Indy 4 on DVD

Udvarnoky

Well-known member
StoneTriple said:
I certainly don't get the feeling they were ever trying to hide his age, not even remotely. In fact, his age is a significant part of the story. It's addressed seriously as well as comically. His age is clearly visible all the time.

Precisely.
 

sandiegojones

New member
I think it just comes down to the fact the Kaminski is a different guy than Slocombe and they used different tools. Cameras and filters and film stock are a lot different than they were just 20 years ago.

Kaminiski did quite a good job keeping a similar look. There are several shots that look like they're right out of LC or TOD. The only places where the film appears really different than the prior films was the jungle chase and Akator and that was mostly due to CGI.
 

agentsands77

New member
sandiegojones said:
I think it just comes down to the fact the Kaminski is a different guy than Slocombe and they used different tools. Cameras and filters and film stock are a lot different than they were just 20 years ago.
Eh, it's not an excuse. The specific techniques Kaminski applied to KINGDOM didn't need to be applied.

sandiegojones said:
Kaminiski did quite a good job keeping a similar look.
In framing the shots, yes. In the lensing? Not necessarily. Look at the classroom scene - the framing is consistent with the originals, but the way it's been lensed and shot is much brighter, with a much dreamier glow.

sandiegojones said:
The only places where the film appears really different than the prior films was the jungle chase and Akator and that was mostly due to CGI.
I disagree. I actually don't think the jungle chase and Akator are different in appearance because of CGI. I think it's actually because of the cinematography. A lot of that stuff is location work, but it's the cinematography that gives it this really artificial feel.
 

Athenee

New member
Re: original trilogy+ set vs. new quadrilogy (?)+

My husband and I have the original "adventure trilogy" that came out way back in the way back (actually, the extra disk of "bonus materials" is dated 2003), and I want to know:

are all the bonus materials in the 'adventure trilogy' also in the new 'quadrilogy'?

Has the new, improved OCD-set been released yet? (I think it has, 'cus I've seen the super-duper, nifty-get-an-Indy-hat package at Borders--that's what those 40 percent off coupons and Borders Bucks are for!)

If all the stuff in the adventure pack is also in the new pack, then I can sell the old trilogy and use that money to buy the new quad! (or keep the "BM" disk and sell the other three...)
 

WeAreGoingToDie

New member
Athenee said:
are all the bonus materials in the 'adventure trilogy' also in the new 'quadrilogy'?

No, the quadrilogy has the same content as the individual rerelases that came out this year. Meaning no bonus disc content (a real loss) and some new content in its place such as storyboard sequences, retrospectives and mini-docs about creepie crawlies, women and the series. Overall you're better off with the 2003 set and the 2-Disc KOTCS.

Athenee said:
Has the new, improved OCD-set been released yet? (I think it has, 'cus I've seen the super-duper, nifty-get-an-Indy-hat package at Borders--that's what those 40 percent off coupons and Borders Bucks are for!)

Having once worked for Borders (three time regional charity drive champ and two time employee of the month, woo-woo!) just remember, the 40% coupon comes off of the original retail price, not the existing sale price sticker. Also, some coupons exclude DVDs so read that fine print. :whip:


Athenee said:
If all the stuff in the adventure pack is also in the new pack, then I can sell the old trilogy and use that money to buy the new quad! (or keep the "BM" disk and sell the other three...)

Keep the 2003 set! That bonus disc will never return! :dead: The only other thing I can recommend is if you DO sell the 2003 set (which you probably won't get much for as its now an old version), try to pick up the bonus disc on amazon or ebay.
 

sandiegojones

New member
agentsands77 said:
Eh, it's not an excuse. The specific techniques Kaminski applied to KINGDOM didn't need to be applied.


In framing the shots, yes. In the lensing? Not necessarily. Look at the classroom scene - the framing is consistent with the originals, but the way it's been lensed and shot is much brighter, with a much dreamier glow.


I disagree. I actually don't think the jungle chase and Akator are different in appearance because of CGI. I think it's actually because of the cinematography. A lot of that stuff is location work, but it's the cinematography that gives it this really artificial feel.
Quit crying. Kaminski put a little of his own flare in the film, can you blame him? He's an artist not a tool.
 

Udvarnoky

Well-known member
sandiegojones said:
Kaminski put a little of his own flare in the film, can you blame him?

Well, yes. :)

But I really don't see how what he did to the look of the series could be quantified as "a little," regardless of what side of the fence you're on. And I say without the filters the movie would have still set itself apart well enough from the other three. This was self-indulgence. There's a difference between being an anonymous artist and being plain not true to the franchise.
 

agentsands77

New member
sandiegojones said:
Quit crying.
Ah, condescension.

sandiegojones said:
Kaminski put a little of his own flare in the film, can you blame him?
When I think it looks bad, I can. I'm not concerned with the fact that the film looks different than the OT (I always expected as much, to be honest). I'm concerned with how the film looks different from the the original trilogy... I just don't think the film looks very good, whether it's an Indiana Jones film or not.

And I like KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL, for the record.
 
The strange thing is that the trailers are graded much better (to my taste at least) than the final film...

AtomicAge said:
I think the whole graveyard/catacomb sequence looks very much like the other three films.

Doug
Agreed... one of the positive exceptions.
 
Last edited:

Udvarnoky

Well-known member
The cemetery scene probably looks better to most people simply because it's darker, and the glowy effect seems to feed off of light sources. I would say though that the look of the film is pretty consistent.

Laserschwert said:
The strange thing is that the trailers are graded much better (to my taste at least) than the final film...

It looks about the same to me. Maybe there's some color correction differences that are too slight for my untrained eyes to really pick up on, but the aspect of the movie's look that I have a problem with seems to come primarily from the lens filters.
 

Bjorn Heimdall

Active member
Forget the filters and check out the lighting... especially just before the warehouse, Indy picks up his hat, clearly shown by the shadow on the car (trailer moment), then the cam moves and Indy looks away and then back towards the car... with the sun in his eyes this time! Thats a record time for the sun to travel 180 degrees in the sky:cool:
 

AtomicAge

New member
Interestingly, and I had forgotten about this until a saw a clip on the extras of Crystal Skull, Douglas Slocombe uses a LOT of filtration on the catacomb sequence and the knight sequence in Last Crusade.

Doug
 

Major West

Member
I find it strange that some people find the slightly different look Kaminski has given the film in some way hinders their enjoyment.

There might be fifth film, and it might even have a different director as well. This place will be like a scene from Scanners.
 

sandiegojones

New member
Major West said:
I find it strange that some people find the slightly different look Kaminski has given the film in some way hinders their enjoyment.

There might be fifth film, and it might even have a different director as well. This place will be like a scene from Scanners.
Some people just like to complain about anything and everything.

To me, there is little difference between the films other than a few moments.
 

caats

New member
only time i see the "plastic" is the jungle scene, and mainly when Mutt is straddled between cars. that was the only time it bothered me. anyway, i just noticed in the diner scene Indy puts his fedora on the head of one of the college kids, right before the "get that greaser" line. i love that line btw.
 
AtomicAge said:
Interestingly, and I had forgotten about this until a saw a clip on the extras of Crystal Skull, Douglas Slocombe uses a LOT of filtration on the catacomb sequence and the knight sequence in Last Crusade.

Doug

He did... and he used it perfectly to capture the magical atmosphere of those scenes... the action-scenes however always got a dirty, gritty and very hard look (in terms of sharpness and contrasts) to them. Not the warm and dreamy look of the warehouse-sequence or the jungle-chase... but I know, tastes are different, I liked KotCS no matter what, but I'm sure it could be "improved", which to me means "brought closer to the other movies". That's the reason for my color correction, which I'm going to apply to my fan-edit.
 

AtomicAge

New member
Well to be fair, starting with Raiders, the films are timed very much to the warm side. Skin tones are rather golden. In this respect Crystal Skull matches the look of the other films almost perfectly.

Doug
 

Udvarnoky

Well-known member
Major West said:
I find it strange that some people find the slightly different look Kaminski has given the film in some way hinders their enjoyment.

Believe me, it surprised me that I was bothered so much. I am not the type of purpose who makes a habit of whining about the cinematography of a movie. But I felt the look of Indy4 was plain distracting.

I mean, to be clear, the first three Indy movies definitely have a very romanticized look to them, but there's a line and I think Indy4 crosses it. When Indy and Mutt take off on the motorbike outside the diner, you can't even see their goddamned faces because of how bleached and shiny they are. When Dean Stanforth peers into Indy's classroom it looks like he's looking into the core of the sun. Indy and Marion's wedding feels like it takes in Heaven itself. And, as we all know, the fuzzy glow of the film's look has led many people to mistakenly believe things were CG that weren't. The look of the film may have been selected with the best intentions, but I think it hurt the movie for a lot of people, even if they didn't know why.
 
Top