When it comes to 3D films, I usually subscribe to the notion that 2D is preferable whenever possible. I have yet to be convinced that 3D is the future of movie-making the way James Cameron would like me to. That said, there have been a few films that I’ve actively sought out in 3D. Cameron’s Avatar, for one. Scorsese’s Hugo. Spielberg’s The Adventures of Tintin. Jackson’s The Hobbit. Lee’s Life of Pi. Luhrmann’s forthcoming The Great Gatsby. What all of these films have in common is the fact that they were all shot using 3D cameras for artistic reasons. When Martin Scorsese tells me that his film needed to be shot and seen in three dimensions, I trust him. And I agree that it was essential all of the aforementioned films be seen in that format.
When a film is post-converted to 3D, however, I am instantly wary. What purpose does this conversion serve other than to inflate ticket prices and pad the studios’ bank accounts? When films are converted to 3D for financial reasons, audiences are rewarded with forced to endure such eyesores as Alice in Wonderland and Clash of the Titans, whose murky effects and dirty-looking visuals certainly offered no argument in favour of this process. Still, both films were box office successes, which led to studios wanting to boost their profit by post-converting every single project to 3D — including instantly forgettable flops like Mars Needs Moms and Drive Angry, starring Nicolas Cage. Remember those? Yeah, I didn’t think so.
So which of these camps does Jurassic Park 3D belong to, then? Steven Spielberg’s 1993 blockbuster, celebrating its 20th anniversary this year, is currently back in theatres, having received a shiny, new 3D transfer of its own. But is Jurassic Park an indispensible entry to the 3D canon? Or is it an exercise in studio greed? The answer, truthfully, is neither.
At this point, no one needs any introduction to this film; it stands as a rightful classic. What needs to be discussed, then, is how successfully the 3D transfer intensifies the visuals — and indeed Spielberg’s film, even in its original 2D form, is packed with layered, immersive visuals. From the tone-setting opening scene — where a yet-unseen velociraptor attacks a construction worker — to the T-rex Jeep attack, to the raptors in the kitchen, so many of the film’s set pieces rely on jaw-dropping visuals for their effectiveness. And, frankly, the conversion does enhance these visuals, as a newly added dimension inherently should… but not really in any way that would convert an agnostic to the wonders of 3D.
Despite all the intense action on display, the most impressive sequence in this 3D transfer is the scene in which Grant (Sam Neill), Sattler (Laura Dern) and co. arrive at Isla Nublar, their helicopter slowly descending through the majestic island scenery to the landing pad resting near the base of a waterfall. The extraordinarily immersive photography by two-time Spielberg collaborator Dean Cundey (filling in for the director’s usual cinematographer Janusz Kaminski) provides the 3D conversion with its richest moments, aided in no small part by Hawaii itself — where the film’s exteriors were shot — whose tropical vegetation and mountains provide the stunning vistas and epic scale required of a summer popcorn film. And, indeed, communicating this scale, this feeling of hugeness, is what Jurassic Park’s 3D conversion does best. I grew up watching this film and have seen it more times than I can remember, but never before have I felt its size the way I did watching it in 3D. The conversion magnifies everything that Jurassic Park (both Spielberg’s film and the fictional theme park) is trying to accomplish — breaking new ground and displaying new innovation that no other person had previously attempted.
Jurassic Park’s staggering visual effects remain more impressive than ever in 3D — with one unfortunate exception. I’ve stated that the new conversion enhances every visual detail; well, it also makes the less successful of the CGI visuals more apparent (and less successful) than ever. As a child, I gazed in wonder right along with Grant and Sattler as they laid their eyes upon their very first real live dinosaur, slowly dropping their jaws in awe and raising their faces towards the sky to revel in the sight of a brachiosaurus in all its glory. I never found fault in the appearance of said brachiosaurus, finding it suitably breathtaking in each viewing. Until now. The 3D enhancement amplifies the underwhelming CGI rendering, emphasizing the obvious green screen Sam Neill is standing in front of. Nevertheless, despite these flaws, the visuals remain an enormous achievement for a 1993 film. This is an imperfection that I find charming rather than distracting.
Let’s put aside our discussion of Jurassic Park’s newly 3D visuals for a minute, because the rest of the movie is incredible too. And it remains as thrilling as it’s ever been. This is a film that must be seen on the biggest screen possible, and I strongly recommend my own choice of seeing it in IMAX. Two decades after last seeing the film on the big screen, I was stunned anew by its absolutely amazing sound design. The stellar work put into creating the various dinosaur roars earned every inch of its Oscar for Best Sound Editing, one of three Academy Awards the film won (along with Sound and Visual Effects).
The film also features some of the most iconic production design of a film in my lifetime — try to picture it… I’m sure you can. Think of the visitors’ centre set, either the exterior with its conical grass roof or its cathedral-ceilinged interior with its colourful banners and dinosaur skeletons. Or think of the giant Jurassic Park gate. Or the yellow-green-and-red tour cars. Rick Carter’s memorable design remains imprinted in our consciousness yet was unjustly denied an Academy Award nomination that year. Also unfairly non-nominated was John Williams’s epic score, which features not one but two memorable, whistle-able themes and remains one of his greatest scores. (Williams did win the Oscar that same year for his Schindler’s List score, so no hard feelings, I guess.)
The actors, meanwhile, are solid and do their jobs well, though it’s hardly an actor’s kind of movie. That said, you just know that, had the film been released 20 years later, Richard Attenborough (as John Hammond) would have received the now-requisite old-man-in-a-film-we-like Best Supporting Actor nomination.
Jurassic Park is without a doubt one of the greatest films of Steven Spielberg’s career. That it was released cinematically in the same year as Schindler’s List is simply a staggering achievement. Was it absolutely essential for the film to be given a 3D post-conversion? Did it improve the film in any meaningful way? No, not at all. Was this conversion merely a business decision? It sure was. But still, this is freaking Jurassic Park! What an excellent opportunity to view this film on the big screen for the first time in 20 years. What an excellent time to introduce the film to today’s teenage audience, who weren’t born yet the last time it screened cinematically. Jurassic Park is a masterpiece, and it’s essential viewing for any person who loves movies.
