CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Focused Film Discussion › INDIANA JONES and you're actually fucking serious pre-release discussion
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

INDIANA JONES and you're actually fucking serious pre-release discussion - Page 37

post #1801 of 1992
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartleby_Scriven View Post

Overlord?
It’s treason, then.

I will make it legal.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by FatherDude View Post

Spielberg actually stated that he shot Indy 4 in the United Stated because he didn't want to be far from his family. Yet his very next shoot (WAR HORSE) took him to Devon. Methinks his one-time policy on Indy 4 had more to do with his attitude toward the project in general than his suddenly becoming a homebody.

Or he just has serious spurts of laziness?  For Ready Player One, apparently he has not directly overseen a single post-production shot, instead relying on teleconferencing and assistants.  I think he just doesn't have as much energy as he once did.  

post #1802 of 1992
Quote:
Originally Posted by FatherDude View Post

Spielberg actually stated that he shot Indy 4 in the United Stated because he didn't want to be far from his family. Yet his very next shoot (WAR HORSE) took him to Devon. Methinks his one-time policy on Indy 4 had more to do with his attitude toward the project in general than his suddenly becoming a homebody.

Every time he was promoting Indy 4 in interviews he brought up how he was already done with the series with Indy 3, and it showed.

I have to assume the way Indy 4 turned out is motivating him to make a better send off with Indy 5. That is, I HOPE.
post #1803 of 1992
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bradito View Post

Crystal Skull wouldn't have been good wherever they shot it.

The script is so flawed in its concept you have to wonder what the fuck happened?  It gets incredibly basic things about Indiana Jones films fundamentally wrong.  He cooperates with the Russians, he's merely retreading the footsteps of Hurt's unfilmed adventure ... many of the action set pieces of either digital or make absolutely no sense ...

post #1804 of 1992
Quote:
Originally Posted by FatherDude View Post

Spielberg actually stated that he shot Indy 4 in the United Stated because he didn't want to be far from his family. Yet his very next shoot (WAR HORSE) took him to Devon. Methinks his one-time policy on Indy 4 had more to do with his attitude toward the project in general than his suddenly becoming a homebody.


I do think some of that may have been rubbed off from Lucas.  I could easily envision Lucas saying something like, "You know, Steven, you really don't have to go through all the trouble of a location shoot.  We can make anywhere we want look like anywhere we need."

post #1805 of 1992
Quote:
Originally Posted by Overlord View Post
 

I will make it legal.

 

Or he just has serious spurts of laziness?  For Ready Player One, apparently he has not directly overseen a single post-production shot, instead relying on teleconferencing and assistants.  I think he just doesn't have as much energy as he once did.  

Maybe, but at the same time this is a guy who loves to put out two movies in the same year.  He does it a lot.  That's not the mark of a man who isn't feeling energized.

post #1806 of 1992
I will never

Ever

Get over the fact that gun powder is not magnetic.
post #1807 of 1992
Quote:
Originally Posted by Belloq87 View Post
 


I do think some of that may have been rubbed off from Lucas.  I could easily envision Lucas saying something like, "You know, Steven, you really don't have to go through all the trouble of a location shoot.  We can make anywhere we want look like anywhere we need."

 

Spielberg should have thrown down his lightsaber and exclaimed "I will never join you."  

post #1808 of 1992
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartleby_Scriven View Post

I will never

Ever

Get over the fact that gun powder is not magnetic.

Neither is gold.  

post #1809 of 1992
Yeah, but Indy is surprised when the skull attracts gold.

IT’S HIS IDEA TO USE GUN POWDER IN THE OPENING

stupid fucking movie
post #1810 of 1992
Quote:
Originally Posted by Belloq87 View Post
 

Maybe, but at the same time this is a guy who loves to put out two movies in the same year.  He does it a lot.  That's not the mark of a man who isn't feeling energized.

 

His "directing" apparently has about 5-15% of the actual hands-on work of his prior efforts.  Just look at the Ready Player One example I gave, above.  Not one shot.  Nobody who is actually doing the post production work has even seen or heard from him.  James Cameron, by comparison, is hands-on for every Avatar sequel post-production shot.  

post #1811 of 1992
I've managed to avoid all Ready Player One trailers thus far. I hope to continue this winning streak.
post #1812 of 1992
Quote:
Originally Posted by Overlord View Post
 

 

His "directing" apparently has about 5-15% of the actual hands-on work of his prior efforts.  Just look at the Ready Player One example I gave, above.  Not one shot.  Nobody working on post has even seen or heard from him.


READY PLAYER ONE seems like it would be a unique case given so much of the movie is animated.

 

I would find it hard to believe that he didn't put in as much hands-on work as he did in the past on live action pictures like LINCOLN, BRIDGE OF SPIES, and THE POST, which he just wrapped.

post #1813 of 1992
Quote:
Originally Posted by Belloq87 View Post
 


READY PLAYER ONE seems like it would be a unique case given so much of the movie is animated.

 

I would find it hard to believe that he didn't put in as much hands-on work as he did in the past on live action pictures like LINCOLN, BRIDGE OF SPIES, and THE POST, which he just wrapped.

Couldn't say.  Don't know anyone that worked on those films.  

post #1814 of 1992
Quote:
Originally Posted by Overlord View Post

 

Or he just has serious spurts of laziness?  For Ready Player One, apparently he has not directly overseen a single post-production shot, instead relying on teleconferencing and assistants.  I think he just doesn't have as much energy as he once did.  




If this is from an article can we get a link? I'm pretty sure directing special effects shots by video-conferencing is pretty standard.  I remember on the DVD for DEAD MAN'S CHEST (so ten years ago) they were showing Gore Verbinski giving fine notes to ILM about a Davy Jones shot via video link, and that seems about as hands-on and low-level as direction of that sort of thing can realistically get.

post #1815 of 1992
Quote:
Originally Posted by FatherDude View Post
 

I'm pretty sure directing special effects shots by video-conferencing is pretty standard.


Especially when you're prepping - and then shooting - a whole other film!

post #1816 of 1992
Quote:
Originally Posted by Belloq87 View Post
 


Especially when you're prepping - and then shooting - a whole other film!

He moved on to his next film when Ready Player One was basically just entering post.  

 

I mean, I'm not going to tell too many stories out of turn, but just look at how directors normally operate when it comes to directing and finishing films, and look at how Spielberg has operated for a while now, and you can clearly see how he's decided to approach the final phase of his career.  

post #1817 of 1992
Thread Starter 
Didn't he supervise post on JURASSIC PARK from Poland while filming SCHINDLERS LIST?
post #1818 of 1992
I wonder if your feelings on this matter are clear, Overlord.
post #1819 of 1992
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluelouboyle View Post

Didn't he supervise post on JURASSIC PARK from Poland while filming SCHINDLERS LIST?


Correct.  Supposedly George Lucas was his point man at ILM and in the editing room with Michael Kahn.  At the end of a day's shooting, Spielberg would teleconference with the various people involved in JP's post.

post #1820 of 1992
That's the thing, It's always been Spielberg's style, at least post-1941, to surround himself with talented craftsmen and delegate liberally. I think Spielberg comes from the Hitchcock school of film-making where there's a huge focus on storyboards and collaboration. I'm sure there's a risk of technology taking it to extremes, but I think you can chart this approach far back enough that it's not about getting old.

Spielberg is certainly capable of laziness, but I think it's a project-specific thing. He obviously did not have a burning desire to make Indy 4.
post #1821 of 1992

Bridge of Spies is solid stuff. I found it refreshing to watch a current movie where I could feel that the director was in total control of the material.

post #1822 of 1992
Lincoln is a stone cold classic, with a script as good as anything Steven Spielberg ever directed. Bridge of Spies is an old school drama, with some sweet Coen Bros zings by Hanks. Both are exceptionally well put together affairs.

I do think Lincoln is top 5 Spielberg.

And I also believe he was totally phoning in Crystal Skull, a first for him.
post #1823 of 1992

Overlord's shitting on LINCOLN?

 

Good day to you, sir. I SAID GOOD DAY.

post #1824 of 1992

Lincoln is wonderful!

 

There's no way you can't call Lost World his laziest film though. Even more so than Crystal Skull. It's a very proficient lazy, but it's about as ambitious as your average Mummy sequel.

post #1825 of 1992

Lincoln is a masterpiece with one masterly-written scene after another, and Spielberg opts to keep the cinematic flourishes a touch subdued with the writing and acting at the forefront but give the film another look or two and you'll find that it's expertly pieced together and directed. 

 

Bridge of Spies is phenomenal as well. 

 

Even The BFG, which seems intentionally doughy, as though it's a children's film made by Antonioni or something, has a fair number of exquisitely-blocked and -directed scenes. 

 

Also wasn't Ready Player One already fairly deep into postproduction, having wrapped principal photography, a good six months or so before Spielberg hopped aboard The Post? Would seem to be standard operating procedure for him to communicate via teleconferencing on that film's postproduction. 

post #1826 of 1992
Quote:
Originally Posted by Belloq87 View Post


I do think some of that may have been rubbed off from Lucas.  I could easily envision Lucas saying something like, "You know, Steven, you really don't have to go through all the trouble of a location shoot.  We can make anywhere we want look like anywhere we need."

 

According to Lucas, shooting internationally would actually have been cheaper, and Spielberg made the call to stay domestic at extra expense.  However, Lucas may have simply been talking about shooting in UK or Australian soundstages versus Los Angeles soundstages, so it probably would have made no difference in terms of what the movie looks like.

post #1827 of 1992

I swear The Lost World sometimes gets a nostalgia pass. It's 10 times dumber than Crystall Skull, and 20 times as boring.

post #1828 of 1992

Also Tintin is an amazing film and a love letter to the Herge comics.

post #1829 of 1992
Thread Starter 
Yes. Damn shame there won't be a TINTIN sequel. Doubt it would be as bloated and dull as FIVE ARMIES, as Jackson would be using the comics.
post #1830 of 1992

Not to hijack the thread, but why isn't there going to be a Tintin sequel? The first film underperformed in the U.S. but did well enough in Europe to seem to make the idea more than feasible. 

 

Also, what is Peter Jackson up to these days? Or did the experience of The Hobbit trilogy make him a nervous wreck who hates his former passion, cinema? Because I'd believe that, sad as it is to say.

post #1831 of 1992
Thread Starter 
He said he wants to direct a smaller film next. Don't blame him.

TINTIN was released before the China boom. Maybe if it was released now it would get a sequel.

Probably not based on THE BLUE LOTUS though.
post #1832 of 1992
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mola Ram View Post

I swear The Lost World sometimes gets a nostalgia pass. It's 10 times dumber than Crystall Skull, and 20 times as boring.

THE LOST WORLD at least has the set pieces and a sense of danger.
post #1833 of 1992
Quote:
Originally Posted by FatherDude View Post

THE LOST WORLD at least has the set pieces and a sense of danger.
I will never understand any preference for Crystal Skull over The Lost World. And that's not a sense of nostalgia....it genuinely was my favorite movie that summer and blew me away. I was only 15, almost 16 but still....I don't get nostalgic for 1997. It wasn't long enough ago. Hell, I like Jurassic World better than Crystal Skull too so, what do I know?
post #1834 of 1992
Quote:
Originally Posted by FatherDude View Post
 

My personal favorite is the establishing shot of Marshall College.  The footage is lifted directly from RAIDERS, but it's been digitally manipulated to a) fit into Kaminski's terrible color grading scheme for the rest of the movie, and b) replace the 1930s-era cars with digital 1950s cars.

 

Crystal Skull is the film that made me properly notice colour grading - it's shocking how terrible it is in that film: it makes the film look totally different from its predecessors; it desaturates a lot of potentially beautiful locations; it makes everyone look orange; and - as with most instances of heavy colour grading, makes the digital effects conspicuous.

 

 

Neither of these frames looks photorealistic, but one looks atmospheric and sharp, whereas the other looks like grey shite.

 

 

Crusade's climax: few primary colours, but everything pops, and the image is sharp. You get a sense of the location. Skull's climax: it's impossible to tell if the environment is CGI or not, since all the edges are blurry and there's little detail to be seen in the sky. Everyone has an inhuman skin tone, and - I don't know the technical term for colour palettes - the colours aren't just desaturated, but also off key. 

 

Folk like to slag off CGI - not me: I think its benefits have vastly outweighed the sloppy laziness it can encourage; but I cannot think of any film that has benefited from today's practice of colour grading every image all the damn time (Mad Max being the exception which proves the rule). 


Edited by RexBanner - 10/22/17 at 7:02am
post #1835 of 1992
Quote:
Originally Posted by RexBanner View Post
 

 

 

This comparison really says it all.  When Kaminski says he "studied" Douglas Slocombe's lighting style, I have to believe he was just paying lip service.  Slocombe's Indy films look like crisp, engaging epics.  Kaminski's looks like the work of a guy who has no idea how to pull that off.

post #1836 of 1992
It's the same pee-ish yellow that Spectre is!
post #1837 of 1992
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fraid uh noman View Post

It's the same pee-ish yellow that Spectre is!


At least SPECTRE is crisp and defined, though.  CRYSTAL SKULL's daylight looks perpetually blown out beyond all reason.

post #1838 of 1992

uuuuuuunnnnnnnnnnggggghhhhhh stop talking about Crystal Skull.

 

STOP

post #1839 of 1992
Happy to know I will never have any desire to watch Crystal Skull... and that was even BEFORE this thread.
post #1840 of 1992
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fraid uh noman View Post
I will never understand any preference for Crystal Skull over The Lost World.

 

Same. TLW is deeply flawed but its pieces remain incredibly enjoyable. (I'd contend that without the ridiculous gymnastics scene the film as a whole would be held more highly by us film nerds). 

 

Plus it has Goldblum in full Goldblum mode. "Mommy's very angry."

post #1841 of 1992
I like the rest of it enough that I can forgive the gymnastics bit. That really is one weirdly out of place "huh??" moment. I guess they felt that Malcolm's daughter had to one-up Lex and "hacking" or something..
post #1842 of 1992
I think TLW is definitely more enjoyable to those who have never read the book or read the book AFTER, which is what I should have done.

The “rescue mission” vibe of the book was more enjoyable, 3 bad guys (one of them Dodgson from JP) attempting to acquire dna samples while Malcolm a few kids and a badass trailer attempt to bring back a millionaire asshole.
post #1843 of 1992

I've read the book, but only once, and it was prior to the film's release. I don't remember that much about it, other than the movie diverges pretty widely from it.

post #1844 of 1992

My favorite bit of The Lost World novel is how Malcolm is declared dead at the end of Jurassic Park, but is resurrected because Crichton was basically writing a sequel so it could be turned into a movie.

post #1845 of 1992

Completely spaced that Malcolm dies in Jurassic Park (the novel).

post #1846 of 1992
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartleby_Scriven View Post
 

because Crichton was basically writing a sequel so it could be turned into a movie.

 

Some of Crichton's later novels -- Airframe, for example -- look like screenplays with the scene headings removed.

post #1847 of 1992

I mean, authors had done similar things before. After the movie came out, David Morrell added, I believe, a foreword or afterword to First Blood that explained how Rambo had lived (he dies in the book) and then wrote the novelization of Rambo: First Blood Part II like a sequel to his own novel. 

post #1848 of 1992
I like how Spielberg took like, 3 parts of the book then transmogrified it into something else completely. Crichton didn’t even need the book written, other than to make his own money. Call Spielberg on the phone, collect the check.
post #1849 of 1992
Quote:
Originally Posted by Belloq87 View Post
 

This comparison really says it all.  When Kaminski says he "studied" Douglas Slocombe's lighting style, I have to believe he was just paying lip service.  Slocombe's Indy films look like crisp, engaging epics.  Kaminski's looks like the work of a guy who has no idea how to pull that off.

 

Yeah, I remember that being a specific thing that allayed some of my doubts after the first trailer. If he studied it, I imagine it was like with Apu in The Simpsons - 

 

"Location shooting... vivid colour... light and shadow... natural lighting... high contrast... mood... sharpness of image... OK. I have none of that."

post #1850 of 1992
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartleby_Scriven View Post
 

My favorite bit of The Lost World novel is how Malcolm is declared dead at the end of Jurassic Park, but is resurrected because Crichton was basically writing a sequel so it could be turned into a movie.

And it's handled in such a thrown away fashion, too.  Malcolm recalls that there were newspaper reports that erroneously reported his death.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Malmordo View Post
 

 

Some of Crichton's later novels -- Airframe, for example -- look like screenplays with the scene headings removed.

I'm a huge Crichton fan, and even I'll acknowledge that this is basically true.  At a certain point, he became very much aware of the possibility of his novels almost instantly becoming movies, and his writing style catered to that.  To me, PREY is the one that feels most like Crichton saying, "This one's ready to go!  I can have a draft of the script next week!"  That's not even a criticism, because I'm still waiting for a movie of that one, to be honest.

 

He eventually did get beyond that, though, as things like STATE OF FEAR and NEXT do not have clean, neat act breaks or conventional structures.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Focused Film Discussion
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Focused Film Discussion › INDIANA JONES and you're actually fucking serious pre-release discussion