Indiana Jones

1174175177179180199

Comments

  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,183
    How did Indy and Helena get back to 1969? I thought the only way was through the fissure in the sky.

    That’s how they got back. That’s not my concern, because that’s the easiest thing they could do.

    The REAL hurdle is after passing the fissure. How do they move an 70 year old man with a gun shot wound all the way to his apartment UNCONSCIOUS? The logistics just seem way off.
  • Posts: 5,993
    That's assuming that the last scene happened right after the trip through the fissure. Nothing in the movie seems to ndicate this. Lots of things had to happen between the two moments : sending Indy to the closest hospital, explaining everything to the authorities, etc. And who knows if that was the first time Indy woke up after receiving that punch. We simply didn't need to see all that.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    edited August 2023 Posts: 5,424
    Reminds me of Raiders, how did Marion and Indy get off the island. We can assume that the spirits fried all electrical equipment and likely the submarine would not be operational.

    In the Toys R Us here in Canada they have a line of Indiana Jones toys...all from previous adventures. I couldn't find a single bit of merchandise tied to the Dial of Destiny. Either it's because there are no set pieces that could become toys or Disney is being ageist and not showcasing a senior citizen character and instead just showing off the younger Indy. Either way it's telling.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    edited August 2023 Posts: 13,978
    Disney might have decided that making DOD figures would be pointless, if they're are only going to end up as peg warmers.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited August 2023 Posts: 16,383
    They do make and sell Indy, Helena and Voller figures from the movie. They're nice figures.
  • Posts: 1,394
    If they really wanted to build up anticipation for Indy 5 for younger audiences then Lucasarts should have taken the time to make terrific Indiana Jones game for modern day consoles.

    Tomb Raider and Uncharted are inspired by Indy and I would have loved a game of that quality set in the Indy universe.They could surely have convinced Ford to do the voice work as well as license his likeness for the animation.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,795
    I'm seeing it again with my Son in an hour's time.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,795
    Back from seeing it. Noticed tons of stuff I didn't the first time. Won $20 from my Son who bet me that more than 30% would piss him off (he dislikes nostalgia grab movies). B-)
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou, but I now hear a new dog barkin'
    edited August 2023 Posts: 9,028
    chrisisall wrote: »
    Back from seeing it. Noticed tons of stuff I didn't the first time. Won $20 from my Son who bet me that more than 30% would piss him off (he dislikes nostalgia grab movies). B-)

    That's an interesting financing concept for when you retire.
  • I still can't believe Disney aren't going ahead with a series about Abner Ravenwood and how he met Indy. Surely it's a no brainer and Ford doesn't need to be involved.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,383
    Personally I'd do a spin-off from Dial with Basil leading a team of adventurers in WW2 recovering artefacts from the Nazis, as we saw at the beginning of the film. I think that's a nice straightforward Indy-flavoured adventure.

    My top preference would be a younger Indy, set in the 20s/early 30s and made Mandalorian-style; but they seem to have ruled that out.
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou, but I now hear a new dog barkin'
    Posts: 9,028
    I love the IJ franchise from beginning to end, but PLEEEEAAAZZZE no prequels, no spin-offs and certainly no continuation or re-boot with a new actor as the protagonist.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,183
    I still can't believe Disney aren't going ahead with a series about Abner Ravenwood and how he met Indy. Surely it's a no brainer and Ford doesn't need to be involved.

    IIRC that was one of the scripts for a unproduced episode of YOUNG INDY.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,795
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    I love the IJ franchise from beginning to end, but PLEEEEAAAZZZE no prequels, no spin-offs and certainly no continuation or re-boot with a new actor as the protagonist.

    I'm right there with ya, JW!
  • edited August 2023 Posts: 1,394
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    I love the IJ franchise from beginning to end, but PLEEEEAAAZZZE no prequels, no spin-offs and certainly no continuation or re-boot with a new actor as the protagonist.

    It’s ok for Bond but not Indy?

    Regardless,it’s not going to happen given the fact that Indy 5 bombed hard.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    It’s IP… the studio will likely resurrect IJ down the road— whether that be a TV series or a feature, or a spin-off, that’s how the studio system works, @AstonLotus
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,424
    I hate to be a fatalist but my bet is when Ford is no longer with us they will dust it off and give it another shot with either a female or male lead. Not sure if they keep it to the thirties. Though that does give them a villain that is easy to have and to hate.

    Indiana Jones reminds me of Clouseau. He was definitively portrayed by Sellers. But once enough time had passed from his passing Steve Martin brought out a new version.
  • Posts: 1,394
    Wow,I’m glad I never got the 4K set. This guy highlights major problems other reviewers failed to highlight.It’s a long video but it’s got chapters..

  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,795
    peter wrote: »
    It’s IP… the studio will likely resurrect IJ down the road— whether that be a TV series or a feature, or a spin-off, that’s how the studio system works, @AstonLotus

    I think (unchecked) they will attempt a CGI Ford Indy movie after he passes. If this can't for some reason happen, then yeah, another actor will play him. On my second viewing of DOD, the CGI de-aging didn't work as well for me as it did the first time... but the first time I was sitting right up front, the second time I was sitting much farther back & could really study it all. But I can still write it off as being a side thing- not the major part of the film.
    In the recent Flash movie they inserted CGI cameos of Chris Reeve & Helen Slater...
    And you all must see where this is heading.
    And this is in part what the Hollywood strike is about.
    You used to know the difference between live action and animation.
    Superhero movies are inherently based in the unreal, but Indy, and Bond, deserve to stay practical.
    Our grand kids will tell us "Who cares? It's all just entertainment!" as the reality of climate change drives the need for the (sometimes disconnected) unreality of entertainment further along.
    Sorry, just some musings from a sexist, misogynist dinosaur & a relic of the Cold War era films.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,183
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    Wow,I’m glad I never got the 4K set. This guy highlights major problems other reviewers failed to highlight.It’s a long video but it’s got chapters..


    I’ve interacted with this guy for over a decade at another forum and twitter. I’ll just say, he’s got very particular tastes. I’m only ten minutes into the video but the things he mentions being altered like erasure of matte lines are very unimportant in the grand scheme IMO. I get his point about wanting to keep the films as close as to the original versions as much as possible for the sake of preservation of arts. But I can’t get too upset over such minute details. These are the kind of concerns only hardcore cinephiles have. This isn’t gonna make me hope someone torrents a 4K scan of a 35mm release print.

    That said, the 4K scan of the 35mm print of STAR WARS and RETURN OF THE JEDI are a thing of beauty and make me feel like Captain Jack Sparrow as I watch them.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,424
    chrisisall wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    It’s IP… the studio will likely resurrect IJ down the road— whether that be a TV series or a feature, or a spin-off, that’s how the studio system works, @AstonLotus

    I think (unchecked) they will attempt a CGI Ford Indy movie after he passes. If this can't for some reason happen, then yeah, another actor will play him. On my second viewing of DOD, the CGI de-aging didn't work as well for me as it did the first time... but the first time I was sitting right up front, the second time I was sitting much farther back & could really study it all. But I can still write it off as being a side thing- not the major part of the film.
    In the recent Flash movie they inserted CGI cameos of Chris Reeve & Helen Slater...
    And you all must see where this is heading.
    And this is in part what the Hollywood strike is about.
    You used to know the difference between live action and animation.
    Superhero movies are inherently based in the unreal, but Indy, and Bond, deserve to stay practical.
    Our grand kids will tell us "Who cares? It's all just entertainment!" as the reality of climate change drives the need for the (sometimes disconnected) unreality of entertainment further along.
    Sorry, just some musings from a sexist, misogynist dinosaur & a relic of the Cold War era films.

    Haven't see DOD, but I did see Flash and all the "cameo's were so obviously CGI or AI. It looked cheap and felt like a badly animated movie. Sad to see them do Adam West and Christopher Reeve that way. Surely there must have been some B roll footage they could have used?

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,383
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    Wow,I’m glad I never got the 4K set. This guy highlights major problems other reviewers failed to highlight.It’s a long video but it’s got chapters..


    I’ve interacted with this guy for over a decade at another forum and twitter. I’ll just say, he’s got very particular tastes. I’m only ten minutes into the video but the things he mentions being altered like erasure of matte lines are very unimportant in the grand scheme IMO. I get his point about wanting to keep the films as close as to the original versions as much as possible for the sake of preservation of arts. But I can’t get too upset over such minute details. These are the kind of concerns only hardcore cinephiles have. This isn’t gonna make me hope someone torrents a 4K scan of a 35mm release print.

    That said, the 4K scan of the 35mm print of STAR WARS and RETURN OF THE JEDI are a thing of beauty and make me feel like Captain Jack Sparrow as I watch them.

    I watched a bit, I have no idea what he’s going on about. The lack of matte lines reduces the ‘depth’ of a shot? So much waffle as well. The 4K release is stunning.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,183
    It’s only his view, so I can’t really argue with it. He’s a lot like folks that view celluloid film as having more “warmth”, “character”, “soul” than digital. I remember he made that argument over how he couldn’t connect with SKYFALL because it was digitally shot, and would have looked much better if Deakins shot on film instead digital.
  • edited August 2023 Posts: 1,394
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    Wow,I’m glad I never got the 4K set. This guy highlights major problems other reviewers failed to highlight.It’s a long video but it’s got chapters..


    I’ve interacted with this guy for over a decade at another forum and twitter. I’ll just say, he’s got very particular tastes. I’m only ten minutes into the video but the things he mentions being altered like erasure of matte lines are very unimportant in the grand scheme IMO. I get his point about wanting to keep the films as close as to the original versions as much as possible for the sake of preservation of arts. But I can’t get too upset over such minute details. These are the kind of concerns only hardcore cinephiles have. This isn’t gonna make me hope someone torrents a 4K scan of a 35mm release print.

    That said, the 4K scan of the 35mm print of STAR WARS and RETURN OF THE JEDI are a thing of beauty and make me feel like Captain Jack Sparrow as I watch them.

    Later in the video he gives examples such as in Raiders,they made Indy “ fat “ by stretching the image in a few shots where they uncover the well of souls.

    He also says pretty much every optical effect was tinkered with.

    The menus are exactly the same as the Blu Ray ones ( I know,nitpicking,but it shows that Paramount are lazy ).

    Have they at least fixed that major error on the blu ray of Raiders of the shot of Indy and Marion on the Washington steps being blurred?

    The packaging also looks really cheap.I hav the limited edition blu ray set which came with all kinds of goodies like the grail diary,map of the knights shield and other goodies.

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited August 2023 Posts: 16,383
    It’s only his view, so I can’t really argue with it. He’s a lot like folks that view celluloid film as having more “warmth”, “character”, “soul” than digital. I remember he made that argument over how he couldn’t connect with SKYFALL because it was digitally shot, and would have looked much better if Deakins shot on film instead digital.

    It really is only his view though, seems like the kind of person who tries to find fault and had already decided (see his constant mentions of Lucasfilm and Paramount) that it would be bad. I'm sad he couldn't enjoy it but I feel like he would find problems no matter what it was; happily everyone else does like it.
  • Posts: 3,327
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    Wow,I’m glad I never got the 4K set. This guy highlights major problems other reviewers failed to highlight.It’s a long video but it’s got chapters..


    I’ve interacted with this guy for over a decade at another forum and twitter. I’ll just say, he’s got very particular tastes. I’m only ten minutes into the video but the things he mentions being altered like erasure of matte lines are very unimportant in the grand scheme IMO. I get his point about wanting to keep the films as close as to the original versions as much as possible for the sake of preservation of arts. But I can’t get too upset over such minute details. These are the kind of concerns only hardcore cinephiles have. This isn’t gonna make me hope someone torrents a 4K scan of a 35mm release print.

    That said, the 4K scan of the 35mm print of STAR WARS and RETURN OF THE JEDI are a thing of beauty and make me feel like Captain Jack Sparrow as I watch them.

    That guy sounds an absolute anorak.
  • edited August 2023 Posts: 3,276
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    Wow,I’m glad I never got the 4K set. This guy highlights major problems other reviewers failed to highlight.It’s a long video but it’s got chapters..
    Show don't just tell, dude! Everone else who do these comparisons use some kind of comparison-shots.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,424
    He lost me complaining about the title of South America 1936 being on the screen for a fraction longer. Talk about focused on the details!
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,183
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    Wow,I’m glad I never got the 4K set. This guy highlights major problems other reviewers failed to highlight.It’s a long video but it’s got chapters..


    I’ve interacted with this guy for over a decade at another forum and twitter. I’ll just say, he’s got very particular tastes. I’m only ten minutes into the video but the things he mentions being altered like erasure of matte lines are very unimportant in the grand scheme IMO. I get his point about wanting to keep the films as close as to the original versions as much as possible for the sake of preservation of arts. But I can’t get too upset over such minute details. These are the kind of concerns only hardcore cinephiles have. This isn’t gonna make me hope someone torrents a 4K scan of a 35mm release print.

    That said, the 4K scan of the 35mm print of STAR WARS and RETURN OF THE JEDI are a thing of beauty and make me feel like Captain Jack Sparrow as I watch them.

    Later in the video he gives examples such as in Raiders,they made Indy “ fat “ by stretching the image in a few shots where they uncover the well of souls.

    He also says pretty much every optical effect was tinkered with.

    The menus are exactly the same as the Blu Ray ones ( I know,nitpicking,but it shows that Paramount are lazy ).

    Have they at least fixed that major error on the blu ray of Raiders of the shot of Indy and Marion on the Washington steps being blurred?

    The packaging also looks really cheap.I hav the limited edition blu ray set which came with all kinds of goodies like the grail diary,map of the knights shield and other goodies.

    I watched a bit more of his video…. I’m not clutching my pearls over these kind of things. Even the “fat Indy” doesn’t even seem all that egregious when looking at it. All these things just come off as getting into the weeds.

    An actual glaring error that would concern me is sometime like WAR OF THE WORLDS featuring a shot of planet Mars that’s colored blue (that actually happened, sadly)
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,795
    My Indy blu rays look rather stellar on my 50" 4K screen. Not sure I need to upgrade.
Sign In or Register to comment.