Indiana Jones and Crystal Skull etc.

[Michel Hafner]

This is why I am against digital projection. I'd say that, there was almost never a case where a a35mm print at a theatre would look worse than a VHS or DVD copy at home. Now the print quality is worse than ever and the home formats are better than ever.

It looked more like a source problem to me than a DLP projector problem per se (except more contrast would always be welcome). In my experience a 35mm print from

the same DI looks even worse and the HD on my home projector better than both.

[Tenolian Bell]

It looked more like a source problem to me than a DLP projector problem per se (except more contrast would always be welcome). In my experience a 35mm print from the same DI looks even worse and the HD on my home projector better than both.

 

Its much more a point of perspective. There is good and bad digital projection and 35mm prints.

 

Try projecting your home HD projector on to a 60 foot screen and it will look far worse than both.

[K Borowski]

I'm going to see this film today, and I am going to try to separate the negative things I've heard about the technical (and technological) aspects of this film and actually evaluate the film as a whole instead of the cinematography, lenses, lighting, set design, processing lab, DI facility.

 

While I gripe about technical stuff on here, ultimately, in the theatre, I expect films to entertain me, or make me think about life in a new way. If it does neither of those things, regardless of what stock it is shot on or who's in it, I feel the film is a failure.

 

Totally off topic, I thought it was great that they had an "Indiana Jones IV" race car in the Indy 500 yesterday. The ad was bigger than the "Kodak Film" car in "Taladega Nights" :lol:

[Scott Bryant]

We're talking about the use of Classic Soft filters and or nets over the lens -- which when combined with

 

Thanks David. As usual you provide excellent explanations and your help is greatly appreciated.

Edited May 26, 2008 by Scott Bryant

[Gus Sacks]

Thought this was interesting...

 

http://www.cnn.com/2008/SHOWBIZ/Movies/05/...s.ap/index.html

[Mike Simpson]

"Hi monkeys. Can you help me get to that jeep faster than than if i was driving?"

[John Holland]

I must've watched a different print from many of you. I didn't see it being nearly as bad as the rest of you. I can agree their was some inconsistency in contrast and the use of soft filters. But their were moments that were absolutely stunning. The high key outdoor scenes were a stylistic choice. I don't think its necessarily good or bad. Kaminiski's use of diffusion was also inconsistent in War of The Worlds and Munich.

 

I saw an interview a while ago where Kaminski said they did not want to stray far from the feel of Slocombe's work, but did not necessarily stick to it religiously.

 

 

 

That's quite an exaggeration.

Well it isnt the the trailer did look better that the 2k poop DI print i saw you wernt there so you just dont know do you , i am a film man and always will be sofor me say such a thing dosent come easy !!!.

[Tenolian Bell]

Well it isnt the the trailer did look better that the 2k poop DI print i saw you wernt there so you just dont know do you , i am a film man and always will be sofor me say such a thing dosent come easy !!!.

 

 

You honestly feel judging an entire 2 hour low key action adventure film to the 2 minute trailer of a high key comedy that hasn't yet been released as a valid comparison?

[Krystian Ramlogan]

I agree with quite a lot of what's been said so far about the cinematography: unmotivated, inconsistent, framing or composition that could have been much better, and some weird colors.

 

I loved the mushroom cloud shot and there were some moments when I thought, now if the Entire Film was like this it would look great.

 

I'm not sure why things are as they appear but, as a fan of Mr. Kaminski I will file this away as a hiccup...

 

The film is not a great one but it is fun and entertaining if you don't have too many expectations; it's certainly the least impressive Indy film but seems to be making a lot of bank. I did enjoy it, even with its problems.

 

I have to say though, Cate Blanchett was not impressive in my opinion. Her constantly shifting accent which wanted to be either British, German or Russian without a claim to any was distracting and mediocre. Her expressions I've seen before and really didn't convey the best emotion. So what if she has decent skin? Or photographs well. That does nothing to improve her acting or distract from her lack of originality.

 

Harrison did a good job, he's still Indy. The film would have sunk without him.

 

Shia...hmm, he's got range. But, I wasn't too thrilled with his character arc which I guess I should blame on the writer.

 

Not as much direction as I would have hoped for, and the story was weak: more traps, more trouble, more of what makes Indy a great thinker...Editing was paced weird at times, but the film did pick up from mid-way onwards.

 

The CGI, hmmm...more originality needed and not quite seamless.

 

Oh well. I say it gets a B-

 

Although if I hadn't been a fan, I'm not sure it would have rated that high...

 

K.

[John Holland]

You honestly feel judging an entire 2 hour low key action adventure film to the 2 minute trailer of a high key comedy that hasn't yet been released as a valid comparison?

I am going but what i saw on the same screen thats all i am saying please try to understand most trailer prints usually look bad this one didnt and still looked better than th feature!! Which was worrying . Have you seen the film in question ?

[Jon Rosenbloom]

Let's put aside the acrimony and just agree that the Connecticut Second Unit, B-Camera Dolly Grip did some excellent work.

[Gus Sacks]

Let's put aside the acrimony and just agree that the Connecticut Second Unit, B-Camera Dolly Grip did some excellent work.

 

High five. ;)

[Jonathan Bowerbank]

What I hated has already been stated in this thread, the unmotivated incredibly unrealistic lighting and the high keyness of it. The original three were pretty high contrast now that I've gone back and watched them all over again. And Slocombe certainly knew how to use the natural sunlight. Reading this month's AC mag, it seems Kaminski was a little lost. It was as if nearly everytime a face was about to go into shadow there was a giant soft source there to give a key.

 

The best scene in the film was the opening scene with the teenagers driving alongside the army trucks, it definitely gave me the feeling that this was gonna be the kind of Indy film I was looking forward too...but then things soon changed.

 

What I liked? The fact that this was a film based in the 50's and not the early 40's, which called for a different style from the previous Indy films. So much of the film's look is forgivable.

 

What I hated again, EXPOSITION...and Lucas didn't even write this one. We really didn't need to play catchup for the past 18 years.

 

What I liked, it was still fun and high flying adventure. And the gophers were a nice touch the 1st & 2nd time we saw them...but not the 3rd time.

 

 

 

 

 

SPOILER

 

What I ultimately hated, Spielberg likes aliens too much. Oh, and did it really have to end with a wedding?

Edited May 28, 2008 by Jonathan Bowerbank

[Tenolian Bell]

I am going but what i saw on the same screen thats all i am saying please try to understand most trailer prints usually look bad this one didnt and still looked better than th feature!! Which was worrying . Have you seen the film in question ?

 

Yes I've seen Indy. I've seen the get smart trailer numerous times.

[Tenolian Bell]

What I hated has already been stated in this thread, the unmotivated incredibly unrealistic lighting and

What I ultimately hated, Spielberg likes aliens too much. Oh, and did it really have to end with a wedding?

 

 

This doesn't come from an unrealistic place. Some of the technology and architectural accomplishments from thousands of years ago are still unexplained today. There are theories that other beings came and taught them to do what they did.

 

Also the time frame of the film is appropriate. That is a time soon after Roswell and when alien abduction stories became popular. Also lots of alien invasion movies.

[Leo Anthony Vale]

Also the time frame of the film is appropriate. That is a time soon after Roswell and when alien abduction stories became popular. Also lots of alien invasion movies.

 

Roswell did not become well known until around 1980. Alien abductions did not become popular until the mid 60s with the publication of 'The Interupted Journey' about the Betty and Barney Hill incident.

This was also the introduction or invention of the Greys.

 

50s UFO contactees, like George Adamski, met with blonde Aryan Buddhists, usually from Venus, talking about nuclear disarmament and early New Age spirituality. They'd occasionally mention that Jesus was one of them & he currently lives on Venus, where he has the occasional dinner party, where he serves a very interesting wine.

 

Was the complaint about aliens a goddam spoiler?

[Tenolian Bell]

Roswell did not become well known until around 1980. Alien abductions did not become popular until the mid 60s with the publication of 'The Interupted Journey' about the Betty and Barney Hill incident.

This was also the introduction or invention of the Greys.

 

50s UFO contactees, like George Adamski, met with blonde Aryan Buddhists, usually from Venus, talking about nuclear disarmament and early New Age spirituality. They'd occasionally mention that Jesus was one of them & he currently lives on Venus, where he has the occasional dinner party, where he serves a very interesting wine.

 

 

The reports of the Roswell crash were known worldwide when it happened. The story was quickly debunked by the US Air Force.

 

You are right abductions did not become popular until the 60's.

 

The concept of the Greys had been around long before. H.G. Welles wrote about them in "Of a Book Unwritten" and David H. Keller wrote about them in the Wonder Stories in 1929.

[Xavier Plaza]

Unfortunately just today I saw the film, I agree in several points, overlit exteriors especially in the first sequence outside the warehouse and abuse with the net, unmotivated use... Someone say the film looks like there are several DP's... totally agree with this... I never expect this kind of work from Mr. Kaminski.

I don't know if Kaminski wants to use the traditional (cinematography) Indiana Jones style or he lost himself founding the style of this movie, mixing the indiana jones cinematography and his style...

 

Anyone knows who really was the second unit DP at IMB they say Irek Hartowicz but i read in the credits another name...

[Jonathan Bowerbank]

If you read the AC article about Kaminski shooting Indy, it's almost as if he had a major brainfart as to how to shoot in broad daylight. I thought the opening shots with the teens racing the military trucks looked great, and the scene with the ants was another well shot exterior. But nearly everything else just seemed off.

[Stephen Williams]

That is quite a feat, though surely his gaffer used one or he asked for x footcandles and got it. Care to explain more?

 

Hi Chris,

 

He used his eyes as his light meter. It's not very difficult I usually can guess the stop within 1/2 a stop on the first day of shooting, gets closer than that on day 2 :lol:

 

Stephen

[Mark Williams]

QUOTE

What I ultimately hated, Spielberg likes aliens too much. Oh, and did it really have to end with a wedding?

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think it did. Probably to leave the film open for the next adventure. This gives Indie a major anchor IE Marion is held prisoner or killed. Indies grief or anger at the loss of a son wife OR the rows he and Marion has leads to trouble.. All kinds of possibilities can lead from this or none at all.. I also thought they missed a great opportunity here to show the Aliens in a good, benevolent positive light and give indie a pat on the back.. Instead they gave the film over to the cgi departments super computer. What a shame that the simple concept of a good story with everything designed around it has been replaced in favour of a look what we can do with all the clever digital stuff we built.

[Xavier Plaza]

If you read the AC article about Kaminski shooting Indy, it's almost as if he had a major brainfart as to how to shoot in broad daylight. I thought the opening shots with the teens racing the military trucks looked great, and the scene with the ants was another well shot exterior. But nearly everything else just seemed off.

 

 

 

Hi Jonathan you're right today I read the AC article and agree with you Kaminski have big problems in daylight scenes... And I guess the big thing in his photography was " I worked to create light that supports the story but doesn't necessarily feel realistic..." that summarizes everything... Perhaps all Kaminski fan expect other kind of cinematography like in his latest movies...

 

Perhaps someone can explain me why Kaminski do this at night... "We were shooting our'night' interiors at T8 to T11. You couldn't really trust your eyes because when you walked onto the set, it would look very, very bright. We were shooting 5218 and using HMI lights, so all of a sudden, we were putting on an 85 filter..."

[Leo Anthony Vale]

QUOTE

What I ultimately hated, Spielberg likes aliens too much. Oh, and did it really have to end with a wedding?

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think it did. Probably to leave the film open for the next adventure. This gives Indie a major anchor IE Marion is held prisoner or killed. Indies grief or anger at the loss of a son wife OR the rows he and Marion has leads to trouble.. All kinds of possibilities can lead from this or none at all.. I also thought they missed a great opportunity here to show the Aliens in a good, benevolent positive light and give indie a pat on the back..

 

Thanks so much for such a SPOILER. At least J.Bowerbank gave a spoiler warning.

 

Not everyone goes to see a movie opening week. It's nice to wait for the crowds to die down.

[Leo Anthony Vale]

The reports of the Roswell crash were known worldwide when it happened. The story was quickly debunked by the US Air Force.

 

And it was also quickly forgotten for 30 years.

from Wikipedia:

On July 8, 1947, the Roswell Army Air Field (RAAF) issued a press release stating that personnel from the field's 509th Bomb Group had recovered a crashed "flying disc" from a ranch near Roswell, sparking intense media interest. Later the same day, the Commanding General of the Eighth Air Force stated that, in fact, a weather balloon had been recovered by RAAF personnel, rather than a "flying saucer."[1] A subsequent press conference was called, featuring debris said to be from the crashed object that seemed to confirm the weather balloon description. The case was quickly forgotten and almost completely ignored, even by UFO researchers, for more than 30 years. Then, in 1978, ufologist Stanton T. Friedman interviewed Major Jesse Marcel, who was involved with the original recovery of the debris in 1947. Marcel expressed his belief that the military had covered up the recovery of an alien spacecraft. His story circulated through UFO circles, being featured in some UFO documentaries at the time.[2] In February 1980, The National Enquirer ran its own interview with Marcel, garnering national and worldwide attention for the Roswell incident.

 

Though Frank Scully's 'Behind the Flying Saucers' 1950 told about UFO crashes with the dead saucermen taken to Wright-Patterson, there is no mention of Roswell. The principal crash was at Aztec NM.

Scully's book was exposed as a hoax in 1952

 

 

The concept of the Greys had been around long before. H.G. Welles wrote about them in "Of a Book Unwritten" and David H. Keller wrote about them in the Wonder Stories in 1929.

 

 

While this 1930 Leo Morey cover depicts something like the greys, the modern version with the big black eyes

is from the Barney Hill incident & specifically the TV movie of it.

[Michael Lehnert]

Not wanting to cut into this debate about alien history, but I just have quick point to raise:

 

I have seen the film for a second time now (this time not on a cine-film print but digitally) not only because I like Fedoras but because I really want to try to get a grip on the intrigueing cinematography at hand - especially after reading the AC feature.

 

A friend who came with us to the cinema is a sound engineer, and she claimed to have noticed sound drops in the volume during the screening of the film. I must say that not only did none of us hear that, but this lead to some jocking remarks on her dropping "ear-sight" later at the bar.

 

Yet she proved us all wrong by providing this rather critical industry blog quote which states that copies of Indy IV feature a new watermarking technique - silencing part of the film at random. I wonder if anyone noticed that or heard about this elsewhere..:

 

Paramount apparently decided that it would be a great idea to deter

and track piracy by silencing random parts of the movie "Indiana Jones

and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull". This seems to be a sort of

watermarking technique to be able to identify the cinema the copy of

the movie was made.. if the guys who copy the movie are stupid enough

to use the same sound source. This is another classic case where the

industry is punishing their legit customers and not the ones who copy

and download the media. It's the same case with copy protections and

DRM.

 

The only ones who have to cope with those things are the customers who

purchase the products, never heard of any copy protections or DRM in

movies, games or music that were available in P2P networks. The

commenters at Boing-Boing write about 3-6 random sound drops for a few

seconds. Now that would really make me angry and I would definitely

ask for a refund on my way out. What's their next ingenious move,

blank out a few scenes ? The cinemas themselves do not seem to have a

say in the matter. I would bet that the movie that is available on P2P

networks does not have those sound gaps. Wanna bet?