TheRaider.net
 

Go Back   The Raven > The Films > Kingdom of the Crystal Skull
User Name
Password

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 04-09-2016, 12:59 PM   #226
Drones33
IndyFan
 
Drones33's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: England
Posts: 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raiders112390
People are acting like it's the worst film of all time...Sorry, disagree!
Nobody is saying it's the worst film of all time, but I think the general consensus that it's the weakest of the four; that's it's not as good as any of the others, is absolutely true.
Drones33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2016, 05:40 PM   #227
Lao_Che
IndyFan
 
Lao_Che's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 359
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drones33
Nobody is saying it's the worst film of all time, but I think the general consensus that it's the weakest of the four; that's it's not as good as any of the others, is absolutely true.

Dr. Tyree's philosophy class is right down the hall.
Lao_Che is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2016, 07:00 PM   #228
Raiders112390
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,740
Even if it was the weakest of the four, which I personally disagree with, the overreaction to the film by many - both on this forum and off - has been pretty unfair. If KOTCS is anything, it is a B movie in a family of A graders - That's not a sin. On this forum, I've seen people treat it as an abomination, or on par with The Phantom Menace. I've seen people say that the mindlessly dumb Mummy sequels were better than KOTCS. I just think people are too hard to please.

Last Crusade - which for me is a weaker film than Crystal Skull outside of Sean Connery's excellent performance and River Phoenix's Young Indy - gave the audience a perfect Hollywood ending; The Mega-Happy Ending, literally riding off into the sunset. Indy discovered the literal Holy Grail - the end all, be all - in that movie.

How could any sequel not only top only those elements, but also compete with almost 20 years of hope, hype and expectation?
Raiders112390 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2016, 07:26 PM   #229
Udvarnoky
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Major West
I don't see why there needs to be a visual consistency other than costume and music. It's a movie about a guy who wears a hat and a leather jacket and goes on adventures. As far I know he wears that gear in all 4 movies and the music is still there. However 20 years has passed in the story as well. Things are not the same. I thought the film struck a good visual balance. It would be ridiculous to try and make the movie look like it been made in a 1989 style just to please a few nostalgic fans online.

This has nothing to do with a 1989 style versus a 2008 style, and I don't see how you can characterize it as such without willfully misreading what I said. There are plenty of movies from 2008 that resemble Indiana Jones more than this movie does. You are trying to cast this as resistance to a "modern" style, when it is a resistance to something far more specific: Kaminski's style.

Quote:
It was never meant to be a masterpiece.

This is the second time in this thread I've seen a made-up position chastised. It's weird, defensive and without substance. Make an argument.
Udvarnoky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2016, 02:49 AM   #230
Major West
IndyFan
 
Major West's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Crystal Lake
Posts: 772
Quote:
Originally Posted by Udvarnoky
There are plenty of movies from 2008 that resemble Indiana Jones more than this movie does.

Such as? This will be interesting, seeing as KOTCS is very clearly an Indiana Jones movie. Please don't mention those god awful Nic Cage movies.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Udvarnoky
You are trying to cast this as resistance to a "modern" style, when it is a resistance to something far more specific: Kaminski's style.

I think Kaminski's style is very fitting for a 1950s setting, which no surprises, is the period the film is set, but if you have a keen eye, his KOTCS style is more similar to Raiders, than ToD and LC.

The previous three movies, were set in the 1930s.

If anything should be 'adhered' to. It's taking note of the fact that 20 years has passed. Which is what was done by the filmmakers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Udvarnoky

This is the second time in this thread I've seen a made-up position chastised. It's weird, defensive and without substance. Make an argument.

I'm not here to make an argument. I think the film ranks as forth in terms of how good it is. Could have been better but I'd be lying if I said I didn't enjoy parts of it. It's obvious where the films failings are I just think some of the criticisms are missing the bullseye.

Last edited by Major West : 04-11-2016 at 03:12 AM.
Major West is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2016, 11:30 AM   #231
Udvarnoky
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Major West
I think Kaminski's style is very fitting for a 1950s setting, which no surprises, is the period the film is set.

I'm very curious about how you drew this conclusion. What about 50s cinema to you evokes a desaturated palette and excessive halating light sources?

Many of the movie's 50s influences, like Earth vs. the Flying Saucers and Them! are black and white productions. A good color example of a 50s B-movie would be The Naked Jungle, and though it appears a bit soft it certainly boasts a filmic look with vibrant colors and none of the bleached shininess of the movie you feel represents the 50s.

Again, many of the techniques employed in Crystal Skull are identifiable as Kaminski mainstays. This suggests a DP that is putting his personal stamp on the material rather than trying to honor the aesthetic of a particular decade or, more to the point, a particular franchise.

Could you cite a movie or two from the 50s that you believe functions as a visual antecedent to Crystal Skull?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Major West
It's obvious where the films failings are I just think some of the criticisms are missing the bullseye.

That's cool, but it's hard for me to understand your case if your basis is disingenuous, "What were you expecting, Citizen Kane?!" type sentiments.
Udvarnoky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2016, 01:27 PM   #232
Major West
IndyFan
 
Major West's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Crystal Lake
Posts: 772
His own style is there in some scenes, but why shouldn't it be? Did somebody tell him he should have to copy Douglas Slocombe? Does this mean that future directors have to copy the style of Spielberg when making Indiana Jones movies? Do future actors have to act the same way as Harrison Ford? You see what I mean when I try to point out the fallacy of the idea that it's a valid criticism of the movie?

Some shots from the blu-rays, comparing. Click for larger. I'm just not getting the sense that it doesn't look like Indiana Jones.





Major West is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2016, 03:40 PM   #233
Stoo
IndyFan
 
Stoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Neuchâtel, Switzerland (Canadian from Montreal)
Posts: 7,964
Quote:
Originally Posted by Udvarnoky
I stand corrected. This article purports that half of the six-minute jungle chase had CGI (whether to augment the foliage or for the blue-screen work). It does say, though, that "most" of the stunts were not shot on location, so mrman7 might be on to something after all.
Thanks for the link, Udvarnoky. That's a great article! However, mrman7 complained that "most of the stunts" in the entire movie were done with bluescreen, which was not the case.

Re: the jungle chase:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Computer Graphics World
“Although they did shoot some stuff with LaBeouf in a ‘hangman’s rig’ so he could straddle the two vehicles, there was no way to do most of the stunts in the jungle—the road was bumpy and it was too dangerous,” says Marshall Krasser, associate visual effects supervisor. Thus, of the six-minute sequence, about half the shots had CG effects. Of those, some were bluescreen shots with synthetic jungles; others were location shots with digital jungle added to the roads.
I meant to say before that it was about 50/50 for "molested" VS. "unmolested" shots during the jungle chase so my estimate would've been correct. As for "most" of the jungle stunts being too dangerous to perform on location, Krasser must be referring to the shots surrounding the Mutt/Spalko/Marion portion...as in, too dangerous for actors...because the vehicle-to-vehicle jumps, soldiers falling off & guy dragging behind are, clearly, live-action stunts done ON SITE by professionals.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Major West
I think Kaminski's style is very fitting for a 1950s setting,
Wha-a-at? Udvarnoky is right on this. The photography does not, at all, reflect the general look of 1950s films (and I've seen over 200 of 'em). Anyway, I agree with you that its lighting & colour tones are closer to "Raiders" than the other movies. "Doom" & "Crusade" are much more juicy and pristine...which was a noticeable change, to me, back in the day.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Udvarnoky
This suggests a DP that is putting his personal stamp on the material rather than trying to honor the aesthetic of a particular decade or, more to the point, a particular franchise.
You mean, 'a particular movie series', right?.
Stoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2016, 04:17 PM   #234
Udvarnoky
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoo
Anyway, I agree with you that its lighting & colour tones are closer to "Raiders" than the other movies.

Well, which version of Raiders? We all recall the controversy brought on by the 4k transfer in which Spielberg (or someone whose work he approved) digitally revisited the color timing:





The color palette is only one facet of a movie's visual identity, anyhow. I don't recall everyone basking in a heavenly glow throughout the original trilogy.

Udvarnoky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2016, 08:44 PM   #235
Raiders112390
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,740
There is no one Iniana Jones color grading. All of the films have differences. As far as that aspect goes, KOTCS and Last Crusade have the best color grading in my opinion. Very Hollywood. I swear I've seen old '50s print ads and such that have the vivid colors of KOTCS. I know the different color dynamics helped to demonstrate this is Indiana Jones in a new era. There are some very beautiful uses of the color:






The movie has a similar look to old Kodachrome photographs:



Last edited by Raiders112390 : 04-11-2016 at 08:59 PM.
Raiders112390 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2016, 10:11 PM   #236
Udvarnoky
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,368
I'm really not seeing the correlation between the screengrabs and the photographs. Maybe if you described what you think the similarities are?
Udvarnoky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2016, 12:02 AM   #237
Raiders112390
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,740
Quote:
Originally Posted by Udvarnoky
I'm really not seeing the correlation between the screengrabs and the photographs. Maybe if you described what you think the similarities are?

Okay, it's obvious we're just going to disagree. You hate the film and think it's the worst thing ever. I don't. I'm an Indiana Jones fan, you're not. So you can go be cute and obtuse with someone else. Or go hang out on a Bat freak fansite. Might suit you better.
Raiders112390 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2016, 01:42 AM   #238
Raiders112390
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,740
I mean, I explained myself clearly in the post - saying I felt the film's aesthetic is similar to old Kodachrome photography from the 1950s, thus establishing an aesthetic/visual link with the 1950s. I thought that point was articulated clearly. There was no "correlation" between the screenshots and the photographs; it was to show KOTCS' look is inspired by the 1950s and has antecedents in the decade it takes place within. Given that Spielberg and Lucas grew up and love the 1950s, I have no doubt that this Kodachrome look was as such suggested to Kaminski probably by Spielberg to help visually establish this Indy film as being set in the 1950s (as well as the Beards indulging in their tendency to give a shout-out whenever possible in their films to their childhoods). It was no accident, and while not many '50s FILMS have this aesthetic, it is clear that KOTCS' visual aesthetic can be linked to the 1950s. But, for people like Udv, it's just something else to attack the film with.

For myself, it makes sense that the films each have a different sort of look to them.

Raiders is the most grounded film of the series, and has the most 'real' visual aesthetic, which suits it given it is the most serious entry.

Temple is the grittiest film and it has a lower grade, duller visual aesthetic; it looks like Silver Age comic books, which suits the over-the-top stunts and action; it looks and feels pulpy.

Last Crusade is the most sentimental film in the series and has a warm, juicy, quasi-30s Technicolor look to it.

KOTCS is set in the 1950s and has the nostalgic look of an old '50s Kodachrome photograph. Thematically, it works, and it helps to establish that this is Dr. Jones in the Atomic Era.

Given Udvarnosky's tendency to be purposely obtuse and given his hate for all things KOTCS, however, I blew my lid. For which I apologize.
Raiders112390 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2016, 08:22 AM   #239
Udvarnoky
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,368
There's a lot to unpack here. Is there some backstory between you and me about Batman that I'm forgetting about? For the life of me I can't remember bringing up that series -- a series I don't have a particular attachment to. Don't wanna second-guess you, though. I'm sure you had your reasons?

But being pressed for time, let me just address your "obtuse" point with some exhibits. Here's what you have to say about me:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raiders112390
You hate the film and think it's the worst thing ever.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raiders112390
Given Udvarnosky's tendency to be purposely obtuse and given his hate for all things KOTCS.

Now here's me, from six days ago:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Udvarnoky
I still think this movie has great concepts behind it. I mean, that's part of the tragedy of it.

The way Lucas endeavors to connect the purpose of the Nazca lines with the story of El Dorado, the myth of Akakor and Von Däniken pseudo-science is a pretty terrific basis for an Indiana Jones movie.

I guess my "hate for all things KOTCS" has a loophole clause. By the way, in this very thread, I used the word "mediocrity" to sum up the film. How does that reconcile with my supposed position that it's the "worst thing ever"? If you're not going to bother to read what I write, why should I bother to defend it?

Last edited by Udvarnoky : 04-12-2016 at 08:28 AM.
Udvarnoky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2016, 10:02 AM   #240
Raiders112390
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,740
Quote:
Originally Posted by Udvarnoky
There's a lot to unpack here. Is there some backstory between you and me about Batman that I'm forgetting about? For the life of me I can't remember bringing up that series -- a series I don't have a particular attachment to. Don't wanna second-guess you, though. I'm sure you had your reasons?

But being pressed for time, let me just address your "obtuse" point with some exhibits. Here's what you have to say about me:

I guess my "hate for all things KOTCS" has a loophole clause. By the way, in this very thread, I used the word "mediocrity" to sum up the film. How does that reconcile with my supposed position that it's the "worst thing ever"? If you're not going to bother to read what I write, why should I bother to defend it?

Well, I don't know, you seem to want to attack every aspect of it, even down to such nitty gritty nitpicking kind of stuff as the color grading to imply it's not an Indiana Jones movie. And then you act totally obtuse when I point out exactly the kind of look they were going for and show examples and give reasons why thematically it works.
Raiders112390 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2016, 10:24 AM   #241
Udvarnoky
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raiders112390
And then you act totally obtuse when I point out exactly the kind of look they were going for and show examples and give reasons why thematically it works.

You did not give "reasons why thematically it works." You put screenshots from the movie next to some photographs and operated under the assumption that everyone agrees with you that they look alike and that it's what the film makers were going for. When I asked you to expound on where you're coming from you chose to have a meltdown.

Also, we call them motion pictures for a reason. If I have objections to what a movie looks like, that's not exactly nit-picking. The broader discussion has currently taken us to the aesthetic of the film, but if you want to talk about something else, please feel free. But simply complaining about the subject matter - in a thread explicitly about airing grievances with this movie, no less - makes it look like you want to micro-manage the discussion rather than contribute to it.
Udvarnoky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2016, 12:49 PM   #242
Drones33
IndyFan
 
Drones33's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: England
Posts: 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raiders112390
Even if it was the weakest of the four, which I personally disagree with, the overreaction to the film by many - both on this forum and off - has been pretty unfair. If KOTCS is anything, it is a B movie in a family of A graders - That's not a sin. On this forum, I've seen people treat it as an abomination, or on par with The Phantom Menace. I've seen people say that the mindlessly dumb Mummy sequels were better than KOTCS. I just think people are too hard to please.

Last Crusade - which for me is a weaker film than Crystal Skull outside of Sean Connery's excellent performance and River Phoenix's Young Indy - gave the audience a perfect Hollywood ending; The Mega-Happy Ending, literally riding off into the sunset. Indy discovered the literal Holy Grail - the end all, be all - in that movie.

How could any sequel not only top only those elements, but also compete with almost 20 years of hope, hype and expectation?

Your constant defence of Crystal Skull is commendable. If a little over-zealous. You prefer it to Crusade, and thats fine. I`m sure theres nothing I can say to change that view, and why would I want to. Its your opinion and you are entitled to it. Because lets not forget, we`re all here because of a shared love of all things Indy. But equally your continued and repeated statement that its not as bad as people say isnt going to make it a better film. All four films have their flaws to various degrees. Its just that Crystal Skull has the most.
In my opinion...
Drones33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2016, 07:04 PM   #243
Raiders112390
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,740
Quote:
Originally Posted by Udvarnoky
You did not give "reasons why thematically it works." You put screenshots from the movie next to some photographs and operated under the assumption that everyone agrees with you that they look alike and that it's what the film makers were going for. When I asked you to expound on where you're coming from you chose to have a meltdown.

Also, we call them motion pictures for a reason. If I have objections to what a movie looks like, that's not exactly nit-picking. The broader discussion has currently taken us to the aesthetic of the film, but if you want to talk about something else, please feel free. But simply complaining about the subject matter - in a thread explicitly about airing grievances with this movie, no less - makes it look like you want to micro-manage the discussion rather than contribute to it.

If you don't like the movie, why bother talking about it? I certainly don't waste my time hanging around talking about movies I dislike.
And unless you're blind, there are great similarities in the color grading between the film and the photos I posted. Kodachrome was a mainstay of the 1950s and Kodachrome is part of the cultural memory of that time period.
But no, let's have it your way, it's not an Indy film, and it doesn't look like a film, period. All films should look like Nolan's Batman films, obvs.
Raiders112390 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2016, 07:10 PM   #244
Raiders112390
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,740
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drones33
Your constant defence of Crystal Skull is commendable. If a little over-zealous. You prefer it to Crusade, and thats fine. I`m sure theres nothing I can say to change that view, and why would I want to. Its your opinion and you are entitled to it. Because lets not forget, we`re all here because of a shared love of all things Indy. But equally your continued and repeated statement that its not as bad as people say isnt going to make it a better film. All four films have their flaws to various degrees. Its just that Crystal Skull has the most.
In my opinion...

My liking of the two is about even. What I feel is that as an Indy film, I feel it is a dud outside of the River Phoenix intro and the bits with Sean. The rest of the film just sort of plods along and doesn't really find a beat until Sean Connery enters the picture.

The action scenes in it lack the kinetic energy of the first two films, and I've written entire threads on how I feel the Tank Chase pretty much sucks especially in comparison to the Truck Chase. It's also not at all subtle or clever. From Indy becoming Indy in less than half an hour, to his father just coincidentally being afraid of rats just as Indy is afraid of snakes, to the gang literally riding off into the sunset - it hits you in the face. Also, turning Sallah into a raving idiot and Marcus into a senile buffoon was a big turn-off for me as I liked bother characters greatly in Raiders...There are great scenes, and great moments, and the score as as good as any of the others....But I don't feel it is up to par outside of the 1912 sequence, which is probably my favorite moment of the entire series, and the ending segment in the Grail Temple.

KOTCS is at least enjoyable as a mindlessly fun B movie, and the science fiction element is to me interesting and clever. It's at least something different, and daring, rather than retreading the tired old ground of the Nazis going after a Judeo-Christian relic.
Raiders112390 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2016, 08:21 PM   #245
Udvarnoky
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raiders112390
If you don't like the movie, why bother talking about it? I certainly don't waste my time hanging around talking about movies I dislike.

I'm sorry you think discussing movies is a waste of time unless your special criteria is met. You have my sympathy if not my understanding.

And again with the Batman thing. I must confess I'm missing the significance of your constant Batman references.
Udvarnoky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2016, 10:43 PM   #246
Joe Brody
IndyFan
 
Joe Brody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Sweetest Place on Earth
Posts: 2,565
[Without having read anything in this thread for I don't know how long but constantly amazed at the constant activity here] I think Finn shutting this thread down with one of his signature definitive declarations is long overdue -- especially now that we have something to look forward to in V.

Frankly, I'd bar any and all discussion of this embarrassment of film if I could.
Joe Brody is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2016, 12:37 PM   #247
Pale Horse
Moderator
 
Pale Horse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: L.A.
Posts: 6,727
Sometimes we keep this stuff around for:
A) Entertainment in the secret and officially disavowed halls of the moderator lair. You should see the drinking games we come up with.
B) Archival documentation of how fans and critics alike responded to a film in a series, and how that changes over time
C) Laziness. We hate being babysitters
D) Bucking the system
There's a movement in the American Collegiate systems wherein the students are demanding from their institutions the ability to censor the content that they're being exposed to. With the amount of monies being paid for that degree that is supposed to guarantee them a job, they (the students) feel they're entitled for the experience they want because of that money. It's sad to see America use capital to shape what in the past was a opportunity to open your minds, not close them. Here at the Raven, content (for the most part) is encouraged. You may take flak for it, but hey, that's real life. When we start charging for membership, we might change our above stance, but for now, we're the rebel forum (no star wars pun intended)
My post may or may not reflect the attitudes and opinions of the staff I am blessed to serve with.

_____
edited for spelling and grammar errors

Last edited by Pale Horse : 04-15-2016 at 05:52 PM.
Pale Horse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2016, 04:53 PM   #248
Finn
Moderator
 
Finn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Finland
Posts: 8,917
Thread still open.

Have a nice day.
Finn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2016, 03:31 PM   #249
Glenville86
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Reston, VA
Posts: 206
Honesty, I like Raiders and Last Crusade. The other 2-movies just did not do much for me. I found Skull very slap-stick with too many way obvious special effects. It was like watching a comedy with forced scenes. Doom's plot and the overall movie was like something made for grade school students. This is just my view and I am only speaking about myself.

I do like the Indy franchise and any movie is better than nothing. Harrison Ford is a good actor. I would like to see a script made for his character that utilizes his abilities more. I understand these movies are meant to be taken lightly and are not serious in any real sense but I would like to see a more serious role in the next movie.
Glenville86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2016, 02:04 PM   #250
Raiders112390
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,740
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Brody
[Without having read anything in this thread for I don't know how long but constantly amazed at the constant activity here] I think Finn shutting this thread down with one of his signature definitive declarations is long overdue -- especially now that we have something to look forward to in V.

Frankly, I'd bar any and all discussion of this embarrassment of film if I could.

It's an official, canon Indiana Jones film.
Raiders112390 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:45 PM.