Originally Posted by KBMAN
I thought JP looked ok, so my copy of LOTR EE will be better???
Jurassic Park is clearly an older HD master with some really harsh noise, and not too much in the way of fine detail. It isn't terrible, it's just... not great, either. Go HERE
and compare the shot of Jeff Goldbloom from the first film (#4) to a similar shots in the second (#11) or third (#17) to get an idea of what I'm talking about.
Then again, some people are infinitely more bothered by color oddities or framing issues than, say, aliasing or DVNR or poor compression, so what looks "eh" to me might look fine to someone else. Personally, I think FOTR EE looks better than Jurassic Park, but you may or may not feel the same way. Different strokes, and so on.
FOTR EE looks very detailed and film-like, since it's (basically) an all new digital transfer from the negative. The green push kills some of that enthusiasm, but it looks really nice otherwise... It's just so frustrating that an otherwise great looking transfer was botched in this way.
For what it's worth, I don't think FOTR EE is half as bad as Dracula or The French Connection: not only are those transfers just worse in general, but those were intentionally
screwed up beyond recognition. I just don't think Jackson was TRYING to make the credits a delicious minty green, it just happened by mistake and it was subtle enough that nobody in QC actually noticed.