Indiana Jones 4

I was extremely disappointed by the sound and cinematography for this movie. Kaminski was definitely not the man for the job and the end result just looked sloppy and poorly done.

I really disliked what they did with the anamorphic lenses and I felt they went completely overboard with the lens flares (it almost looked like no one was looking through the viewfinder to check for them). The contrast for this film was really weak and the lighting was phoney and poorly motivated. Compared to Slocombe's work, this looked like it was done by a film student with a crazy budget.

The diffusion especially pissed me off the most. It looked like they shot the whole film with Vaseline splattered on the lens. The end result was muddy and inconsistent. The color correction was so cheap looking and it made the movie feel plastic. I was so put off by it I barely noticed the terrible blocking and really amateur looking coverage.

Coming from the master that is Janusz Kaminski, I really don't know what happened. I blame Lucas, ILM, and the hacks who planned the visual effects. There was an incredibly unnecessary amount of VFX work on this film and I can guarantee it really limited Kaminski's work. Janusz should stick to making real movies, if I was Spielberg I would have hired someone like Andrew Lesnie to make this movie. He knows how to handle VFX shots better than any other DP IMHO.
 
CaptainMench said:
And I have no response to your parenting skills either.

CaptM
Click to expand...

Wow, that goes over the "P is for Personal" guideline doesn't it? You and I usually see eye to eye on things. I guess I turn into a bad parent because I disagree with your take on this one movie? Nice.

By the way, the comments about my six-year-old on the producer, director and the actress was a ****ing joke. Just like this movie.

e
 
Erik Olson said:
Wow, that goes over the "P is for Personal" guideline doesn't it? You and I usually see eye to eye on things. I guess I turn into a bad parent because I disagree with your take on this one movie? Nice.

By the way, the comments about my six-year-old on the producer, director and the actress was a poo pooing joke. Just like this movie.

e
Click to expand...

It's ALL a poo-pooing joke!! That's why this thread is SO funny. 360 posts -- like this is some sort of art form. This is almost as bad as Hudson not liking any of the new star wars movies!!

poo-pooing funny

We're eye-to-eye on our jokes on this thread... just not on the movie.

CaptM
 
We're all good then - from a personal standpoint.

Actually, I don't understand why fan/filmmaker critique of Spielberg's movie is a joke? People are emphatic about the Raiders franchise because the first picture was a near-perfect film. Make a sequel to Casablanca and people are going to have something to say about it.

Ruining a franchise is, for a lot of people, akin to stealing or diminishing a part of their childhood. You say you were at opening night for each film. Like me. When I was eleven, my mom took me to Raiders on opening weekend and it literally changed my life. It set in motion a path of curiosity, research and discovery that would eventually bring me into filmmaking as a career. Nothing short of a pivotal moment in my life.

Am I personally affected by Skull. Well, I care enough to write about it here, so the answer must be "yes". That entertainment should color the life of someone who makes their living in entertainment shouldn't require a big leap to understand.

e
 
Last edited:
I enjoyed and have seen all of them. last crusade is probably my least fav.

raider
temple
skull
crusade

thats how i feel about it.
 
You know, I was going to post that I thoroughly enjoyed the movie, but after reading all the hate, I don't think I'll bother. I don't think I could have hated the movie as much as some of you if Spielberg had peed in my $12 popcorn and Lucas in my $6 Diet Pepsi. :)
 
hey remember speilberg made them. its not like speilberg made the first then others stepped in.
 
Captain Pierce said:
You know, I was going to post that I thoroughly enjoyed the movie, but after reading all the hate, I don't think I'll bother. I don't think I could have hated the movie as much as some of you if Spielberg had peed in my $12 popcorn and Lucas in my $6 Diet Pepsi. :)
Click to expand...

This is funny because I was having dinner with a buddy last night and this is pretty much how he described the experience. Lucas and Speilberg took a dump, then pissed on it, then wrapped it up in a bag and sold it to us. :)

I think a lot of the hard feelings are coming from the fact that it's glaringly obvious that these guys just don't care what they do. They are just cynical ****ers who just want your money and they know they don't have to put in a ounce of effort to get it, because people will come see it anyway.

Same thing with the star wars movies. Beyond what anyone feels about them being star wars, they were simply a joke as filmmaking. An absolute joke in every respect. And if they didn't have the star wars name stamped on them they would have been relegated to late night re-runs on the Sci-Fi channel along with the Shark-Man movie and forgotten forever.
 
Last edited:
CaptainMench said:
Dude...

I'm old enough to have seen all of them on opening weekend... and did.

Thankfully I'm not one (like many hacks here) who 1) cares about film art and 2) runs my life on Spielberg/Lucas.

I just enjoyed the movie with my family because my children enjoyed it.

CaptM
Click to expand...

1.) Your calling people on a film-making board that care about "film art" a bunch hacks?

2.) Having expectations for a sequel that has been nearly 20 years in coming, to one of the greatest films of all time and one that to many is personal and reminiscent of their childhood and love for film, equates to "running their life on Spielberg/Lucas?" Lol.

I'm glad you had a good time with your family and children, though.
 
filmguy123 said:
1.) Your calling people on a film-making board that care about "film art" a bunch hacks?
Click to expand...

HA! If'n the shoe fits... then that's exactly what I said (wow) (and it is You're not your)

filmguy123 said:
2.) Having expectations for a sequel that has been nearly 20 years in coming, to one of the greatest films of all time and one that to many is personal and reminiscent of their childhood and love for film, equates to "running their life on Spielberg/Lucas?" Lol.
Click to expand...

You just put on the shoe.

filmguy123 said:
I'm glad you had a good time with your family and children, though.
Click to expand...

Thanks.

CaptM
 
Last edited:
CaptainMench said:
HA! If'n the shoe fits... then that's exactly what I said (wow) (and it is You're not your)



You just put on the shoe.



Thanks.

CaptM
Click to expand...

I think you missed the point. Of course "the shoe fits" - what are you, daft? You're on a film-making board, genius. If you're not one of these so-called "HACKS" talking about film art, (if thats what you're so ignorant as to call someone who actually cares about filmmaking) what in the world are you doing here?

I was serious when I said I am glad that you enjoyed the film with your family, I was NOT being sarcastic. That's obviously who it was made for, and that's exactly why many of the film-makers here have a problem with it. The Indy "legacy" deserves better than that.

Is it really necessary to resort to criticizing grammar on an internet forum? I'm not here to write an academic paper, I am here to read and contribute to intelligent discussion about the film. If you want to discuss the film please do so, but you've contributed nothing to why you did or did not like the movie. I have no problem with you enjoying the movie, many people here did and gave legitimate reasons.

I respect your opinion; is it too much to ask you to respect the opinion of others?
 
filmguy123 said:
I think you missed the point. Of course "the shoe fits" - what are you, daft? You're on a film-making board, genius. If you're not one of these so-called "HACKS" talking about film art, (if thats what you're so ignorant as to call someone who actually cares about filmmaking) what in the world are you doing here?
Click to expand...

Whoa, big fella... that's NOT what I said (who's daft?)

filmguy123 said:
I was serious when I said I am glad that you enjoyed the film with your family, I was NOT being sarcastic.
Click to expand...

I took it as so. Again, Thanks.

filmguy123 said:
I'm not here to write an academic paper,
Click to expand...

I'm glad you came back and fixed that. A 23 year old college student should know the difference. Adds to your own credibility.

filmguy123 said:
That's obviously who it was made for, and that's exactly why many of the film-makers here have a problem with it. The Indy "legacy" deserves better than that.
Click to expand...

Why??? WHY??? Who here thought the the film, when it came out, was ground breaking? Nobody!! Wanna know why? Because it was ALL done before. Did they do a good job doing other people's work? Yes. Was it the perfect film? Holy crap, no! Good enough to be nominated? Wow... honestly that was a stretch but look again at that year. Was it the best of the franchise? Wasn't a franchise when I saw it!! Though you weren't born yet.

filmguy123 said:
I respect your opinion; is it too much to ask you to respect the opinion of others?
Click to expand...

Look... my point is I enjoyed the movie. Go back and read my posts to this thread again as you certainly only skimmed them the first time. What I find VERY funny are the hacks going after two successful film editors and highly successful crews and talent thinking they did this on purpose to you.

THAT my friend is sad. Please... the WHOLE movie was an homage to the franchise. You didn't know? hee.

CaptM
 
Last edited:
This isn't directed at anyone, but when you start making things personal in a popcorn movie forum, it's time to call it a day.

And my final post about this movie is this, if you're going to wait 20 years to do a sequel, it better damn well be just as good as the other sequels. Do or do not, there is not try.
 
Right... All the Godfather movies were sure spot on. (Oh, by the way... that film WON best picture... what did GFIII win 16 years later? Huh?

Get a LIFE people!!

Blade... the point I DO agree with you on is Popcorn Movie Forum (thread)... I don't mind the film makers coming forth with criticisms based on THAT... it is the rest. What I affectionately call the Hack Squad.

CaptM
 
Ohhhh wow... Captain Captain. You're right Blade. Moving along.

So did anyone else notice the differences between the trailer and the film? First, the trailer is color corrected differently - more earthy tones and less of a diffused look. Looks more detailed and gritty. Looks more Indy-ish, but the actual movie looks more 50's SciFi movie-ish (ie all of the things mentioned throughout the thread).

Second, they use different lines in the trailer - and the trailer lines sound MUCH better! "You're a teacher?" -> "Part time" the delivery is different in the trailer and film, and the trailer sounds infinetly better.

The delivery of the line "Not as easy as it used to be" is also different in the trailer. The inflection is slightly different, particularly in "used to be." Yes, I notice these kinds of things...

The line where Blanchett asks "where is it you would imagine I am from" - Indy's response, the delivery feels SOOO off it almost doesn't even sound like Harrison Ford let alone Indy. So out of place, I'd almost be convinced it was dubbed over.

Pacing issues all over. One example is Indy's house. Talking with Mutt, and he pulls out his book with map and says how they need to go to Peru. The shot hangs on the book while Indy talks about what they need to do and then crossfades into the classic Indy map and plane. Well, it's a tad off from the transition pacing of the other films. It really should have showed the book being opened as Indy talked, cut to Indy talking, then the kid looking at him (reaction shot) after he Indy says they need to go to Peru, then back to the book, slight camera move while showing the map and then fading to the Indy theme. Also, the tempo of the music during the plane sequence is about 15% too fast IMO.

Finally, it would have been more true to the series had the arrival shot not been them standing at the airport with the plain pulling away, but started with the noises of the city street and them walking through.

Random little things, but all of them add up to making things just feel a bit off.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top