Enhanced Visuals

[Sundance]

I have noticed a few continuity errors while watching the Indy movies about 10 times each...I was wondering if these have been corrected for the DVD release...Also on my old VHS tape of Raiders it is obvious there is glass separating Harrison Ford and the Cobra in the well of the souls...The reflection will be even more noticeble in DVD format...It would be so easy for ILM to edit this out...

cheers

Padawan

[Udvarnoky]

I personally agree with Roger Ebert (read his review on raiders) in that the films should not be touched.

[MrE26]

I got the set on Friday & watched the whole lot over the weekend & the snake reflection in Raiders has been digitally removed. Other than that, the movies are untouched.

[spohlso]

So Belloq still eats a fly?

[MrE26]

Yeah, the fly is still in there!

[Tequileros]

Ummm Belloq doesn't eat the fly ;-). Just watch that scene frame by frame, and you see that there are a few frames cut out. This is a joke of the editors. Paul Freeman said it himself :-).

[Aaron H]

Hey, Tequileros! Haven't seen you here in a while. Hope to see you around more often!

Okay, back on topic...

I've noticed that a few frames were missing too. That or he need some extra protin in his diet.

[SharpShooter]

didn't i hear something about them fixing up the blue screen work, particularly the water parts in TOD?

[Aaron H]

I heard that too, as well as the Zepplin scene in LC! YEAH!

[Tequileros]

Those things have been fixed aswell.

They even fixed the falling car thing in Raiders. It looks better now. Well that's what I heared from people who watched the DVD-rips...

[Ben Friend of Indy]

Yeah, the water scene on TOD really needs fixing up. I'm hoping they also fixed up some of the stuff in the mine cart chase--like when that one cart is on its side, and another comes from behind and crashes, it looked kind of fake. An analogy for that that comes to mind is how the Brownies in "Willow" look in the blue/green/whatever screen shots.

[SharpShooter]

while i'm not a big fan of new scenes being added to a movie, i really like when directors go back and fix up any technical problems (such as blue screen)

i'm glad the indy films will look a little better in the blue screen scenes

[spohlso]

Yeah, I have to admit, some of the blue screen work in LC was horrible. I won't say anything about TOD since I'll probably wind up using that disk as a coaster.

[11thIndian]

Hey Guys. New to the forum, but not to Indy. Raiders was probably the first and only movie I can ever remember my entire family going to more than once.

That said, on to the topic at hand...

Most of you seem keen on the "fixing" of images from the films. Let me offer an alternative viewpoint. Frankly I've found the blatent revisionsim of movies over the last couple of years to be quite troubling. Every movie is a product of it's time, budget, etc. How will be be able to evaluate the evolution of movies down the road if they're contstantly being "refreshed". Especially in the case of Academy Award nominated movies like Raiders. There's an obligation to have the work that was nominated be represented in the film. Why was STAR WARS nominated for an accademy award? For special effects produced in 1977, or effects produced in 1996? Did the glass reflection really hurt anyone's enjoyment of RAIDERS? If anything, it's a notable (and extreemly quick) gaff that I'm sorry to see go. It's an interesting topic of conversation. Sadly, now no one will be able to see it any more...

People should stop looking for movies to be perfect. RAIDERS is what it is, a movie from 1981. What's wrong with that?

[Udvarnoky]

I really agree with you in terms of "fixing" movies, but I can sort of live with these slight changes. I can understand the blue screen thing: they're not making it look more real, they're just removing the frilly blue edges that appeared around characters. The snake reflection is debatable, however.

I'm pretty sure that's all the digital tampering that has gone on with the films, though. They haven't tried to change the movie. We're still gonna see the same fake-looking backdrops behind the planes in flying sequences (for which I am grateful).

[SharpShooter]

the way i look at it is this

we only watch these movies, they are Speilberg's and lucas's babies, and if they want to change things or add stuff (as with ET or the star wars trilogy) then they are entitiled to do so

[nandosb]

Im totally for fixing these minor mistakes on the movies. The way I think, these movies are not a sort of sacred and untouchable things. A movie is a visual way to tell a story and the more realistic this story can be told, the better. So whats wrong about using technology to enhance it.. Seeing a glass protecting the actor only contributes to break the magic of a movie, when you realize its all fake, theres no well of souls, its only a set..
For exeample I can never understand why some ppl didnt like the Star Wars Episode I and II . if they dont like the story plot, its ok (which is not my case), but blaming the special effects for not liking the movie, its nonsense in my opinion, for what is the better way to tell a story that takes place in such an exotic place if not using means to create an out-of-reality environement?

[11thIndian]

To Sharpshooter:

I agree, the films are the makes babies, but they don't belong to them. Not once they're released to the public. Moreso, they belong to movie history. Let's take for example Jaws. As advertised, the movie was nominated for Accademy awards. One of those was for sound. Yet on the disk, the Academy Award winning mix is nowhere to be found. The 5.1 mix is NOT the same as the original monaural mix that was released with the film. If they wanted to include a 5.1 mix, then fine. But include the mono mix as well. How would you feel if you were the sound editor on Jaws, to have your award winning work erased? OR to be ET's pupetters, and have your work replaced with CG? No ONE PERSON makes a film, it's a collaberative art form. By doing what they're doing, aren't they doing a diservice to the other artists involved? Entitled, yes. Justified...?

To nandosb:

But the reality of a movie is internal. As long as it's consistant, the reality is held. When new technology is used to update an older film; that, to me, breaks the internal reality of the movie. As far as the glass thing goes. As a mistake, it's such a slight one that I was very surprised to hear it had been removed. The average person would never notice it, even upon multiple viewings. People like us, prone to watch the film over and over and over... sure we'll pick up on it. But really...?
And for the STAR WARS thing. I know that for myself, I have been disapointed with the FX in the new films. The look and feel of the OT had a very "real" feel to it, whereas the newer films have a very intangible look to them... But that's a whole other discussion for another board.

So basically what I'm saying is I feel people like Lucas and Spielberg DO have a responsibility to film history. Film, like most art forms, is about making mistakes, learning from them, then moving on. Make new movies! Leave these ones be!

[SharpShooter]

i was just wondering, if any one had a side by side comparrisaon of the snakes scene with the glass, because i can't remember that scene, and i'd like to see how well they fixed it up