Jurassic Park trilogy - Page 50

I have many stills of actual 35mm film cells from Jurassic Park, I'll make a comparison as much as I can and post them for you. But my computer has this weird problem of crashing whenever I try to play anything. I'll fix it by Jan and upload them for sure !!!

Will you stop with the unsupported complaints?


You're welcome to think it all you want, but you're on a public forum putting it forth as fact and decrying the distributor based on your assumption.


You're attacking the people who worked on this release. You may well be right about the framing, but wouldn't it be better not to assume the worst (and whine about it) until you actually know if you're correct?

Do you have a matte box insert or projection instructions? A frame of film (which is not a cell, incidentally) is not going to tell you what portion of the image is intended to be seen.

Maybe you haven't noticed, but Steven Spielberg has historically taken a pretty active role in the production of the Blu-ray releases of his films. Don't you think he deserves the benefit of the doubt that maybe- just maybe- he knows a little bit more about what he wants Jurassic Park to be than you do?

If so why would each version of Jurassic Park, from Laserdisc to Dvd to BD would have different framing, different in the sense that each version cuts off more info than the other.
By your logic then the framing of the Laserdisc may be wrong, and the "cut" version of the BD is right.
Are you asking me to understand then that Spielberg who so carefully supervises the transition of his films to home video, failed to notice that the laserdisc was showing way more image than it was supposed to?? And laserdisc back in those days was what the Bluray is today.

And I think he was pretty much occupied with Tintin and War Horse to scrutinize if the film was missing image at the edges or was being cut off or not. He probably thought it looked Ok and gave his approval.

I wasn't aware that SS has come forward to publicly endorse his involvement, if any.

Yeah, we know all too well how much of effort went actually into the making of this release! The used the decade old dvd masters for crying out loud, which were also used for the HDTV airings.
It is never possible to completely know, unless I get to interview Spielberg or more importantly the video guys who made the bluray. It is all we can do, assume, with a handful of raw data, or evidence or clue,whatever.

Exactly, Spielberg never said that he supervised the Bluray transfer.

I don't know and my point is that unless you do, it's pretty foolish to make an assumption about which one (if any) is accurate, isn't it?


It's certainly possible. It's also quite possible that both versions are incorrect.

The point is, we don't know.


Well, at least one of them is obviously wrong, so he was either wrong then or wrong now or not involved then or not involved now.

Again... we don't know.


So then, perhaps you should, too.

Did someone say that he has?!

Exactly. So why are you assuming it's wrong and complaining about it?

Got this for £20 today, its worth that for the sequels alone

You did when you were getting defensive over Papai2011's inquisition of proper framing.

Historically, there has been evidence of his involvement.

Nick, that's quite a twisting of my words to turn them into a statement that Spielberg publicly announced that he worked on this set.

I think you need to re-read the post you quoted; it says nothing of the kind.

Look, no offense, but it is my headache what I chose to believe or assume, not yours! If you don't like my inference then ignore it, why poke your nose into a matter which is someone else's opinion, and then wage a semi-war against that person .
I believe I am entitled to express my "assumptions", but I don't go about and cry foul every time somebody expresses their opinion, if it is contrary to mine. You're making this personal, as if either you or someone you know was involved in the Bluray's making.
I was disappointed with the BD and therefore I express it, and draw some inferences, your inference will differ as it naturally should, because you are a different person. But that doesn't mean that you make this whole thing bitter by trying to prove that I am foolish to believe certain things.
I get it, you absolutely LOVE this bluray release, but there are many who think different.
Are they waging a war against you because you like it? No? Then stop doing that to me! MY VIEWS ARE MINE period!!!

It's not your headache when you make it mine by complaining about it multiple times on the internet.


Buddy, this is a forum. You're making an assertion on this forum and I'm asking you to back that assertion with some evidence.

It's discussion about the topic at hand and it's the kind of thing places like this are for.


You are entitled to believe whatever you want to believe, but you came in here and stated that the BD is incorrect when you don't know that it is. If you're going to make that claim, I'm going to ask you to demonstrate why it's true. If it's just your opinion, you should describe it as such.


I'm not waging a war against you and I'm not personally attacking you. You entered an internet forum and made a claim of fact that you can't back up. I'm asking you to either demonstrate how it's a fact or to acknowledge that it's not a fact and is actually just your uninformed opinion.

That's all.

If you don't like my asking you for evidence of your claim, you can ignore me. If you don't want your claims questioned, don't post them on the internet.

It is not the questioning of my claims, it is your tone, which was just wrong from the start. You were hostile from the beginning!
Did you just read what i posted before, that my computer is unstable now, that it is crashing frequently if I play any file, and that I will put up those screenshots once I am able to recover my PC???
Ill give you evidence then, along with explanations as to why I think the BD framing is incorrect, but I bet you will whine then as well.

And besides when did I say that I know officially for a fact that the laserdisc IS the original framing?
I said I know that the framing has been tampered with because I compared them with the 35mm film scans which were projected in the theatre, with the dvd, and with the bluray.
This was MY inference from the data I had at hand.
I did not like the idea that the picture keeps on shrinking with every version.

You are making it sound as if I made the claim that-"I know the original framing because I am Dean Cundey's assistant and the Bluray is not that framing!", which I clearly never did.

Are you always like this? I read it multiple times and it was just as clear each time. You begin by mildly insulting Papai2011's intelligence and then offer up SS's previous Blu-ray endorsements as anecdotal evidence to bolster your next statement:

This statement couldn't be more clear that SS "knows what he wants" specifically with the Blu-ray transfer of Jurassic Park. You couldn't have meant anything else unless you privately spoke with SS about this topic.

I have every confidence that SS knows what he wants and if he was asked about the JP Blu-rays and said, "Yes, I approve of them." or any sort of positive endorsement, I would be still be disappointed with the overall quality, but satisfied that they comply with his wishes and more comfortable with the purchase.

Truth is, SS has been all over the news and interviews promoting the Blu-rays for Jaws, E.T., Close Encounters, Minority Report and even films he didn't direct personally like Star Wars, Transformers 1/2/3/4 and Indiana Jones. But then silence for JP? That supports concerns that he did not approve this Blu-ray.

However, you can no more assume that SS was involved or approved this Blu-ray than anyone can claim he didn't. So stop fooling yourself and others into thinking they are out of line or "complaining" for simply disagreeing with you or because they expect more from the Blu-ray.

I did start off a bit snarky and I apologize for that. I aired my skepticism that you would be able to evidence your claim because I was a little irked at the language you used in stating that claim. You called the re-framing "careless", as if telecine operators are just turning on the machine, jamming the film into it and running outside for a smoke.


While I'm not sure what evidence you could have that would require the screenshots you describe, I'll look forward to it. And I promise I won't whine, though if you think that I already have, I can't promise you won't imagine that I'm whining.

Maybe they did, what with the money Universal paid them to do a master,just saying.


You don't have to worry about my imagination.

What? Interested in clarifying my statements when they're being wildly misrepresented? Yes.


Papai2011 displayed some apparent ignorance about the processes of telecine while trying to assert that this release was incorrectly produced. I wasn't insulting his intelligence, I was trying to educate him as to the reasons it might behoove him to give the producers of this product the benefit of the doubt.


Correct. However, does it say ANYTHING about Spielberg having been involved in the Blu-ray transfer?

No.

Does it say ANYTHING about Spielberg having publicly stated that he was involved in the Blu-ray transfer?

No.

My point was that we don't know that he wasn't involved and there is a lot of historic precedent to suggest that he very well might have been, so to claim that this release is incorrect without knowing more facts about who produced it and how is irresponsible. I was not making a claim that Spielberg was involved- only that we don't know that he was not.


And that's exactly why I did no such thing, so please don't put words in my mouth.

Well, clearly this is a re-purposed old master (which, for the record, I think is a terrible decision for a release like this), but I assure you that someone was taking a look at the framing, whenever it was made. That doesn't mean that it's correct, but it wasn't done blindly or randomly.

I started watching these a couple of days and made it through the first and half way through the second. The PQ is below average and very disappointing. I thought it might get better as the movies went along but the second is slightly worse than the first.

If you'd said that, I never would've objected because that would've been some evidence to back up your claim!

watched the Lost World last night. I won't go into the PQ/AQ, but as a movie.....
Mostly poorly casted characters...I thought Vince Vahn was great, and we could have used him at the end. The 'hunter guy' was also good, and could go more into his character....
Little to no plot, and is more of a mystery when ingen brings over the helicopters...needed more development in many spots....
Jeff Goldblum is a great actor, but can't hold his own as a sole star in the film.

I still had a good time with it.....there's more action than the first one, and slightly 'darker'. The film is def better than a lot of crap that is out there today. YMMV

This set does not get a pass from me, but it's universal so it could have been miles worse

You know what's most hilarious about this aspect ratio argument? When the Laserdisc was released back in the day, it received a lot of complaints about being "zoomboxed" and losing picture from all four sides of the frame. Now that disc is being used as a reference standard to judge all future video editions by. Huh.

Worked for back to the future

So think, if the laserdisc received complaints of being zoomboxed, which I am not aware of it receiving, than what about the bluray which has been cropped even further than what was in the laserdisc.

How can you assure me that it was being looked into as much as it should have. Do you have proof, regarding this particular transfer?

What a bunch of idiots.