than 70mm 2.20:1 ratio. If they have a 1.89:1 IMAX version, they'll have to crop the sides significantly.

However, they can shoot select scenes in 1.78:1 and then crop down to 1.89:1 for a shifting aspect ratio in IMAX digital.
Anyway, my heart sunk the moment I saw the teaser clips. It's a personal thing though. And I can understand everyone's excitement here.

A note on the image quality - I realise it's Youtube compression, but the faces look completely devoid of any textural complexity. It looks like a regular digitally shot feature. Nothing filmic about it.

Attachment 187892

As for the CG, I hope it's not finished yet, as it looks awful and fake. Rexy was supposed to be an animatronic, inside the container. But she looks completely CGI in the other teaser. Like most of you, I am also worried about her fate.

Characters look small, dinos look big. It conveys scale. Yeah, scope gets overused these days, but if a director like Bayona knows what he's doing with it (along with a good DP), there's no reason it can't look good. My favorite movie franchise is Bond and those movies have used 1.66:1, 1.85:1, and scope across 24 movies. It's really not a big deal.

[supersix4]

lol not that one can accurately judge 30 seconds of footage but it looks like a weird hybrid of Lost World and JPIII lol, alone on the island (3), moving dinosaurs around (LW)

[Riddhi2011]

Originally Posted by NegaScott128

The iTunes version has a higher bitrate, and you can see a bit more detail in the faces.

Faces still look very flat, featureless and pasty; lacking in dimension.

As for the aspect ratio, no I disagree that dinos look bigger. They look cropped out, while the humans feel tiny. As I said previously, there's a reason Spielberg and Dean Cundey chose a 1.85:1 ratio, despite shooting 'Hook' in scope. Also, Spielberg's previous monster feature 'Jaws' was 2.35:1. So, he could've shot JP using the same "monster-movie" logic.

Janusz Kaminski and Shelly Johnson respected Cundey's choice and retained the same ratio (even though JP2 was "larger" in scale) because they wanted to create this intimate and involved, yet big, tall and scary atmosphere. Flat ratio has both. You can make really nice portrait compositions in flat and at the same time have large set pieces, like JP, War of the Worlds, Avatar, Life of Pi, to name a few.

John Schwartzman and Colin Trevorrow wanted 2.40:1, initially. The concept art and the location scout photo all show 2.40:1 composition. But, Spielberg insisted on 1.85:1. Eventually, both parties reached a nice compromise with 2.00:1, which is still flat and fits the digital IMAX screens well. It also looks big in our HDTV or 4K TVS, without looking like "TV movie." The first three do not like like TV movies either, despite being 1.85:1.

This is why I wonder, did Spielberg have no say in this movie? Was he not consulted? Or was he not as involved due to having shoot two films ('...Post' and 'Kidnapping...')? Has JW become one of his "productions" where he has very little creative input.

Another thing I was saddened to see go was celluloid film acquisition. All of the movies were shot on film. At a time when film is making a big comeback with Star Wars, (JW no less), Dunkirk, Baby Driver, Wonder Woman, La La Land, the JP series, which has been kind of a stronghold of film, goes digital.

Maybe it is just me, but I feel JW2 is too different than the other movies. I also fear that now all Jurassic Park movies will be shot digitally and will be in cinemascope. For the record I also dislike when a scope film series goes flat for one odd entry.

Anyway, I can understand the excitement that all of you have for this. i'm happy for you guys loving the teaser. But to me, it no longer feels "Jurassic Park." It feels far removed from the series that I grew up almost worshipping; every single aspect of it. I don't feel angry. I just feel sad; a sense of loss. As if I was personally involved with this.

What this has done is taught me never to be too invested in something that's not yours. Too much expectation will inevitably get one hurt in the end.
Anyway, there's really not much I can say about it anymore.

[Todd Tomorrow]

If it's got dinosaurs eating people, I'm happy.

[brooks101189]

Originally Posted by Destinys Memory

A trailer for a trailer.

Also, Chris Pratt screaming "Run!"

Time To Change -- The Brady Bunch - YouTube

Probably should have had him do a retake.

I think it's meant to be a comedic moment in the movie proper

[Cremildo]

Back in the day when JPIII as still in production, there was a fansite - Dan's JPIII Page. I used to visit it daily. It was very popular. When the first trailer as released, some cinemas showed it in scope. Lots of fans were taken aback - so much so that the site owner managed to get a quote from Joe Johnston himself about the subject. He said that the film was going to be flat just like the previous two, otherwise he'd have to crop the dinosaurs' heads. He wrote that in a jokey-yet-somewhat-serious way. And it made perfect sense.

[wonderer99]

Originally Posted by Todd Tomorrow

I don't see what the drama about the aspect ratio is about. J.A.Bayona shoots all of his films wide, that's just how he rolls. He is a director with a particular aesthetic and its his film, not Spielberg's. Maybe you are taking Fritz Lang's remark that Cinemascope is for snakes and coffins a little too literally. I'm just glad that Trevorrow isn't doing this one, at least it won't look like a TV movie.

How anybody can judge the CGI from an early youtube trailer is beyond me. They are still going to work for months on this.

I agree. Moaning about the CGI at this point is just ridiculous. Surely everyone at this point know it is a work in progress pretty much up to release. Remember when the whole background was changed in scenes from the Jurassic World trailer to the film?

[Cremildo]

We are commenting the CGI that we saw in the teaser. I don't think anyone is judging the CGI in the finished film, for two basic reasons: the film isn't actually finished and no one has seen it.

Surely we are allowed to give an opinion on the content of a teaser?

[wonderer99]

Originally Posted by Cremildo

We are commenting the CGI that we saw in the teaser. I don't think anyone is judging the CGI in the finished film, for two basic reasons: the film isn't actually finished and no one has seen it.

Surely we are allowed to give an opinion on the content of a teaser?

To be honest I think these days Studios release previews, and trailers way to early. It feels like after watching 34 TV spots, 7 trailers, 4 behind the scenes videos and seeing 74 posters I have seen the movie. I miss the days when your first glimpse of a new film that you never even knew existed was in a dark cinema not watching a teaser for a trailer for a film not out for a year on a phone!

What can I say......i'm old!