Jurassic Park 3D re-release in theaters April 5 2013

[Koray Savas 2,260]

That's not an explanation, it's a ridiculous assumption based on little evidence since it almost all relies on the fence not reaching the tunnel. This type of mistake is seen later in the film where the fence Grant and kids climb over inexplicably ends.

Even assuming there's a cliff, there is no cliffside once we're down in the gorge. It would have to be directly next to the goat pen, but all we see is the cement wall and then a wide open expanse.

It's a production error, no one should have had to put that much time into explaining such a little thing.

[MSM 194]

That's not an explanation, it's a ridiculous assumption based on little evidence since it almost all relies on the fence not reaching the tunnel. This type of mistake is seen later in the film where the fence Grant and kids climb over inexplicably ends.

Even assuming there's a cliff, there is no cliffside once we're down in the gorge. It would have to be directly next to the goat pen, but all we see is the cement wall and then a wide open expanse.

It's a production error, no one should have had to put that much time into explaining such a little thing.

Moreover, this explanation does not cover the fact how a few sequences later Ellie and Muldoon get down so quickly in the ravine when they find the crashed car, and then back to the Jeep when the T-rex approaches.

[Rachael Foley 10,162]

That's not an explanation, it's a ridiculous assumption based on little evidence since it almost all relies on the fence not reaching the tunnel. This type of mistake is seen later in the film where the fence Grant and kids climb over inexplicably ends.

Even assuming there's a cliff, there is no cliffside once we're down in the gorge. It would have to be directly next to the goat pen, but all we see is the cement wall and then a wide open expanse.

It's a production error, no one should have had to put that much time into explaining such a little thing.

Moreover, this explanation does not cover the fact how a few sequences later Ellie and Muldoon get down so quickly in the ravine when they find the crashed car, and then back to the Jeep when the T-rex approaches.

Yeah. kinda like how we don't know how Arnold got to the shed, serious problems there.

[MSM 194]

That's not an explanation, it's a ridiculous assumption based on little evidence since it almost all relies on the fence not reaching the tunnel. This type of mistake is seen later in the film where the fence Grant and kids climb over inexplicably ends.

Even assuming there's a cliff, there is no cliffside once we're down in the gorge. It would have to be directly next to the goat pen, but all we see is the cement wall and then a wide open expanse.

It's a production error, no one should have had to put that much time into explaining such a little thing.

Moreover, this explanation does not cover the fact how a few sequences later Ellie and Muldoon get down so quickly in the ravine when they find the crashed car, and then back to the Jeep when the T-rex approaches.

Yeah. kinda like how we don't know how Arnold got to the shed, serious problems there.

Well, that one at least didn't distract me from the storyline.

[Rachael Foley 10,162]

I wanna know how Indiana Jones got to Cairo.

[MSM 194]

You are not bothered by script holes at all?

[Rachael Foley 10,162]

Its not a script hole.

Its a scene change.

[MSM 194]

Its not a script hole.

Its a scene change.

Scene changes should be logical IMO.

Anyway I do hope they have additional scenes.

[Xander Harris 9,672]

Back in 1993, when "JP" was frist released, there were complaints from cinema owners, concerning the sound. Nowadays, DTS is common, but then, hardly any cinemas were equipped to showcase "JP" in DTS, and had to show the film in either Dolby Digital (which had only come out 1 year earlier) or in Pro Logic, aka Dolby Stereo (yeuch!). It wasn't even 6-track magnetic. Oh, the shame! One cinema in the town where I used to live even sent the film back to Universal and demanded a "louder" print.

When I saw "JP" on its last cinema outing, I was dismayed by the look (far, far too saturated!), and the sound (still not loud enough) of the film.

I look forward to seeing "JP" in 3D, and with these "new" sound effects.

I was 6 and I remember this. The sound was horrendously low.

[Rachael Foley 10,162]

Its not a script hole.

Its a scene change.

Scene changes should be logical IMO.

Anyway I do hope they have additional scenes.

It changed to Ian coming back to conciousness.....

I never had a problem with it.

[Ollie 1,375]

When I saw Jurassic Park in 1993 I was so entertained that I never gave one thought to the T-Rex paddock.

Kinda like the obvious error in Temple Of Doom with the rope bridge not being as high up as the overhead views make it seem.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 12,383]

Or Indy's bag getting stuck and then unstuck on the tank barrel in TLC.

[Ollie 1,375]

Or the barrels that keep disappearing / re-appearing on the shark in Jaws.

[Jay 46,241]

I've never noticed any problem with the Temple Of Doom bridge before, or even seen it discussed before - so I wouldn't call it obvious. What exactly is the problem?

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 12,383]

Or the barrels that keep disappearing / re-appearing on the shark in Jaws.

Ruined Jaws for me!

[Ollie 1,375]

Look at the wide shot on location and watch the overhead views with the matted/ bluescreen, the bridge isn't as high up as it is made to be.

[MSM 194]

The submarine mystery in Raiders...

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 12,383]

The submarine has windowless portholes!

[Jay 46,241]

The submarine never submerged, and Indy strapped himself to the periscope until they arrived at the island. That was all filmed, but deleted from the final cut.

[Koray Savas 2,260]

Apparently this is being shown in 2D around my area as well.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 12,383]

Here it will play in 2D too.

[Matt C 605]

Only one rival theater in my neck of NC is showing it in 2D, and only one show.

The theater I work at, has no 2D shows planned for Jurassic Park. All four are in Real-D 3D.

[MSM 194]

The submarine never submerged, and Indy strapped himself to the periscope until they arrived at the island. That was all filmed, but deleted from the final cut.

it's very unlikely, the chances were minimal the sub wouldn't submerge.

[Jay 46,241]

Well as scripted and filmed, it journeyed to the island without submerging.

[MSM 194]

Well as scripted and filmed, it journeyed to the island without submerging.

badly scripted.

[Brónach 1,330]

Well as scripted and filmed, it journeyed to the island without submerging.

badly scripted.

These subs operated much faster without submerging. It was the normal way of moving with it, as the shape of the hull indicates, they're primarily surface ships with the capability of submerging. If you've seen Das Boot, they don't chase other ships underwater, but on the surface. As long as they aren't detected or attacked by enemy ships they have no reason to go underwater. Also having to use electric batteries to power the ship underwater limits the time you can be there. Even in combat, a common thing to do was attacking enemy ships on the surface at night, to move more freely.

Badly scripted my ass. It's set in 1936, and Indy is portrayed as a knowledgeable man very willing to take risks. It works, even if it's something exagerated like many other things in the film.

[JoeinAR 1,957]

The submarine never submerged, and Indy strapped himself to the periscope until they arrived at the island. That was all filmed, but deleted from the final cut.

it's very unlikely, the chances were minimal the sub wouldn't submerge.

not true at all, it's much more efficient for a pre WWII sub to stay above water than below.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 12,383]

Indeed. Before subs became nuclear powered they would only dive when stealth was necessary. Diving was a huge drain on the batteries.

[MSM 194]

Well as scripted and filmed, it journeyed to the island without submerging.

badly scripted.

These subs operated much faster without submerging. It was the normal way of moving with it, as the shape of the hull indicates, they're primarily surface ships with the capability of submerging. If you've seen Das Boot, they don't chase other ships underwater, but on the surface. As long as they aren't detected or attacked by enemy ships they have no reason to go underwater. Also having to use electric batteries to power the ship underwater limits the time you can be there. Even in combat, a common thing to do was attacking enemy ships on the surface at night, to move more freely.

Badly scripted my ass. It's set in 1936, and Indy is portrayed as a knowledgeable man very willing to take risks. It works, even if it's something exagerated like many other things in the film.

I didn't know that, it makes it more believable indeed.

The submarine never submerged, and Indy strapped himself to the periscope until they arrived at the island. That was all filmed, but deleted from the final cut.

it's very unlikely, the chances were minimal the sub wouldn't submerge.

not true at all, it's much more efficient for a pre WWII sub to stay above water than below.

I didn't know, I learned something about subs today

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 12,383]

The sub in Raiders is not a WWII sub strictly speaking.

[MSM 194]

Indeed. Before subs became nuclear powered they would only dive when stealth was necessary. Diving was a huge drain on the batteries.

redundant.

The sub in Raiders is not a WWII sub strictly speaking.

Got it, removed it.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 12,383]

Dont call me redundant!

[Wojo 2,458]

If you've seen Dash Boot, you've seen that submarine before because Spielberg borrowed and repainted it for Raiders. That really presents the only reason it's a submarine at all in the first place: the studio didn't have to build a ship, they could borrow a sub. We are led to assume that it sneaked up on Katanga's ship, but that's irrelevant because the Germans are there when the scene begins, as Indy wakes to a stopped ship. From there, not showing it dive or Indy magically surviving with his whip, that's just lousy filmmaking, but the only major flaw in an otherwise perfect adventure movie culminating in a supernatural face melt party.

Diving was hard on crews, so if you didn't have to dive, you wouldn't. Especially during peacetime when the Germans already won the Ark search.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 12,383]

Flaw? how is that? this really never bothered me.

[Wojo 2,458]

Flaw, plot hole, whatever. If you don't over analyze it, it's ok.

The submarine seen in Raiders is an anachronism. The sub portrayed in Dash Boot is Type VIIC U-96, commissioned in 1940, though her keel was laid down sixteen days into the war. That makes her a WWII sub even if repainted for an action adventure set three years before war. Not a showstopper, just a quirk.

[Luke Skywalker 2,383]

Now I understand why in all those WWII aircraft simulators the U-boats are almost always in the surface making them easy for you to bomb down

[Wojo 2,458]

That might also be a limit on the game engine.

U-boat crush depths were 200 to 280 meters.

[JoeinAR 1,957]

I can't imagine being 900 feet below the surface in a rust bucket

[Brónach 1,330]

Now I understand why in all those WWII aircraft simulators the U-boats are almost always in the surface making them easy for you to bomb down

What games did you play? I'd like to give a shot to some flight simulators.

[JoeinAR 1,957]

in other news Jurassic Park 3D is being released this weekend in the US. Universal has a quite large marketing campaign going. We'll see how well it works as the only other "new" competition is the remake of the Evil Dead.

personally I will likely double dip.

[Wojo 2,458]

I got razzed yesterday at work for saying I want to go see this on the big screen. I think it's justified because a I missed it 20 years ago and 2 she's on board with seeing it.

[scallenger 665]

http://www.nola.com/movies/index.ssf/2013/04/take_5_the_jurassic_park_3d_ed.html#incart_river

"During the 3-D conversion of "Jurassic Park," pains were taken not to significantly alter scenes or add new effects to the soundtrack. Eagle-eyed viewers will, however, notice certain changes, such as the addition of rain in the foreground when the film's massive T. rex first is shown, splinters breaking toward the camera as an SUV falls down a tree, and enhanced scales on the film's dinosaurs."

Grrr... not sure if I like these additions. As subtle as they may be.

And here is some direct evidence on audio additions.

This clip is from the BluRay. Watch at 0.38 to 0.42:

This clip is from the 3D version. Watch at 1 to 1.05:

[Rachael Foley 10,162]

It makes sense to me, atleast the 3D will actually add something, instead of being boring like in TPM3D.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 12,383]

I dont mind. they are already changing the film dramatically by converting it to 3D.

[Jay 46,241]

I must be blind. What's the difference in the two clips posted?

[scallenger 665]

The first clip, from the BluRay, has just the raptor purrs as they keep advancing while you see the children moving around. On the 3D clip you hear some extra kind of sounds, that sounds a bit like a mountain lion.

[Jay 46,241]

Oh my bad, I missed the word "audio" in your post. I was looking for a visual change because the block of text you quoted was about visual changes

I think it's lame they are altering the audio.

Wasn't Spielberg JUST saying that he'll never alter his films again?

[Wojo 2,458]

If you wanted the 3D film to be identical to the 2D version, you can go see the 2D version. Me, I would be happy if they went overboard. T-Rex, toss some of that Gennaro goodness this way when you're done, ok?

[scallenger 665]

Yeah I know, that's what I recall him saying, too. However, to give him some credit, he didn't alter it for the BluRay presentation, which does retain as it was originally seen (despite PQ). And, if the e-mails sent from Universal were correct (as you may see on the BluRay.com forums), we won't be seeing a 2D version of this presentation beyond these clips appearing online, only in 3D. The 2D version included on the upcoming BluRay 3D will be the exact same transfer that is currently available, such as the first clip. Which is a shame, because if you compare shots between the clips, I MUCH prefer the look of the 3D transfer. An example (3D on top, BluRay on Bottom):

[Not Mr. Big 5,011]

I don't know, the 3D version looks slightly DNR'd and the color timing is extreme.