Sure, we have to watch them wearing Jake Ellwood attire, but glad to see some of the classics getting a re-run at the old multiplex again. From “Ghostbusters” to “Back to the Future” and soon, “Top Gun”, all the wet spots of our youth are coming around again (I could make a Carly Simon song… but most of our readers would probably spit back ‘Who the heck is Carly Simon!?). These 3D re-issues have done more than just convince Hollywood that there’s still more milk to be wrung from the 3D teat, it shows the big brass at the major studios that people will come and see these old films again – because they’re good. They know, unlike so many releases these days, they’re guaranteed to have a good time. And in the case of a film like “Ghostbusters” or “Back to the Future”, the bigscreen is undoubtedly where the film belongs – nice 35mm print, ear-shattering bass pouring out of the monstrous speakers, and stories you can invest in so much more when seeing them play out on a big screen as opposed to a home TV.
“Jurassic Park” could be the next ‘classic’ (albeit a rather recent ‘classic’) to get the 3D re-release treatment.
Universal, it seems, aren’t just pinching Steven Spielberg with a hot poker in an effort to get him moving on that long-awaited fourth instalment, they also want him to consider and consequently tinker with a 3D re-release of his 1993 hit.
Producer Kathleen Kennedy, out stumping “Tintin”, tells Collider that a bigscreen re-issue of the enormously successful feature film adaptation of the Michael Crichton novel could be in the cards.
“They have asked us. And I think it’s really gonna come down to making sure Steven has the time, and [director of photography] Janusz [Kaminski] has the time to sit down and go through it and evaluate.”
(Interestingly enough, Kaminski was the DP on “Lost World” not “Jurassic Park”, suggesting Kennedy has her cinematographer’s mixed up).
Kennedy says she’s not a huge fan of ‘add it in later 3D’, but thinks if Spielberg is involved in the process of laying a 3D coating over “Jurassic Park” that it could work.
“I’m not a huge proponent of post-conversion, but I think if the filmmaker gets intricately involved in the post-conversion—it’s not just a technological exercise—then I think it can be really, really good and I think Jurassic Park is a perfect example of a movie that could work really, really well as a 3D picture…I also think it’s tricky because unless you framed the movie with [3D] in mind, not all those shots—quick cutting, that kind of thing—it’s not necessarily going to translate, and so that’s why you’ve gotta have the DP and you’ve gotta have the director frame-by-frame involved in the process of that conversion.”
Would you go and see “Jurassic Park” again if it was re-released in 3D?