my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film Handlers' Movie Reviews   » Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (2008) (Page 5)

This topic comprises 7 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7

Author Topic: Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (2008) Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 05-29-2008 09:58 AM                     quote: Monte L Fullmer Does DeLuxe know about this, or do they care? A group of us pointed this out a few years back at the Canada lab where they have the K printers and nobody working there felt it was a problem. Of course they were viewing the prints on a screen maybe 2 feet in size, but simple math should have been sufficient enough for them to understand that the tiniest bounce on a small screen will look godawful on a large one. Deluxe in California, while not capable of producing prints to the quality of the Technicolor labs, does a decent job. (Being in TX I get prints from both of those labs since I am right in the middle of their distribution line for titles that they are both printing and occasionally get a print of the same title from each that I can compare side by side.) Deluxe California should send some of those techs up to Canada to work on their printers. All of my Indiana Jones prints came from Deluxe in California. Can anyone here verify if they have one from Deluxe in Canada, as noted by a "K" number in the corner of the sticker on the leaders? They might have printed all of these in California.  |  IP: Logged Rick Raskin Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1100 From: Manassas Virginia Registered: Jan 2003 posted 05-29-2008 04:48 PM                     When Indy is flying to Peru and a map is displayed showing the flight's progress, I could swear I saw the country of Belize on that map. Belize was known as British Honduras until 1973. Would someone verify that I saw correctly?  |  IP: Logged Chad Souder Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 962 From: Waterloo, IA, USA Registered: Feb 2000 posted 05-29-2008 09:49 PM                     quote: Brad Miller Did anyone else find that the quality of the dialogue on this movie wasn't particularly great? Maybe its because George Lucas is responsible for writing some of the worst dialogue ever, so they quit putting forth effort to make it audible. If not for Harrison Ford's improvisation on his lines over the years, there would hardly be a single salvagable line in any of Lucas's movies. The best word I can think of to describe this movie is wussy. How far the series has fallen. What happened to faces melting off Nazis... eating monkey brains... ripping still beating hearts from a man's chest, then lowering him into a pit of lava... Indy, after watching a man twirl a sword around, shooting him without thinking twice... We could all go on and on. What is left in the touchy-feely marriage of Lucas/Spielberg, but a few CGI bugs biting people and Shia LaBeouf repeatedly getting hit in the balls by plants. What crap. And speaking of LaBeouf, could they have picked a bigger wimp to play Indy's son? He just doesn't have a tough screen presence to me. Ralph Maccio and C. Thomas Howell were badder-ass greasers than him. Needless to say, this movie disappointed me, although it really should not have. It is what we've all come to expect from the two formerly great film-guys that have lost all touch with what they used to do so well. When Jerry Rice was too old and too slow to make plays anymore, the Broncos cut him and no other team would pick him up. I wish there were the same standards for people in the movie industry.  |  IP: Logged Mike Schindler Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1039 From: Oak Park, IL, USA Registered: Jun 2002 posted 05-30-2008 01:25 AM                     quote: Chad Souder Maybe its because George Lucas is responsible for writing some of the worst dialogue ever, so they quit putting forth effort to make it audible. Actually, the script was written by David Koepp of JURASSIC PARK fame.  |  IP: Logged Greg Anderson Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 766 From: Ogden Valley, Utah Registered: Nov 1999 posted 05-30-2008 08:16 AM                        Translation: Actually, the script was [re]written by David Koepp [on a very short leash], of JURASSIC PARK fame, [after several better writers had a crack at it but their work was rejected by Lucas, Spielberg and/or Ford]. So, while I don't care for David Koepp's work, I can't really blame him for, nor credit him with very much for this script.  |  IP: Logged Mike Schindler Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1039 From: Oak Park, IL, USA Registered: Jun 2002 posted 05-30-2008 12:02 PM                     But don't you think it feels a lot like a David Koepp script? I've always thought of Koepp as being a really good action movie writer, in the sense that his movies tend to have fantastic set pieces held together by a decent framework. I've always thought of Koepp as being a crew member like any other. So while he most likely was kept on a short leash, the script was still his work in the same sense that the cinematography was Kaminski's work. Obviously, Spielberg had a big hand in both. But I would still credit/blame Koepp, especially for the dialogue. Were the other writers really better than Koepp? Does Lucas count? I'd say he's a better writer. But Jeff Nathanson? Dude wrote SPEED 2: CRUISE CONTROL. Frank Darabont is someone who has tricked the world into thinking he's a good writer. THE SHAWSHANK REDEMPTION was solid, but the rest of his credits are really weak. His stuff on YOUNG INDIANA JONES was crap, making me think that his script for this movie was also crap. If you want to go back further, the only other two people I've heard of working on the script are M. Night Shyamalan and Chris Columbus. Shyamalan's really good at doing one thing, and that ain't INDIANA JONES. Columbus' work on Harry Potter has proven that he's really good at making movies like ADVENTURES IN BABYSITTING. So while I don't think that Koepp is a fantastic choice, no one that came along (aside from Lucas) was better. Obviously, if we were living in an ideal world, Lawrence Kasdan would have written the script. But you have to take what you can get.  |  IP: Logged Louis Bornwasser Film God Posts: 4441 From: prospect ky usa Registered: Mar 2005 posted 06-01-2008 06:01 AM                        I'm 99% sure I saw a U.S. flag with too many stars on it. Louis  |  IP: Logged Brad Allen Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 688 From: Evansville, IN, USA Registered: May 2000 posted 06-02-2008 12:25 AM                     Wow, the vaseline on the lense sure looked horrid. Maybe it was CGI vaseline?  |  IP: Logged Mike Schindler Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1039 From: Oak Park, IL, USA Registered: Jun 2002 posted 06-02-2008 03:02 AM                     I'm not a big fan of diffusion either, but I don't quite see why everyone thinks it's so bad in this movie. I didn't think the photography was super-duper or anything like that, but I didn't have a problem with it at all. If nothing else, I thought it was cool to see something shot with anamorphic lenses. Also, everyone keeps on complaining about the CGI gophers. What's wrong with them? They're insignificant. The only problem I have with them is the one reaction shot where they're watching the jet-powered vehicle-thing speed past them. The camera crosses the line on that shot. Why not just have the gophers turn their heads in the opposite direction? Personally, I think this is the best movie of the year so far. But that being said, I can find way more deserving things to complain about it than gophers and diffusion.  |  IP: Logged Greg Anderson Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 766 From: Ogden Valley, Utah Registered: Nov 1999 posted 06-02-2008 07:49 AM                        There were no gophers in the movie, digital or otherwise. I believe they were actually prairie dogs. At any rate, the reason folks are harping on the CGI animals is simple: They are the most obvious examples of "Stuff that Just Didn't Work" in this movie. A lot of stuff just didn't work but it's easier to point out the critters than do a more indepth analysis. At any rate, a real Indiana Jones movie would never have given up the box office throne to a bunch of middle-aged, spoiled women within 8 days.  |  IP: Logged Lyle Romer Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1400 From: Davie, FL, USA Registered: May 2002 posted 06-02-2008 09:03 AM                     quote: Greg Anderson At any rate, a real Indiana Jones movie would never have given up the box office throne to a bunch of middle-aged, spoiled women within 8 days. It took the box office throne back after one day. SATC IJATKOTCS Fri- $26.9M $12.2M Sat- $17.9M $19.9M Sun- $10.8M $13.9M This actually held pretty well in week 2, down less than 55%. That's a relatively good hold especially when the opening weekend was memorial day weekend. Indiana Jones will end up making over $300 Million while the middle aged women movie will most likely not hit $100 Million which is HORRIBLE with an opening of $55 Million.  |  IP: Logged Brad Allen Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 688 From: Evansville, IN, USA Registered: May 2000 posted 06-02-2008 09:53 PM                     I've not seen any gophers, I was just commenting in general about all the crappy looking CGI. Much worse than in most films.  |  IP: Logged Mike Schindler Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1039 From: Oak Park, IL, USA Registered: Jun 2002 posted 06-02-2008 10:24 PM                     Brad, I wasn't trying to specifically comment on your post. Sorry about that. And sorry to call them gophers. I get my burrowing rodents all mixed up. But seriously, why does everyone think the CGI in this thing is so bad? There was never a moment where it took me out of the movie. How is it worse than any other movie?  |  IP: Logged John Wilson Film God Posts: 5438 From: Sydney, Australia. Registered: Dec 1999 posted 06-02-2008 11:48 PM                     It's probably not...we were all just told it wasn't going to be there.  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 06-03-2008 06:18 PM                     Fully agreed. That was a big selling point of this movie to me, no fucking cgi! ...and then there it was in all of it's godawful glory.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 7 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.