The Trouble City Forums
INDIANA JONES and you're actually fucking serious pre-release discussion - Printable Version

+- The Trouble City Forums (http://citizens.trouble.city)
+-- Forum: Main Street (http://citizens.trouble.city/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Focused Film Discussion (http://citizens.trouble.city/forumdisplay.php?fid=94)
+--- Thread: INDIANA JONES and you're actually fucking serious pre-release discussion (/showthread.php?tid=155331)



RE: INDIANA JONES and you're actually fucking serious pre-release discussion - mr. stockslivevan - 01-08-2021

Yeah, that’s why he’s a bad guy. He’s a believer, but is willing to step over others to get what he wants. Hence the face melt!


RE: INDIANA JONES and you're actually fucking serious pre-release discussion - MichaelM - 01-08-2021

(01-08-2021, 04:29 AM)mola ram Wrote:
(01-07-2021, 01:51 PM)MichaelM Wrote: But I don't think we ever see Indy actually pawning relics to private buyers. Sure he's a looter...but in his mind, he's different from someone like Belloq because he [Indy] loots to preserve the pieces for academic study and perhaps public display (which, being a professor, he could argue in his mind that his actions help educate the public).

The tension is always there in terms of how different is Indy from his opponents, but the text of the films makes it clear he's not eBaying his finds to the highest bidders.

The opening scene of Temple of Doom is him pawning a relic to a Chinese mobster for a diamond. The first half of Temple of Doom is probably Indy at his most selfish, where he's basically a mercenary all about fortune and glory, but at the end he becomes a hero who helps free the slave children and return the stone to the village.

Here's how Lawrence Kasdan wrote the character in Raiders.
"Indy's a classic anti-hero. The idea always from the get-go was that he's fallen from grace as an archaeologist and he's become a grave robber."
https://www.empireonline.com/movies/features/indiana-jones-making-raiders-lost-ark/

Remember what Belloq says to Indy in the first film?

Belloq: Archeology is our religion, yet we have both fallen from the pure faith. Our methods have not differed as much as you pretend. I am but a shadowy reflection of you.


I don't think Indy actually gave a shit about preservation until The Last Crusade and Crystal Skull, where he's a much more moral person who doesn't steal stuff. In Raiders and Doom, it's all about the money and adventure.

I'd completely forgotten about the screwed transaction at the beginning of TEMPLE! 

But even though TEMPLE was written and made post-RAIDERS, it still presents a rough but clear arc for Indy: 

1. TEMPLE: Fortune and glory - but after the experiences in India, Indy realigns in that he sells only to "respectable" institutions like museums, not private collectors
2. RAIDERS: Adventure and knowledge - Indy is still in it for the highs of discovery and adventure but by the end, his brush with the divine further realigns his moral compass re: the collection of artifacts
3. LAST CRUSADE: Family and faith - Indy seems to have slipped a bit here, in that he goes to work for a private collector...but there's also the motivation of finding/saving his father. In the end, Indy chooses faith (letting the grail go, meaning he knows it's real but can't study or prove it) and family over the self-centered satisfactions of discovery and adventure.


RE: INDIANA JONES and you're actually fucking serious pre-release discussion - hammerhead - 01-08-2021

(01-08-2021, 08:17 AM)freeman Wrote: I'm saying it seems based on context clues that Beloq is not particularly devout, but merely portrayed as doing what he feels he needs to do to communicate with the Ark(Re the robes and ceremony).  We don't see him torn up about working with Nazis we don't see him disturbed about disrespect to the Ark or Jewish culture.  He literally describes it as a "transmitter!  A radio for speaking to GOD!"  Does that sound devout and respectful, to describe the Ark as a powerful tool to be exploited?  He clearly believes God is real, but I don't see devout Juddaism.  I see an opportunist doing what an opportunist would do at every possible chance he gets, for one scene that happened to include some robes and a fun hat.  

If he were Jewish and he respected and feared the Ark, why would he display the incredibly dimwitted arrogance he does and get his face melted?  Old testament God saw right through that huckster.

Ah, gotcha. I'm not even remotely religious so my slider on "devout" is probably skewed.


RE: INDIANA JONES and you're actually fucking serious pre-release discussion - fatherdude - 01-10-2021

Paramount's UHD set for the first four movies is rumored to be released on June 14th. I dunno about this tentative cover art, but the set is a must buy for me, particularly if they make good on the innuendo about deleted scenes. Paramount was given access to the Lucasfilm archives to develop new supplements, so hopefully they came up with something substantial.

The Indy movies just left Netflix after two years on the service, and they lived on Prime immediately before that. Wouldn't surprise me if Paramount held off licensing the series for another streaming round to encourage sales of the boxed set. Still will be interesting to see if they opt to license to Disney+ by the time INDY 5 ends up on the service so that the whole franchise can share the same steaming home.


RE: INDIANA JONES and you're actually fucking serious pre-release discussion - Belloq87 - 01-10-2021

I think I'll only spring for that set if those deleted scenes finally appear in full.


RE: INDIANA JONES and you're actually fucking serious pre-release discussion - Nooj - 01-10-2021

oh man, I hope they do justice to Slocombe's work

ESPECIALLY temple


RE: INDIANA JONES and you're actually fucking serious pre-release discussion - Judas Booth - 01-10-2021

(01-10-2021, 02:51 PM)fatherdude Wrote: Paramount's UHD set for the first four movies is rumored to be released on June 14th. I dunno about this tentative cover art, but the set is a must buy for me, particularly if they make good on the innuendo about deleted scenes. Paramount was given access to the Lucasfilm archives to develop new supplements, so hopefully they came up with something substantial.

The Indy movies just left Netflix after two years on the service, and they lived on Prime immediately before that. Wouldn't surprise me if Paramount held off licensing the series for another streaming round to encourage sales of the boxed set. Still will be interesting to see if they opt to license to Disney+ by the time INDY 5 ends up on the service so that the whole franchise can share the same steaming home.

That's one of the few sets that I'll buy a physical copy of.  Depending on pricing, I may wait until Christmas when it's down to half price though (like how you could buy the Craig Bond films for half off).


RE: INDIANA JONES and you're actually fucking serious pre-release discussion - bradito - 01-10-2021

I'm content with my three-film DVD boxed set, since it came out in the early-2000s and allows me to pretend the series was just a trilogy.


RE: INDIANA JONES and you're actually fucking serious pre-release discussion - Nooj - 01-10-2021

I wonder if they'd consider re-grading the color for Crystal Skull...


RE: INDIANA JONES and you're actually fucking serious pre-release discussion - bradito - 01-10-2021

I give it an F+.

I'm grading on a curve.


RE: INDIANA JONES and you're actually fucking serious pre-release discussion - mr. stockslivevan - 01-10-2021

(01-10-2021, 02:51 PM)fatherdude Wrote: The Indy movies just left Netflix after two years on the service, and they lived on Prime immediately before that. Wouldn't surprise me if Paramount held off licensing the series for another streaming round to encourage sales of the boxed set. Still will be interesting to see if they opt to license to Disney+ by the time INDY 5 ends up on the service so that the whole franchise can share the same steaming home.

They're about to launch their Paramount+ platform, so I wouldn't be surprised if they just put all the films on their service instead of licensing them to Disney+.


RE: INDIANA JONES and you're actually fucking serious pre-release discussion - fatherdude - 01-10-2021

(01-10-2021, 05:00 PM)Nooj Wrote: I wonder if they'd consider re-grading the color for Crystal Skull...

You can't grade out the filtration and lighting choices.

Interesting point: I am pretty sure CRYSTAL SKULL went through a 2K digital workflow, so any 4K version of it would presumably just be an uprez.


RE: INDIANA JONES and you're actually fucking serious pre-release discussion - mr. stockslivevan - 01-10-2021

(01-10-2021, 06:41 PM)fatherdude Wrote:
(01-10-2021, 05:00 PM)Nooj Wrote: I wonder if they'd consider re-grading the color for Crystal Skull...

You can't grade out the filtration and lighting choices.

Interesting point: I am pretty sure CRYSTAL SKULL went through a 2K digital workflow, so any 4K version of it would presumably just be an uprez.

Is that accurate? I distinctly recall WAR HORSE being the first film by Spielberg to be done on DI, because he and Michael Kahn were known to still be editing their films on the moviola when everyone else was going digital.


RE: INDIANA JONES and you're actually fucking serious pre-release discussion - Nooj - 01-10-2021

according to IMDB's listing for the movie, the movie's DI was a 2K master


RE: INDIANA JONES and you're actually fucking serious pre-release discussion - fatherdude - 01-10-2021

mr. stockslivevan Wrote:Is that accurate? I distinctly recall WAR HORSE being the first film by Spielberg to be done on DI, because he and Michael Kahn were known to still be editing their films on the moviola when everyone else was going digital.

One doesn't preclude the other. I do believe Kahn cut the movie on film, but Kaminski timed the movie digitally, and of course the effects were part of the digital workflow as well. I am not sure why Spielberg considered it so important shoot and project (where possible) the movie on film if he was going to make all these choices that gave the movie an extremely digital look anyway, but what do I know.


RE: INDIANA JONES and you're actually fucking serious pre-release discussion - mr. stockslivevan - 01-10-2021

If they actually had cut a negative of the film, then that'll be likely used for a remaster in time for a 4K disc. IIRC, only RAIDERS was scanned at 4K as the source for blu-ray release, while DOOM and CRUSADE simply used the existing HD masters. So they would have to be scanned at 4K along with CRYSTAL SKULL.

Typically 4K discs for movies cut on film always go back to the negatives unless they're either lost (MAD MAX) or if someone like Nolan only allows interpositives to be used for home media masters.


RE: INDIANA JONES and you're actually fucking serious pre-release discussion - fatherdude - 01-10-2021

You could definitely go back to CRYSTAL SKULL's negative for a 4K scan, but you would also have to remaster the film from scratch, and the best you could do with all the CGI presumably is upscale the source, and with enough care that it will still blend in with the footage. It is not an unheard of undertaking (Jackson apparently did it for the upcoming LOTR set), but it is probably a hefty investment for a movie with CRYSTAL SKULL's level of adoration.


RE: INDIANA JONES and you're actually fucking serious pre-release discussion - mr. stockslivevan - 01-10-2021

Like I said, this is something that would have to be done with all the sequels. Would be odd to just leave out CRYSTAL SKULL when the negative is sitting right there. The CGI shots would be stuck at 2K as that's the resolution they were created. I too doubt they would go far as Peter Jackson did going all the way back to the elements and recompositing.


RE: INDIANA JONES and you're actually fucking serious pre-release discussion - Nooj - 01-10-2021

I feel like it's been enough time for CRYSTAL SKULL to get some kind of reappraisal that a lot of these kinds of perceived misfires get when a decade or so passes

we've certainly seen a generation of fans that profess their love for the prequels (a bunch of animated series filling in the gaps doesn't hurt)

I've even seen some love for the hobutts already

But something about crystal skull seems to be holding that kind of swell of reappraisal back a bit. Maybe it's just because the movie feels like such a compromise throughout. I just found it a middling experience from the first viewing

I honestly can't remember if I've ever sat down and actually rewatched the whole thing


RE: INDIANA JONES and you're actually fucking serious pre-release discussion - bradito - 01-10-2021

I mean, even if I join in on the shared hallucination that there's a fourth Indana Jones movie (absurd!), I can't imagine they'd grade it differently to match a different DP's aesthetic. It's not like the look of the film was out of Spielberg's hands. You don't hire a DP and say, "Go crazy." As the director, you tell the DP what you want the movie to look like, and the DP and his team makes it look the way you want it to.

Anyway, there is no fourth movie.


RE: INDIANA JONES and you're actually fucking serious pre-release discussion - fatherdude - 01-10-2021

I cannot wait to see how Phedon Papamichael tries to right the ship in this regard.


RE: INDIANA JONES and you're actually fucking serious pre-release discussion - Nooj - 01-10-2021

(01-10-2021, 07:35 PM)mr. stockslivevan Wrote: Like I said, this is something that would have to be done with all the sequels. Would be odd to just leave out CRYSTAL SKULL when the negative is sitting right there. The CGI shots would be stuck at 2K as that's the resolution they were created. I too doubt they would go far as Peter Jackson did going all the way back to the elements and recompositing.

I believe a lot of today's VFX heavy movies still finish their work in 2K, even for movies that have a 4K master

I don't know if this is the case anymore, but increasingly tight deadlines doesn't provide enough of a perceptible visual boost to make it worth the time and cost of rendering VFX work out at 4K

I also recall reading (or hearing) that due to the artificial 'sharpness' of VFX, the upscaling actually helps them sit with the live-action plates better than it would with full renders.  Don't know if that's still the case

Anyway, I don't think an revisionism on CRYSTAL SKULL's look is hindered too much simply by having VFX work rendered at 2K


RE: INDIANA JONES and you're actually fucking serious pre-release discussion - fatherdude - 01-10-2021

I think the difference between SKULL and the other sequels is that Lucasfilm probably already views SKULL as having a 4K master. If I remember right a few 4K DCPs were used in 2008 for the relatively few amount of theaters capable of projecting them. It was of course an upscale, but how necessary are the bean counters going to see it that CRYSTAL SKULL look superior than it did at its premiere? It will probably still see meaningful gains in UHD compared to the Blu due to the other benefits of the format beyond resolution. TEMPLE and CRUSADE pose different kinds of challenges since they were finished on film, and probably stand to gain more besides.


RE: INDIANA JONES and you're actually fucking serious pre-release discussion - commodorejohn - 01-10-2021

(01-10-2021, 07:36 PM)Nooj Wrote: But something about crystal skull seems to be holding that kind of swell of reappraisal back a bit. Maybe it's just because the movie feels like such a compromise throughout. I just found it a middling experience from the first viewing
I think that's a bingo. It feels like a movie that nobody involved particularly wanted to make, but had to anyway. It's not a film like TPM where there was genuine investment on the creative end, just riddled with mistakes in judgement that one may or may not be willing to forgive.


RE: INDIANA JONES and you're actually fucking serious pre-release discussion - fatherdude - 01-10-2021

From what I can tell, the closest thing SKULL has enjoyed to a reappraisal is an inevitable rise in the "Well, it's not THAT bad" takes over the years. Enthusiastic!

My favorite recurring "defense" dates back to the movie's opening, and it's the "At least it's better than TEMPLE OF DOOM" line. I just feel sad for those people.


RE: INDIANA JONES and you're actually fucking serious pre-release discussion - Belloq87 - 01-10-2021

I can't imagine what kind of poor individual would prefer CRYSTAL SKULL to TEMPLE OF DOOM. It's utterly unfathomable to me.

(01-10-2021, 07:41 PM)bradito Wrote: It's not like the look of the film was out of Spielberg's hands. You don't hire a DP and say, "Go crazy." As the director, you tell the DP what you want the movie to look like, and the DP and his team makes it look the way you want it to.

The really bizarre thing is that Spielberg, by his and Kaminski's own admission, DID give a directive to Kaminski to approximate Slocombe's work on the first three films.

You'd never know that from looking at the visual style of the movie.


RE: INDIANA JONES and you're actually fucking serious pre-release discussion - fraid uh noman - 01-12-2021

I don't prefer Crystal Skull to ANY of the other three. Not even close. But I don't hate it the way I once did. I even found myself enjoying it somewhat. Damning with faint praise, I know...but...I'd put it out of my mind to such a degree and for so long that I felt I was seeing it for the first time. And where it looked pukey and gray and washed out in the theater, it looked much more like the previous three at home. Cuz I got my home theater shit on point lol. It helped. I still wish Spielberg had gone with a different DP but I was impressed at how gritty and sun blasted the Central American settings felt. It felt as hot as The Revenant felt cold. Which was a DEFINITE improvement...seeing as how the whole thing looked like mud theatrically..


RE: INDIANA JONES and you're actually fucking serious pre-release discussion - Richard Dickson - 01-12-2021

(01-07-2021, 02:37 PM)hammerhead Wrote: In Raiders anyway, Brody is clearly his fence, and even if the artifacts are going to the museum Indy's motivation is personal finance. "They're good pieces, Marcus..."

He's trying to sell them to get the money to get to Marrakesh and retrieve the idol. He's not necessarily trying to convince Marcus to up his price. It seems he basically sells what he finds to the museum to fund his next trip out. It's not mercenary.


RE: INDIANA JONES and you're actually fucking serious pre-release discussion - fraid uh noman - 01-12-2021

Yeah...it's hard to globe trot with reckless abandon on a university professor's salary lol. Or unless you're bank rolled by someone like Donovan..


RE: INDIANA JONES and you're actually fucking serious pre-release discussion - Overlord - 01-12-2021

(01-10-2021, 08:37 PM)Belloq87 Wrote: The really bizarre thing is that Spielberg, by his and Kaminski's own admission, DID give a directive to Kaminski to approximate Slocombe's work on the first three films.

You'd never know that from looking at the visual style of the movie.

It's a complete fucking garbage claim from Spielberg.  Kind of like how he said he would eschew CGI.

I can't imagine ever watching the original Crystal Skull ever again.  There's a couple of fan edits that are far superior.   The fixed color grading, removal of godawful humor, and the deletion of most of the nuclear blast sequence all greatly improve the film. This fanedit is the best:

https://ifdb.fanedit.org/indiana-jones-and-the-kingdom-of-the-crystal-skull-the-essential-edition/discussions/9515/

The Raiders of the Lost Skull fanedit might be even better if not for an inexplicable music swap during the best scene of the film (the bar fight at the college and ensuing motorcycle chase).

**Both The Hobbit (Maple Edit) and Crystal Skull were saved for me by fanedits. They don't become classics, but they become watchable and enjoyable.


RE: INDIANA JONES and you're actually fucking serious pre-release discussion - fraid uh noman - 01-12-2021

The worst Hobbit movie is immeasurably better than Crystal Skull. But I see your point..


RE: INDIANA JONES and you're actually fucking serious pre-release discussion - mr. stockslivevan - 01-12-2021

I feel they're interchangeable. I haven't actually revisited any of the Hobbit films since the last one.

I have downloaded a fanedit that supposedly seamlessly edits out anything that had nothing to do with the novel, which brought the whole thing down to four hours.


RE: INDIANA JONES and you're actually fucking serious pre-release discussion - fraid uh noman - 01-12-2021

I get that they're just too much for a lot of folks. Three gargantuan movies out of one book is pretty...uh, INDULGENT...to say the least. But they're so well made and well shot and well acted and that's such a gorgeous sand box to play in that I TOTALLY do not mind Peter Jackson taking the most scenic route possible with them. I NEVER find myself bored or tiring of any of it at any point whatsoever...but that's just me and my POV. At the very least, three more films with McKellen playing Gandalf the Gray is a gift and a joy. And we got a couple of final movies with Sir Christopher Lee and Ian Holm as well...which is nothing to sneeze at..


RE: INDIANA JONES and you're actually fucking serious pre-release discussion - mr. stockslivevan - 01-12-2021

I was okay with it just being two films as originally planned.


RE: INDIANA JONES and you're actually fucking serious pre-release discussion - fraid uh noman - 01-12-2021

Most people are. I would've been too if that's how they had done it. But they didn't, so...I'm just happy that I'm still satisfied with what we DID get..