› ›

Indiana Jones

1…175176178180181…199

Comments

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,383
    I would say they're lovely, and the regarding to Skull really improves it, but you can see these versions on Disney+ and Paramount+.
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou, but I now hear a new dog barkin'
    Posts: 9,029
    chrisisall wrote: »
    My Indy blu rays look rather stellar on my 50" 4K screen. Not sure I need to upgrade.
    I'd like to add (as maybe I've said before - ;-)) that I have a Full-HD (though not 4K) projector doing its work on a 14-ft (4.2 meters) diagonal screen. And I'm sure I won't need to upgrade from Blu-ray. At least I won't. "It's wonderful...marvelous", to quote the Gershwins... and no, I'm not gonna mess with it.

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,383
    I must admit that for me it's the HDR which is the main appeal of a lot of 4Ks, these ones included.
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou, but I now hear a new dog barkin'
    Posts: 9,029
    I guess I don't know what I'm missing, but I'm happy with my ignorance.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,795
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    I guess I don't know what I'm missing, but I'm happy with my ignorance.

    Ignorance is bliss, and saves money too.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,183
    I dunno about you guys, but I like to buy expensive 4K sets that I won’t like and post a YouTube video about how I’ll never watch it again and stick with my LaserDisc copy.
  • AstonLotusAstonLotus
    Posts: 1,394
    MakeshiftPython wrote: »
    I dunno about you guys, but I like to buy expensive 4K sets that I won’t like and post a YouTube video about how I’ll never watch it again and stick with my LaserDisc copy.

    It’s his job.He reviewed the set for his channel and he’s a massive Indy fan.Also,technically he is not wrong with what he reported and his opinions on he feels about how good the set is are his own and should be respected.

    He reported on things that other reviewers failed to pick up on so you can’t fault his attention to detail.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,183
    It’s his hobby, NOT his job. He’s a multimedia collector with his own particular opinions for how archiving should be handled. If you share all his opinions, fair game. But pointing out things like having “South America 1936” last a second longer on the UHD are the kinds of things that matter most to him and the media aficionados you find at OriginalTrilogy.com, rather than the vast majority.

    Professional media reviewers like Bill Hunt wouldn’t give sets like these a hard “not recommend” just because they might lack 2.0 Dolby Stereo or have matte lines erased.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited August 2023 Posts: 16,383
    And not having matte lines just simply doesn't make the shot lack 'depth': that's a nonsense. The matte lines were never there intentionally to give the shot depth. If he were talking about verisimilitude in terms of the very original version of the movie, that's different; but it's not what everyone is after.
    With the 1936 caption I do kind of wonder how that sort of thing happens because it's so easy to match two versions side by side when you're doing it. But for all we know (and I can't be bothered to check) he may well be comparing it to a previous remastered version which got it wrong, and this version is more faithful to the original. Or perhaps there are several different versions of Raiders (much like we find with Thunderball) which have small differences like this.
    Also his judgements on which versions of colour grading are similarly subjective: no-one remembers exactly what the colours were like in any original version from 40 years ago, to say that the colours of this or that are wrong and not perfectly like the original (especially when you're judging it compared previous transfers as opposed to an actual original print of the film) is just misleading.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,183
    When LucasFilm remastered the Star Wars films in 4K they actually made sure the color timing would match the original release (something the DVDs were criticized for not doing right). I would hope that lesson stuck with them when remastering Indy (though the CRYSTAL SKULL thing is curious). And even that reviewer noted that the 4K of Raiders seems truer color wise to what it should be.
  • AstonLotusAstonLotus
    edited August 2023 Posts: 1,394
    MakeshiftPython wrote: »
    It’s his hobby, NOT his job. He’s a multimedia collector with his own particular opinions for how archiving should be handled. If you share all his opinions, fair game. But pointing out things like having “South America 1936” last a second longer on the UHD are the kinds of things that matter most to him and the media aficionados you find at OriginalTrilogy.com, rather than the vast majority.

    Professional media reviewers like Bill Hunt wouldn’t give sets like these a hard “not recommend” just because they might lack 2.0 Dolby Stereo or have matte lines erased.

    If he’s after monetising his channel,it is his job as well as his hobby.

    Regardless,the guy knows what he’s talking about and it’s fine to disagree with him whether the set is worth picking up or not but the fact is the movies have been tinkered with extensively.A lot of people in the comments agree with him.But hey,if you enjoy your 4K set of the classic trilogy ( And Crystal Skull ) then good for you.

    I’m happy with my limited edition Blu ray set for now.

    In answer to someone’s question earlier,he talks about the “ fat Indy “ shots at around the 08:00 mark

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited August 2023 Posts: 16,383
    MakeshiftPython wrote: »
    When LucasFilm remastered the Star Wars films in 4K they actually made sure the color timing would match the original release (something the DVDs were criticized for not doing right). I would hope that lesson stuck with them when remastering Indy (though the CRYSTAL SKULL thing is curious). And even that reviewer noted that the 4K of Raiders seems truer color wise to what it should be.

    Crystal Skull looks great now; I can't imagine anyone is upset about it looking better.
    I watched this supposed 'fat Indy' bit: no idea what he's going on about.

    I'm not convinced this guy watches these things to actually enjoy the films, he clearly watches them in order to pick off any perceived issues. And that's fine, I guess different people get their entertainment in different ways, and if that's what he enjoys then all power to him. But it's not really useful to me, or most people who watch films in order to enjoy them.
  • TheSkyfallen06TheSkyfallen06 Buenos Aires, Argentina.
    edited August 2023 Posts: 1,101
    https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https://preview.redd.it/yasbahml75eb1.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=5edf6a0cfb673a8492e884263fecd4fdd73172e2

    https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https://preview.redd.it/rp0lwgml75eb1.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=359cbcbeda7ddd9f8179f094e13cf87fcadd5d47

    Well ain't that clever.
  • AstonLotusAstonLotus
    Posts: 1,394
    mtm wrote: »
    MakeshiftPython wrote: »
    When LucasFilm remastered the Star Wars films in 4K they actually made sure the color timing would match the original release (something the DVDs were criticized for not doing right). I would hope that lesson stuck with them when remastering Indy (though the CRYSTAL SKULL thing is curious). And even that reviewer noted that the 4K of Raiders seems truer color wise to what it should be.

    Crystal Skull looks great now; I can't imagine anyone is upset about it looking better.
    I watched this supposed 'fat Indy' bit: no idea what he's going on about.

    I'm not convinced this guy watches these things to actually enjoy the films, he clearly watches them in order to pick off any perceived issues. And that's fine, I guess different people get their entertainment in different ways, and if that's what he enjoys then all power to him. But it's not really useful to me, or most people who watch films in order to enjoy them.

    He just has a different opinion to you.It’s not rocket science.

    And he did say Crystal Skulls picture is improved but it’s still a bad movie in his opinion ( and mine ).

  • TheSkyfallen06TheSkyfallen06 Buenos Aires, Argentina.
    Posts: 1,101
    The funny thing is, if a fourth or even a fifth Indy movie came out in the 90's, everyone would have praised it as much as the Original Trilogy, that's where the problem is in my opinion, Skull and Dial came out too late.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited August 2023 Posts: 16,383
    The conversation is either about picture quality or it isn't. If the review was just about how good the films are, then Raiders is still a perfect movie, despite a 1936 caption holding for a second longer than it used to.
    I speak as someone who has actually watched these 4K BRs rather than someone who's just watched a YT vid about someone whining about them, and they're superb. That's my opinion based on actual first hand experience, respect it: it's not brain surgery.
    TheSkyfallen06 wrote: »
    The funny thing is, if a fourth or even a fifth Indy movie came out in the 90's, everyone would have praised it as much as the Original Trilogy, that's where the problem is in my opinion, Skull and Dial came out too late.

    Honestly I think it does depend on the quality of the film. If Spielberg had made Indy 4 in his checked-out, Lost World mood in '97, then although it may well have had a couple of decent sequences, it would probably have been about as well-received as Lost World.
  • AstonLotusAstonLotus
    Posts: 1,394
    TheSkyfallen06 wrote: »
    The funny thing is, if a fourth or even a fifth Indy movie came out in the 90's, everyone would have praised it as much as the Original Trilogy, that's where the problem is in my opinion, Skull and Dial came out too late.

    I disagree,they are still such a huge step down from the classic trilogy ( they may have been slightly better in the action department given that Harrison would not have been too old and able to do more ).

    I see Skull as the Die Another Day of the series and Dial as the View To A Kill.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,795
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    TheSkyfallen06 wrote: »
    The funny thing is, if a fourth or even a fifth Indy movie came out in the 90's, everyone would have praised it as much as the Original Trilogy, that's where the problem is in my opinion, Skull and Dial came out too late.

    I disagree,they are still such a huge step down from the classic trilogy ( they may have been slightly better in the action department given that Harrison would not have been too old and able to do more ).

    I see Skull as the Die Another Day of the series and Dial as the View To A Kill.

    Wow. I'd say Die Another Day & SPECTRE.
  • AstonLotusAstonLotus
    edited August 2023 Posts: 1,394
    mtm wrote: »
    The conversation is either about picture quality or it isn't. If the review was just about how good the films are, then Raiders is still a perfect movie, despite a 1936 caption holding for a second longer than it used to.
    I speak as someone who has actually watched these 4K BRs rather than someone who's just watched a YT vid about someone whining about them, and they're superb. That's my opinion based on actual first hand experience, respect it: it's not brain surgery.
    TheSkyfallen06 wrote: »
    The funny thing is, if a fourth or even a fifth Indy movie came out in the 90's, everyone would have praised it as much as the Original Trilogy, that's where the problem is in my opinion, Skull and Dial came out too late.

    Honestly I think it does depend on the quality of the film. If Spielberg had made Indy 4 in his checked-out, Lost World mood in '97, then although it may well have had a couple of decent sequences, it would probably have been about as well-received as Lost World.


    He reviewed them.Calling it whining doesn’t change the fact that he’s entitled to his opinion just as your entitled to yours.And he spoke about a lot more issues than a 1936 caption holding for a second longer than it used to.

    He invites people to comment on his video and in the comment section some people agree with him and some don’t.Nobody insults him though.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    edited August 2023 Posts: 8,183
    For what it’s worth, he’s a member of this forum @hegottheboot_ . I had a lot of fun talking about the 2015 4K transfers of the Bond films with him, regarding how much the new transfers were an improvement to the blu-rays, and what they could do to make the 4K discs better. For example, if the Bond 4K discs for the first 16 films didn’t have the original mono/stereo mixes, I’d be more upset with that than Indy lacking them because unlike Indy, the Bond films were given new sound effects that were never part of the original mix, sometimes ruining moments. Like when Largo uses the remote to open the door for the secret SPECTRE meeting. In the original mix, the sound of the door sliding is a small electronic noise that no one outside the hall could hear, which is fitting for a secret room. But in the newer mix they change it to loud clanging metal moving which would grab a lot of attention.

    THAT is the kind of tomfoolery I would not be happy about if the 4K only had revised soundtracks like that.
  • AstonLotusAstonLotus
    edited August 2023 Posts: 1,394
    MakeshiftPython wrote: »
    For what it’s worth, he’s a member of this forum @hegottheboot_ . I had a lot of fun talking about the 2015 4K transfers of the Bond films with him, regarding how much the new transfers were an improvement to the blu-rays, and what they could do to make the 4K discs better. For example, if the Bond 4K discs for the first 16 films didn’t have the original mono/stereo mixes, I’d be more upset with that than Indy lacking them because unlike Indy, the Bond films were given new sound effects that were never part of the original mix, sometimes ruining moments. Like when Largo uses the remote to open the door for the secret SPECTRE meeting. In the original mix, the sound of the door sliding is a small electronic noise that no one outside the hall could hear, which is fitting for a secret room. But in the newer mix they change it to loud clanging metal moving which would grab a lot of attention.

    THAT is the kind of tomfoolery I would not be happy about if the 4K only had revised soundtracks like that.

    Interesting.Never noticed that before.

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited August 2023 Posts: 16,383
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    The conversation is either about picture quality or it isn't. If the review was just about how good the films are, then Raiders is still a perfect movie, despite a 1936 caption holding for a second longer than it used to.
    I speak as someone who has actually watched these 4K BRs rather than someone who's just watched a YT vid about someone whining about them, and they're superb. That's my opinion based on actual first hand experience, respect it: it's not brain surgery.
    TheSkyfallen06 wrote: »
    The funny thing is, if a fourth or even a fifth Indy movie came out in the 90's, everyone would have praised it as much as the Original Trilogy, that's where the problem is in my opinion, Skull and Dial came out too late.

    Honestly I think it does depend on the quality of the film. If Spielberg had made Indy 4 in his checked-out, Lost World mood in '97, then although it may well have had a couple of decent sequences, it would probably have been about as well-received as Lost World.


    He reviewed them.Calling it whining doesn’t change the fact that he’s entitled to his opinion just as your entitled to yours.And he spoke about a lot more issues than a 1936 caption holding for a second longer than it used to.

    He invites people to comment on his video and in the comment section some people agree with him and some don’t.Nobody insults him though.

    Great: nobody has insulted him here either. Also no-one has said he's not entitled to his opinion; we just disagree with it, and I'm not keen on the way he insults the BRs as they're a great piece of work. I'm glad you appreciate that I'm entitled to my opinion too. Which is: they're great.
  • Scaramanga1974Scaramanga1974
    edited August 2023 Posts: 728
    Dial of Destiny is a very enjoyable Indy flick.
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou, but I now hear a new dog barkin'
    Posts: 9,029
    Scaramanga1974 wrote: »
    Dial of Destiny is a very enjoyable Indy flick.
    Yeah, it surely is. I'd watch it again (for the third time) at a cinema if the only original-language place in Hamburg weren't blocked by Oppenheimer, Barbie and Gran Turismo (whatever that is).
  • TheSkyfallen06TheSkyfallen06 Buenos Aires, Argentina.
    Posts: 1,101
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    Scaramanga1974 wrote: »
    Dial of Destiny is a very enjoyable Indy flick.
    Yeah, it surely is. I'd watch it again (for the third time) at a cinema if the only original-language place in Hamburg weren't blocked by Oppenheimer, Barbie and Gran Turismo (whatever that is).

    Yeah, the Barbenheimmer truly changed the history of cinema, for good or worse.
  • AstonLotusAstonLotus
    Posts: 1,394
    Scaramanga1974 wrote: »
    Dial of Destiny is a very enjoyable Indy flick.

    It’s not terrible. That’s the best way I can describe my feelings on it. Indy being taken out of commission for the last half hour is my biggest problem with it.

    And at least there is nothing as particularly embarrassing as the monkey swinging,or cgi gophers in Crystal Skull.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited August 2023 Posts: 16,383
    Indy being captured and somewhat passive at the end isn't a flaw, it's a feature. The film about him finding his place in the world again, it's not about him being a superhuman and beating all Nazis in the world: he's an old man. It's much like the ending of Raiders -and I defy anyone to say that's a bad film- where he literally gives up. The ending of that film is about him realising the power of the Ark, which he hadn't accepted before, and finding Marion. Dial of Destiny is about him finding that he does have a place in the world (and yes, at one point he gives up, much like he did in Raiders) and that people love him and need him around.

    I'm really looking forward to seeing it again. Do films normally come out on Blu Ray before Disney+ or vice versa?
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou, but I now hear a new dog barkin'
    Posts: 9,029
    mtm wrote: »
    Indy being captured and somewhat passive at the end isn't a flaw, it's a feature. The film about him finding his place in the world again, it's not about him being a superhuman and beating all Nazis in the world: he's an old man. It's much like the ending of Raiders -and I defy anyone to say that's a bad film- where he literally gives up. The ending of that film is about him realising the power of the Ark, which he hadn't accepted before, and finding Marion. Dial of Destiny is about him finding that he does have a place in the world (and yes, at one point he gives up, much like he did in Raiders) and that people love him and need him around.

    I'm really looking forward to seeing it again. Do films normally come out on Blu Ray before Disney+ or vice versa?

    Beautiful conclusion, @mtm, and I really wish DOD (I have all the others) will come out on Blu-ray as soon as possible, since I'm not going to subscribe to a streaming service which I won't need 95+ % of the time.
  • AstonLotusAstonLotus
    edited August 2023 Posts: 1,394
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Indy being captured and somewhat passive at the end isn't a flaw, it's a feature. The film about him finding his place in the world again, it's not about him being a superhuman and beating all Nazis in the world: he's an old man. It's much like the ending of Raiders -and I defy anyone to say that's a bad film- where he literally gives up. The ending of that film is about him realising the power of the Ark, which he hadn't accepted before, and finding Marion. Dial of Destiny is about him finding that he does have a place in the world (and yes, at one point he gives up, much like he did in Raiders) and that people love him and need him around.

    I'm really looking forward to seeing it again. Do films normally come out on Blu Ray before Disney+ or vice versa?

    Beautiful conclusion, @mtm, and I really wish DOD (I have all the others) will come out on Blu-ray as soon as possible, since I'm not going to subscribe to a streaming service which I won't need 95+ % of the time.

    Given Disneys track record,it will most likely be put on Disney+ first,then digital to rest or buy and then on disc.Given that the film has flopped badly though they will most likely keep it in theaters for as long as possible to make back as much of the money they lost on this.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited August 2023 Posts: 16,383
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Indy being captured and somewhat passive at the end isn't a flaw, it's a feature. The film about him finding his place in the world again, it's not about him being a superhuman and beating all Nazis in the world: he's an old man. It's much like the ending of Raiders -and I defy anyone to say that's a bad film- where he literally gives up. The ending of that film is about him realising the power of the Ark, which he hadn't accepted before, and finding Marion. Dial of Destiny is about him finding that he does have a place in the world (and yes, at one point he gives up, much like he did in Raiders) and that people love him and need him around.

    I'm really looking forward to seeing it again. Do films normally come out on Blu Ray before Disney+ or vice versa?

    Beautiful conclusion, @mtm, and I really wish DOD (I have all the others) will come out on Blu-ray as soon as possible, since I'm not going to subscribe to a streaming service which I won't need 95+ % of the time.

    I have D+ but I'd rather it came out on disc first just because it'll be marginally better quality and the extras etc. But if it does come on D+ first I'm sure I'll just watch it on that! :)

    Was it mentioned here that one of Mangold's original ideas was that the film would be called
    Indiana Jones and the Magical Mystery Tour? :)
    I don't know if he ever thought there was an actual serious chance of it being called that, and I'm not sure I love it, but I do quite like the ballsiness of it.
Sign In or Register to comment.