JURASSIC PARK 3-D

[The Burgomaster]

I got sucked in, but I recommend that you spend your money on something else.  First of all, the tickets for IMAX 3-D were more than $15 each.  Add the snack bar stuff and it ended up costing more than $50 for my wife and I to see this. 

Overall, I like Jurassic Park and have seen it many times.  So, the movie itself is not bad, but I'm giving a thumbs down to the 3-D "upgrade." 

The revamped 3-D version is disappointing for two major reasons:

1.  The special effects were ahead of their time.  But the effects are 20 years old and they look like they're 20 years old.

2.  The 3-D conversion is overbearing.  Sure, most of the action scenes are good.  But the scenes where people are sitting around talking and everyday items in the foreground are sticking out of the screen are very distracting.  And, in many cases, these images are blurry.  They should have toned some of this down.  It seemed like they tried to make objects in every scene seem like they were sticking in your eye.

I think the TITANIC 3-D revamp was more successful because it didn't over play the 3-D effects.

Oh, well . . .

 

 

[Trevor]

It will be released here in May: the part that I'm waiting for is when Jeff Goldblum speaks to Richard Attenborough via the car camera in maximum closeup and then breathes on the lens. 

[rebel_1812]

so is it just me or are there remakes become more lazy all the time?

[Bushma]

so is it just me or are there remakes become more lazy all the time?

Nope, not just you.  I firmly believe that Hollywood ran out of ideas in the early 90s, that's why everything is a remake, sequel, or prequel.

[tracy]

I enjoyed the film when it came out and still like to watch it periodically. However,since today's 3-D gives me a raging headache I'm gonna have to pass.