Indiana Jones - Better in Black & White?!

Dr.Jonesy

Well-known member
indianajonesspielbergnl.jpg


Yes, I believe so!

I'm admittedly a film fan, particularly older films in the area of 1925-1960. And what I've always found that while I do love color, I feel that black and white films (akin to still photography) gives you more of an eye for detail, and makes the film appear much better; it makes it more artsy.

And at one point, whilst watching Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, I wondered what films like this would appear like in black and white. As films like the Indy series were based on the 1930s/1950s Matinee Serials and Sci-Fi B-Films, this should look relatively natural. And it looks great!

Since then, I've always made sure to watch many films in black and white by simply putting the color setting on my TV down to zero in the menu. But to me, the Indiana Jones films all look the most amazing in black and white. They were all seemingly lit for both saturated and desaturated viewing.

Anyone every try this?
 
Last edited:

Montana Smith

Active member
While there are some great films in black and white which gain a lot of atmosphere from being monochromatic, I still crave colour.

For example, seeing The Crimson Ghost and Zombies of the Stratosphere in their colourized versions is fantastic. You see the colours of the cars, not to mention the Republic Robot, and the serials come even more alive.

It's how all films would have been shown, if colour wasn't such an expensive process.

I think Indy's original trilogy works because it sits in a tradition of a serial that could well have been colourized at a later date.
 

Dr.Jonesy

Well-known member
Montana Smith said:
While there are some great films in black and white which gain a lot of atmosphere from being monochromatic, I still crave colour.

For example, seeing The Crimson Ghost and Zombies of the Stratosphere in their colourized versions is fantastic. You see the colours of the cars, not to mention the Republic Robot, and the serials come even more alive.

It's how all films would have been shown, if colour wasn't such an expensive process.

I think Indy's original trilogy works because it sits in a tradition of a serial that could well have been colourized at a later date.

I understand and of course I never ditch color completely, but every once in awhile it's cool to see a color film in black and white. I think it gives alot more attention to detail.
:hat:

Every Indy film works so well in black and white. All these films seem to have been lit with both saturations in mind and being serial type films, it works perfectly.

If anyone hasn't tried this, give it a shot!
 

Goodeknight

New member
Great idea!

(Just guessing, but I feel a response from Stoo coming very soon.)

What I'd really love to see is the Indy films in black and white, with some Adobe "old film look" scratches and dust, shown in an old movie theater. Give the sound track the same 'old film' treatment and grab a big bucket of popcorn.

Interesting concept.
 
Those still are from Last Crusade, not Crystal Skull.

Crystal Skull would be much better in just black - i.e. with the TV off.
 

Dr.Jonesy

Well-known member
replican't said:
Crystal Skull would be much better in just black - i.e. with the TV off.

Not necessary. Most people on this forum like that film and all Indy films, so watch whose toes you're stepping on.

If you aren't going to contribute to the topic nicely or don't have anything good to say...don't say anything at all. Just sayin'...
:whip:
 
Last edited:

Dr.Jonesy

Well-known member
goodeknight said:
Great idea!

(Just guessing, but I feel a response from Stoo coming very soon.)

What I'd really love to see is the Indy films in black and white, with some Adobe "old film look" scratches and dust, shown in an old movie theater. Give the sound track the same 'old film' treatment and grab a big bucket of popcorn.

Interesting concept.

Raiders is actually on YouTube in the old serial format!
(y)

EDIT....okay there used to be! But here;


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GUPDuQq9GsM
 
Last edited:

Attila the Professor

Moderator
Staff member
replican't said:
Those still are from Last Crusade, not Crystal Skull.

One is, one isn't.

So, it's not really black & white, in a sense. Sure, you've put it into grayscale, but surely you can see the difference between how your adjusted films look and how films that were actually filmed in black & white look. The use of shadow, the depth of the tones, and the like. You'd need to reshoot the films to really get that.

And besides, Spielberg's use of color in these films, Raiders in particular, is top notch. It's a shame to miss out on his sparing use of reds.
 

Dr.Jonesy

Well-known member
Attila the Professor said:
One is, one isn't.

So, it's not really black & white, in a sense. Sure, you've put it into grayscale, but surely you can see the difference between how your adjusted films look and how films that were actually filmed in black & white look. The use of shadow, the depth of the tones, and the like. You'd need to reshoot the films to really get that.

And besides, Spielberg's use of color in these films, Raiders in particular, is top notch. It's a shame to miss out on his sparing use of reds.

I know, the only thing I do is I just remove the color on the TV. I know it'd have to have been re-shot specifically for black and white, but still it looks cool.


:whip:
 

Lance Quazar

Well-known member
Gotta disagree with Jonesy and especially Montana.

Films should be seen as they were meant to be seen. Not "de-colorized" and certainly not "colorized."

Not converted to 3D twenty years later.

Spielberg would have made completely different choices if he had been filming in black and white. Ditto the old school filmmakers who did work in the medium, whether they were Orson Welles making "Kane" or nameless journeymen cranking out cheapie serials.

Here's a great interview by Roger Ebert with Spielberg himself from 1990. The topic is letterboxing, which, at the time, was still a new and wildly misunderstood practice.

But, really, Spielberg could be talking about ANY modification to the original intent, whether it's pan and scan, colorization, or updating FX (Spielberg himself apologized for his modifications to "E.T."

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/19900114/PEOPLE/11010302
 

Dr.Jonesy

Well-known member
I think you're going a bit more serious than I intended, Lance. All I'm saying is that it's kinda cool to see it without color, I'm not saying it should be that way...but I kinda like it better sometimes cause it makes me pay attention to detail, I'm not saying they should ever be released that way.

:p
 
Last edited:

Montana Smith

Active member
Lance Quazar said:
Gotta disagree with Jonesy and especially Montana.

Films should be seen as they were meant to be seen. Not "de-colorized" and certainly not "colorized."

Not converted to 3D twenty years later.

Essentially black and white was a necessity due either to cost or technology. With money or technology no object, a film-maker would only choose colour unless he had an artistic preference for monochrome.

As you probably know, The Crimson Ghost and Zombies of the Stratosphere weren't high art. Translating the grayscales back into the colour the camera was pointing at adds a lot to the experience, in the same manner that Dr. Jonesy is extracting another form of viewing enjoyment from Indy movies:

Dr.Jonesy said:
I think you're going a bit more serious than I intended, Lance. All I'm saying is that it's kinda cool to see it without color, I'm not saying it should be that way...but I kinda like it better sometimes cause it makes me pay attention to detail, I'm not saying they should ever be released that way.
 

Dr.Jonesy

Well-known member
Montana Smith said:
Essentially black and white was a necessity due either to cost or technology. With money or technology no object, a film-maker would only choose colour unless he had an artistic preference for monochrome.

As you probably know, The Crimson Ghost and Zombies of the Stratosphere weren't high art. Translating the grayscales back into the colour the camera was pointing at adds a lot to the experience, in the same manner that Dr. Jonesy is extracting another form of viewing enjoyment from Indy movies:

Exactly.
:hat:

It's just fun and makes the watching of Indy (which I've seen all four 1,000 times) feel like a new experience in some fashion.

I don't think a film has to be filmed specifically in black and white to be enjoyed as such, just like a photo can be enjoyed both colored and desaturated. Indy works perfectly for this, IMO.
 

Dr. Gonzo

New member
These films have a classic color look that is hard to replicate nowadays. Dougie Slocombe was a master. Taking out the color does great disservice to the master. Raiders and Doom especially are brilliant displays of Slocombe's knack for color and light arrangement.
 

Dr.Jonesy

Well-known member
Dr. Gonzo said:
These films have a classic color look that is hard to replicate nowadays. Dougie Slocombe was a master. Taking out the color does great disservice to the master. Raiders and Doom especially are brilliant displays of Slocombe's knack for color and light arrangement.

Actually his lighting arrangement is what makes the first 3 great for black and white, and the lighting arrangement on the 4th is great, too.

I think it's not a disservice to say that his lighting was great to the point that it can be appreciated with or without color. I think it points out just how great he was.
 

Stoo

Well-known member
goodeknight said:
(Just guessing, but I feel a response from Stoo coming very soon.)
Your guess was right, Mr. Goodeknight.:) Granted, I have never watched a FULL Indy movie without colour but it's easy to understand why Dr. Jonesy enjoys the different perspective.
Dr.Jonesy said:
Raiders is actually on YouTube in the old serial format!
(y)

EDIT....okay there used to be! But here;


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GUPDuQq9GsM
That black & white serial version of "Raiders" was removed from YouTube sometime between 2008-2011. Here is a thread about it: Raiders of the Lost Ark: The Serial watch it like real serial

The video you linked to doesn't have any clips from "Raiders". (For anyone interested, there is also a thread on it here: Chuck Heston is Indiana Jones.)
Lance Quazar said:
Films should be seen as they were meant to be seen. Not "de-colorized" and certainly not "colorized."
For 1st time viewing, I emphatically agree with you, Lance, from an artistic standpoint. However, after seeing some films over & over as a fan, it is interesting to watch them with a new set of eyes (so to speak). Dr. Jonesy mentions seeing certain details stand out in b/w and I've had similar experiences with colourization. The first instance was with one of my favourite movies; the original "King Kong", which I'd seen about 100 times in b/w before seeing the colourized version in the early '90s. It was extremely refreshing because I was seeing details that I had never noticed before (and that film is just *1* example).
Dr. Gonzo said:
Taking out the color does great disservice to the master.
True, Gonzo...but it's much less of disservice than those "fan edits" out there which relish in removing certain elements or eliminating entire scenes.(n) Dr. Jonesy's suggestion is quite harmless because it's akin to watching colour movies/programmes on a black & white TV (which even I remember doing in my pre-kindergarten years). There is/was a whole generation of folk who were able to enjoy something in b/w, even though that "thing" was meant to be seen in colour. Lance Quazar, please take note of this.;)

---
Another alternate viewing experience: In the early days of pay-TV-movie channels, non-subscribers would receive a scrambled signal. A couple of times, I watched "Star Wars" in NEGATIVE!:eek: Trippy...
 
Last edited:

Dr. Gonzo

New member
I see what you all are saying. I'm not making the argument that a film viewing experience should not be experimented with, but to answer the question posed "Indiana Jones better in black and white?" the answer is a resounding "No".

"In the early days of pay-TV-movie channels, non-subscribers would receive a scrambled signal. A couple of times, I watched "Star Wars" in NEGATIVE! Trippy..." -Stoo

Damn Stoo that must have been something.
 

Stoo

Well-known member
Dr.Jonesy said:
I'm admittedly a film fan, particularly older films in the area of 1925-1960. And what I've always found that while I do love color, I feel that black and white films (akin to still photography) gives you more of an eye for detail, and makes the film appear much better; it makes it more artsy.
Nice to know that you're a fan of older films, Jonesy.(y) People like you are scarce around this place!:(

I'm curious about what details you've observed while watching the Indy films in b/w (because, in my experience, it's the colourization of old films that brings out their detail). Can you give some examples of these extra details?
Dr. Gonzo said:
I see what you all are saying. I'm not making the argument that a film viewing experience should not be experimented with, but to answer the question posed "Indiana Jones better in black and white?" the answer is a resounding "No".
Gonzo, while I do agree with you..."Raiders" (compared to the other 3) is not a very colourful film. MOST of its palette is beige, browns and dull greens so those generic, earthy hues wouldn't/shouldn't suffer too drastically from a lack of colour.

That said, Attila wrote about missing out on Spielberg's 'sparing use of reds' in Raiders and he has a point because some shots that would definitely be inferior in b/w are the mechanic's blood spraying onto the tail of the flying wing and Indy's blood on the truck windshield. Blood isn't as shocking when it's black.
Dr. Gonzo said:
Damn Stoo that must have been something.
'Twas, indeed. (My brother thought I was an idiot for watching it that way!:D)
 

Dr.Jonesy

Well-known member
Stoo said:
Nice to know that you're a fan of older films, Jonesy.(y) People like you are scarce around this place!:(

I'm curious about what details you've observed while watching the Indy films in b/w (because, in my experience, it's the colourization of old films that brings out their detail). Can you give some examples of these extra details?

:hat:

When you see things in b/w, you have a tendency to let your eyes wanted and seek out exciting things for your eyes to look at since it's not being as entertained with the colours.

I'm just going to speak in general terms here since naming every little thing would take from now until Indy V comes out.
:p

Mainly, you notice smoke and lighting; just how great the lighting in every one of these films really shows in a desaturated palette. Jungle scenes (Raiders, Kingdom) especially have lovely lighting with the sun-beams going in between the trees. Also, any issue with special effects in TOD, TLC, KOTCS is almost non-existent due to the fact that since it has no color, everything looks a bit more unified.

I guess I don't know how to explain it but seeing a film like Indy w/o color makes me look closer at each shot or frame and notice more little things in the background, how things are lit, what composes each shot, etc...You guys gotta remember, you all have probably seen these films more than I have so I still notice new things.
 

Goodeknight

New member
Stoo said:
Blood isn't as shocking when it's black.
Maybe so, but Hitchcock seemed to do an okay job with it.

Stoo said:
In the early days of pay-TV-movie channels, non-subscribers would receive a scrambled signal. A couple of times, I watched "Star Wars" in NEGATIVE!:eek: Trippy...

I watched Star Wars with all the squiggly lines sent out to non-subscribers. That was in the days before even VCRs or Beta machines. Since you couldn't rent or buy it, we'd do anything to catch a glimpse of the Star Wars universe. Listened to it like a radio show.
 
Top