Bullsh!t

Finn

Moderator
Staff member
Stoo said:
The universal & automatic blame on George Lucas for putting CGI gophers in "Crystal Skull". Bulls!t. The prairie dogs were SPIELBERG's IDEA!:gun:
But was the way it was executed too?


<small>It's funny really. What bothers most of the complainers is that the furballs were CGI. Had they been regular stop motion dolls or something, the same folks would likely call it a quaint little touch.</small>
 

JuniorJones

TR.N Staff Member
Stoo said:
If it is the same horse (Hurricane, by the way), then the white blaze on its nose has been painted with black


Your funny...


Please pay special attention to 06:42. And just to add the nail in the coffin on this...

vic.jpg





 
Last edited:

Henry W Jones

New member
Stoo said:
Another big pile of knee-jerk reaction B.S. and blinkered, Philistine pig ignorance is:

The universal & automatic blame on George Lucas for putting CGI gophers in "Crystal Skull". Bulls!t. The prairie dogs were SPIELBERG's IDEA!:gun:

Personally I don't mind the gophers. They don't have 50's haircuts, don't aid the heros and don't do anything extremly ungopherish. (Not that I have any expertise in gopher behavior) What's the issue with them? I would believe they were a Lucas idea if I had heard it not knowing one way or the other.
 
Last edited:

Stoo

Well-known member
Junior'Juggernaut'Jones said:
Please pay special attention to 06:42.
Junior, while I never doubted *a* horse was used in both "Crusade" and "Rambo III" (in this case, the one Vic used for the tank jump), the original claim is too generic & vague. ("Indiana Jones' horse in The Last Crusade was also John Rambo's horse in Rambo III"). Indy's steed in "Crusade" was represented by, at least, 2 different horses...possibly 3. (The fact may not be bullsh!t but whoever wrote it could've worded things a little better.)

Oh, and...in to order avoid continuity mistakes, dye-painting patches is commonplace when using multiple horses so my comment wasn't meant to be funny, JJ. It was meant to explain why the horses don't look identical.;)
JuniorJones said:
And just to add the nail in the coffin on this...

vic.jpg
While remarkably similar, there are subtle differences between this horse and the one in the photos you posted before from the "Rambo III" screengrabs.
Finn said:
But was the way it was executed too?

<small>It's funny really. What bothers most of the complainers is that the furballs were CGI. Had they been regular stop motion dolls or something, the same folks would likely call it a quaint little touch.</small>
My main point is that Lucas' name is automatically used in conjunction with the presence of the gophers (nevermind the CGI aspect). "Skull" critics don't blame Spielberg even though it was his idea. I can understand why the general populace thinks that their inclusion is Lucas' fault but he isn't the one to blame, thus...Bullsh!t.

As for the other issue you raise, we can only speculate what complainers would've thought had the gophers not been CGI. But that isn't really the topic of the thread, is it? Try this one: CGI gophers, an alternative

P.S. Finn, it's good to see you actually participating in some Indy discussion for a change!:p
Henry W Jones said:
Personally I don't mind the gophers. They don't have 50's haircuts, don't aid the heros and don't do anything extremly ungopherish. (Not that I have any expertise in gopher behavior) What's the issue with them.
Henry W, there are plenty of places to pontificate your personal opinions about the prairie dogs and this isn't one of them. Check out this thread, instead: Prairie dogs - who's to blame? A great mystery - solved.
 

JuniorJones

TR.N Staff Member
Stoo said:
If it is the same horse...

Just making sure! Plus, it gave me the excuse to post the Indy pic.:D

Stoo said:
Indy's steed in "Crusade" was represented by, at least, 2 different horses...possibly 3. (The fact may not be bullsh!t but whoever wrote it could've worded things a little better.)

It would be daft to assume otherwise. I simply choose that Rambo 3 shot shot due to the similiarity of the stunt. There are hundreds of the *&@!$@&'s in that film.


"This fim is dedicated to the brave Mujahideen fighters of Afghanistan". :eek:
 
Gobbels may have consulted on the design...

"I was told the Nazi minister of propaganda, Joseph Goebbels, actually helped create the costume on film, which is why it has so many angles. And, in fact, it might be one of the first purely propaganda costumes ever made because you can actually film it from any angle."
- Michael Byrne, "Vogel," Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade

...but
The Nazi costumes were genuine and were found in Eastern Europe by Powell's co-designer Joanna Johnston, to whom he gave research pictures and drawings for reference

...is TOTAL BullScheiße!
 

Montana Smith

Active member
Rocket Surgeon said:
Gobbels may have consulted on the design...



...but

...is TOTAL BullScheiße!

We never got to the bottom of that one, whether or not they were getting confused by accurate-looking props, or whether those props were actually once real uniforms.

In post-war Germany, due to the dire economic situation, things were de-Nazified and put back into use (such as firearms, which had the Swastika hammered flat). Uniforms, which might not be so easy to put back into service, might have been preserved or sold as props.
 

Pale Horse

Moderator
Staff member
Concerning the title of the thread

Once upon a time, there was an egg...and a script for Indy V......
 

Montana Smith

Active member
Concerning the title of this thread

It makes me think of this movie...

bullshot.jpg


...which in style might similar to a potential script for Indy V.

I call bullsh!t on both the claims it's happening, and what it'd be like if it did happen.

But at least Bullshot was meant to be ridiculous.
 

Henry W Jones

New member
Speaking of B.S. Stoo you wrote about gophers

Stoo said:
Another big pile of knee-jerk reaction B.S. and blinkered, Philistine pig ignorance is:

The universal & automatic blame on George Lucas for putting CGI gophers in "Crystal Skull". Bulls!t. The prairie dogs were SPIELBERG's IDEA!:gun:

Then you chastise me for discussing them on the wrong thread

Stoo said:
Henry W, there are plenty of places to pontificate your personal opinions about the prairie dogs and this isn't one of them. Check out this thread, instead: Prairie dogs - who's to blame? A great mystery - solved.

Dude, you need to stop thinking you are so great and so much better than everyone. If you don't want comments about gophers here than stop bringing them up. I commented that if I was told that, it would sound believable. So what was the point of trying to correct me? Especially because I commented on your comment. So yeah Stoo, Prairie dogs - who's to blame? A great mystery - solved. please refer to this next time you want to bring up Prairie Dogs and you won't have to hear about them here. Please apply this simple rule to all threads "If you don't want to hear about a certain subject, Don't bring it up"

Pale Horse said:
Once upon a time, there was an egg...and a script for Indy V......

Two thing. 1) I think Stoo wants to be a Mod. 2) He's not gonna like you bringing up eggs here. This is not the right place. ;) Or is it?
 
Last edited:

Moedred

Administrator
Staff member
The diplomatic version of the Tom Selleck story. Starting with the second paragraph:

img737.jpg


Howard Kazanjian fills in the rest:
George Lucas wanted Tom Selleck for the movie. George was suing Universal for "Battlestar: Galactica," because many of the characters ripped him off. Glen Larson was the producer who not only has ripped George Lucas off, but a lot of other creative people. That's documented. So, George and Fox are now... we know the film is a Paramount picture, so George personally is suing Universal and Glen Larson. Glen Larson is the producer on the Tom Selleck television show. "Magnum: P.I." So, we knew that a strike, an actor's strike, was going to happen. It was inevitable, just like the writer's strike we had a year ago. And we said, to Universal, give us Tom Selleck for this picture, because we're making it in England, not under SAG, but under Equity, so we can keep working during the strike. And then by the time the strike is over, you'll get him back, and he'll have a great picture under his belly. They wouldn't do it.

...and before Battlestar Galactica was cancelled, they spelled out a very special message to Lucas, in lights...
CapricaMessage.jpg
 
Last edited:

Stoo

Well-known member
Henry W Jones said:
I commented that if I was told that, it would sound believable. So what was the point of trying to correct me?
Henry W, when I copied your message to write a reply, the on-topic statement wasn't there because you added it later. My reply was based on your original, unedited text. (Before you ask: Yes, I took over 3 hours to reply but was doing something else at the same time.) Writing to Finn in the same post, I said it's understandable how people would believe that the gophers were Lucas' idea...which essentially agrees with your added comment edit.
Henry W Jones said:
Speaking of B.S. Stoo you wrote about gophers

Then you chastise me for discussing them on the wrong thread
"Chastise"? That's a wild exaggeration. I was trying to keep things on-topic by pointing out places where gopher love/hate/alternatives to CGI could be found & discussed in depth. Didn't realize being helpful would rub you the wrong way!:(

This is a thread about bullsh!t claims, false information & common misconceptions - FACTS. My initial post concerned WHOSE IDEA the gophers were (which is a discussion of facts), not sharing my opinions on them. Your *unedited post* was an explanation of WHY YOU LIKE the gophers and questioning why others don't...which, of course, is a completely different topic and has nothing to do with the prairie dog 'culprit'.
Henry W Jones said:
Dude, you need to stop thinking you are so great and so much better than everyone. If you don't want comments about gophers here than stop bringing them up. I commented that if I was told that, it would sound believable. So what was the point of trying to correct me? Especially because I commented on your comment. So yeah Stoo, Prairie dogs - who's to blame? A great mystery - solved. please refer to this next time you want to bring up Prairie Dogs and you won't have to hear about them here. Please apply this simple rule to all threads "If you don't want to hear about a certain subject, Don't bring it up"
You don't get where I'm coming from. Wouldn't it be wise to link to the appropriate thread if someone replied to Pale Horse's post like this:

"Personally, I don't mind Indy catching an egg. It's funny, shows his instinctual skills and doesn't seem extremely unIndyish. (Not that I have any expertise in egg catching) What's the issue with it?"
Henry W Jones said:
Two thing. 1) I think Stoo wants to be a Mod. 2) He's not gonna like you bringing up eggs here. This is not the right place. ;) Or is it?
1) I doubt I'd make a very good mod so, no, I don't think I'm great nor better than everyone else.
2) Heh, I had a feeling Pale Horse was going to mention the egg and that's fine because he's on-topic with the bullsh*t/not bullsh*t claims.

You're overreacting, Henry W, because I often give links to other threads and you are only the 2nd person thus far to get so riled up by it. This reflects more about you than it does about me.;)

ALL THAT SAID, the hat-stapling business is a common untruth and was a good bullsh!t entry on your part. Got any others to contribute?:whip:
 

Henry W Jones

New member
Like you said Stoo, you waited hours to reply and I edited it within the 30 min period I/we have to do so. In fact I edited it immediately after because I accidentally posted it before I finished it. Also you were not trying to be helpful. (Another Bulls**t). You just like being right and acting like an all knowing pompous pr**k. (Fact)
 

Crack that whip

New member
Moedred said:
...and before Battlestar Galactica was cancelled, they spelled out a very special message to Lucas, in lights...
CapricaMessage.jpg

Erm - hm? I must confess, I don't know what I'm supposed to be looking at...
:eek:
 

Finn

Moderator
Staff member
Look folks, a comment or two not sternly related to the intended topic is not going derail the whole thread. And in case it does, you ought to rely that sooner or later a mod is going to show up and point out a more proper one.


And Stoo... while I certainly don't personally mind having link directions, I can't help thinking this case was a bit of a miss, considering I dressed my comment concerning the gophers and the problem people have with them as a humorous footnote.

My main point (which you ignored in your reply, btw) still stands: even if inserting prairie dogs in the movie was originally Spielberg's idea, was using computer-generated imagery as means of bringing them to life also his, or could it have originated from a head more known to being in love with techno-stuff you can do in post-production? So, bullsh!t or not?


Oh, and thinking a person resembles male genitals is most certainly an opinion, not a fact. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, after all.
<small>Not to mention giving statements like that is a pretty surefire way to find oneself in mod-populated Troubleville.</small>
 

Stoo

Well-known member
Moedred said:
The diplomatic version of the Tom Selleck story. Starting with the second paragraph:

Howard Kazanjian fills in the rest:
Good one, Moedred!(y) I completely forgot about the Glen Larson lawsuit/Tom Selleck affair. Even Spielberg, himself, relates the 'diplomatic' version in interviews (which is understandable) but it's nice to know the real truth of the matter. This is a biggie and right up there with the shooting-the-Arab Swordsman scene. Thanks for the reminder.
Henry W Jones said:
Like you said Stoo, you waited hours to reply and I edited it within the 30 min period I/we have to do so. In fact I edited it immediately after because I accidentally posted it before I finished it. Also you were not trying to be helpful. (Another Bulls**t). You just like being right and acting like an all knowing pompous pr**k. (Fact)
Whatever you say!:rolleyes: Henry, you really are overreacting and blowing the issue way out of proportion. Chill out, dude.:cool:
Finn said:
And Stoo... while I certainly don't personally mind having link directions, I can't help thinking this case was a bit of a miss, considering I dressed my comment concerning the gophers and the problem people have with them as a humorous footnote.
Gotcha, Finn, but please note: Providing links is also done for the benefit of other readers as well, be they active members, lurkers or guests who may be interested in further discussions on a certain topic.

"I'm just a soul who intentions are good.
Oh, Lord, please don't let me be misunderstood."♫
Finn said:
My main point (which you ignored in your reply, btw) still stands: even if inserting prairie dogs in the movie was originally Spielberg's idea, was using computer-generated imagery as means of bringing them to life also his, or could it have originated from a head more known to being in love with techno-stuff you can do in post-production? So, bullsh!t or not?
In my original post, I should've written just, "gophers", (rather than, "CGI gophers") to avoid any confusion....and your main point wasn't ignored, Finnmeister. As I said previously, many people don't like the prairie dog scenes (whether they are CGI or not) and Lucas automatically gets the blame. This is bullsh!t.

I used to be one of those blamers until I read the truth here at The Raven in October 2008.:hat:
Finn said:
Oh, and thinking a person resembles male genitals is most certainly an opinion, not a fact. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, after all.
Not to mention giving statements like that is a pretty surefire way to find oneself in mod-populated Troubleville.
Heh, it wasn't Henry W's 1st time but I'm a big boy. I can take it.;)
 
Last edited:

Montana Smith

Active member
I went through The Complete Making of... for references to the prairie dogs. The first page for KOTCS shows the stuffed one on his mound. Later on there's just a mention of ILM working on the creature CGI (monkeys, ants, scorpions and prairie dogs).

So nothing there about blame. However, there were a couple of interesting points:

"The monkeys had to be added digitally because the production wasn't allowed to bring its own animals to Hawaii. One shot in the script had Spalko callously knock a little guy off a cliff - but Spielberg later decided to show that the monkey survives his brush with the villainess."

So, there would have been less CGI monkey footage if they could have brought the real thing?

And Spielberg's attentiveness to the welfare of his cute creatures!

Relating to the prairie dogs, it indicates that Spielberg was probably as guilty as Lucas on all counts.
 

Stoo

Well-known member
Digitally Shrinking Corey Carrier

This merits a mention in the bullsh!t category...From our own Raider.net:

"In a frankly astonishing bit of technical legerdemain, new scenes shot with actor Corey Carrier as the pre-teen Indy were matched with film from five years before by digitally shrinking the actor to make him appear the right size in relation to other performers."

Myself & several others see no signs of this 'digital shrinking'. The "pompous pr**k" within me can't resist from linking to another thread: Digitally Shrinking Corey Carrier. If anyone has any further information or insight, please check out the thread.:D
Montana Smith said:
Relating to the prairie dogs, it indicates that Spielberg was probably as guilty as Lucas on all counts.
(y)
 
It's piling up...

How about Spielberg NEVER crossing the Rope Bridge in Sri Lanka?

Bullsh!t!

Crack that whip said:
Erm - hm? I must confess, I don't know what I'm supposed to be looking at...
:eek:
Me niether! :eek: Is that supposed to be Modesto?
 

Moedred

Administrator
Staff member
Crack that whip said:
Erm - hm? I must confess, I don't know what I'm supposed to be looking at...
This site will show you. Can't believe they got this and John Ritter's scrotum on network tv 30 years ago. Here's the Fox lawsuit by the way.

I was disappointed when Lucas took credit for nuking the fridge, when it's clearly lifted from the 1981 draft of Back to the Future.
 
Top