Filmphoenix
New member
The effect in TOD were so bad that I'm surprised LC ever got made, really you can see the effect every where in that movie.agentsands77 said:
Did the action scenes disappoint?
- Thread starter TheIndyOpinion
- Start date
Quickening
New member
Filmphoenix said:
Wow people really do say some outrageous things about the trilogy in order to make KOTCS seem good along side it. The effects in Temple of Doom were second to none in its day.
CasualJeff
New member
Good points all around about Temple of Doom. The movie has comic relief all over the place. I think it's odd that people act like ToD is the "dark" "horrific" one while Last Crusade is the lighter one. I thought ToD was way too goofy and comic, while Last Crusade was more engaging.
Still, even with the campiness of Temple of Doom, I felt they still at least TRIED to make things supenseful. There are moments like the voodoo doll fight--even though I hated the scene, myself, there is legitimate suspense there. The music gets a little more intense, and the shots a little quicker--and the audience is left thinking "uh-oh, will Indy get up before he gets crushed? Will Short Round get the knife out of the voodoo doll's back?" Sure, you know that he's the hero and of course he will win in the end--but it's still suspenseful.
I didn't feel anything in the KotCS action scenes. There were some cool moments, but no suspense. There was no danger. I liked KotCS overall, but the action sequences were a major disappointment to me. Only the Area 51 sequence lives up to the original movies.
Still, even with the campiness of Temple of Doom, I felt they still at least TRIED to make things supenseful. There are moments like the voodoo doll fight--even though I hated the scene, myself, there is legitimate suspense there. The music gets a little more intense, and the shots a little quicker--and the audience is left thinking "uh-oh, will Indy get up before he gets crushed? Will Short Round get the knife out of the voodoo doll's back?" Sure, you know that he's the hero and of course he will win in the end--but it's still suspenseful.
I didn't feel anything in the KotCS action scenes. There were some cool moments, but no suspense. There was no danger. I liked KotCS overall, but the action sequences were a major disappointment to me. Only the Area 51 sequence lives up to the original movies.
Filmphoenix
New member
Your right, both are used, but I think film uses green more know. I work with video and we use green. For some reason I was think blue for film, but digital see green better.Katarn07 said:I think you got that mixed up. Isn't it green today, blue yesterday? I make this arguement all the time but the CGI-haters don't wanna hear it. For some reason, fake looking effects from 20 years ago are preferred to fake looking effects of today.
I felt the action was very underwhelming my first viewing. The motorcycle chase was easily the best of the litter for me the first time I saw it (as well as the second time). I appreciated the jungle chase more my second viewing (along with everything else). I think I was just expecting RotLA as Koepp and Lucas hyped this thing up to be that I wasn't able to appreciate it for being its own thing.
But aren't a lot of people unimpressed with the action in LC? I think the action in this one, while not as plentiful, was on par with that film's action sequences.
Filmphoenix
New member
Look I like all four films, I'm just honest. You can see effect shots in ALL of the movies. TOD is the worst for this, sorry to burst your bubble. You can say that the effects in Raiders were second to for the time, but sorry TOD effects were bad for the time.Quickening said:
Katarn07
New member
Quickening said:
And some people defend outdated and obvious effects shots to bash KotCS.
(just a quick aside, I actually think LC has the weakest of the effects in that the bluescreen is most visible, but that doesn't ruin my enjoyment of the film any).I don't have a preference as to which method's used. I'd like real stuntwork and set pieces, but we haven't seen that throughout an Indy movie since RotLA. And even that one has some obvious effect shots as Filmphoenix pointed out....
Quickening
New member
Filmphoenix said:
Arguing with someone who believes that the effects in TOD were bad for the time is like arguing with someone who believes that the grass is blue. It just isn't so, but there's not really much you can say. It won an oscar and BAFTA for its visual effects.
Quickening
New member
Katarn07 said:
I'll take the "outdated and obvious effects" of the original trilogy anyday over CGI because it looks so fake. Effects can fool you until you've seen them repeatedly but CGI looks like CGI anytime.
As for "bashing" KOTCS, look you have to accept sometime that some people were genuinely disappointed with the film and they have legitamite grievances no matter how much you convince yourself that they're all "haters" and "trolls".
MolaRam2
New member
Filmphoenix said:
As Quickening mention, ToD won the Oscar for best visual effects. I think the special effects are far better in the OT than in any movie released today. Say what you will, but the effects in the OT were far more beleivable than the CGI cartoons put into movies now days. Clay puppets are a practical effect, which makes them much better than CGI. I would have never known that puppets were used in the mine cart chase unless I watched the special feature that talked about it. Even then, the puppets are only visible in a couple of very quick shots and are much more beleivable than KOTCS's CGI ants. Practical effects look more real than CGI because all CGI is, is cartoons drawn into live action.
And, I will admit that their is humor in ToD, but it never got in the way of the suspense and danger, unlike KOTCS, and to a lesser extent LC.
Filmphoenix
New member
Quickening said:
That's your opinion and you are welcome to it. At that time there wasn't a lot of competition in special effects, it was up against Gostbusters. The effect were still horrible. One thing we can agree on is it is pointless to argue. My main point is all the things that people are bashing KOTCS for can be found in the other movies as well.
Filmphoenix
New member
MolaRam2 said:
I guest I've just learned too much about special effects, because I didn't need to watch a special feature to see the effects when I watched the movie. And by the way you all see CGI all over the place and don't know it. Sure you notice a lot of it in movies, mainly in like comic book based and SCIFI movies were you know going into the theater it's going to be there, but theres a lot cgi you don't.
Agent Spalko
Guest
MolaRam2 said:
Word
Filmphoenix
New member
No but there is:MolaRam2 said:
CGI monkeys= but bad miniature, rafts falling from the sky without people when they should be there (not even a dummy in sight that sound kinda lazy to me) clearly blue screen shots, a boy falling into a train car with fake snake and other fake animals, melting people that don't look real ect..
tarzan sene= a boy who as far as the audience knows never used a wipe but not only be able to crack the wipe, which takes a lot of practice itself, but hold off a lion in a small space (much harder to do than swing from vines in the amazon rain forest and just as believable).
no fridge= Just people having their hearts removed and remain alive.
no Mac, no Ox,= Willie Scott enough said here.
and no horrible script= Thats a matter of opinion. In my opinion there isn't a bad script in Raiders, LC, TOD, or KOTCS. TOD is the one I like least. I enjoy them all for what they are, but I'm not going to fool myself that they all don't have their faults. There are a lot of people who hated LC and TOD as much as you hate KOTCS, and give similar reasons as all of you who hate KOTCS. They didn't like the effect, or there shouldn't be a kid in Indy, they didn't like the voodoo, the comedy is too slapstick ect..
EVERYTHING YOU SAY YOU HATE ABOUT THIS FILM OTHER PEOPLE HAVE SAID SIMILAR THINGS ABOUT THE FILMS YOU LOVE.
Crusade>Raiders
New member
Summary: RAARGH I HATE CGI MORE CHEESY EFFECTS LIKE OLD MOVIES ALSO I HATE KINGDOM RAARGH
RAARGH CGI IS A NATURAL EVOLUTION IN SPECIAL EFFECTS AND ITS FINE THAT WAY IT IS ALSO I LIKE KINGDOM RAARGH
RAARGH CGI IS A NATURAL EVOLUTION IN SPECIAL EFFECTS AND ITS FINE THAT WAY IT IS ALSO I LIKE KINGDOM RAARGH
Filmphoenix
New member
Crusade>Raiders I take it you are tired of the pointless bickering about this. I agree that on this subject we all will have to agree to disagree and move on.Crusade>Raiders said:
Agent Spalko
Guest
Crusade>Raiders said:
You know, if Spielberg had given the Heisman to CGI like he said he would and used good old-fashioned conventional effects LIKE THE OTHER FILMS it would have maintained continuity evocative of the old movie serials from which Indiana Jones pays tribute to instead of trying to make everything so perfect for the digital age. There's inherent charm to the old-school special effects and that's what movie magic is really all about, not cheating with computers. It needed some good old fashioned creative innovation.
Darth Vile
New member
Shortie said:
And that's the top and bottom of it... Raiders used less special effects, and probably, works better for it. TOD I think has the most special effects within the original Indy movies... and they stand out like a sore thumb in places... So I can only think its blind enthusiasm for the movie that would lead anyone to defend the effects in TOD over KOTCS. I understand why someone may prefer the older effects over CGI, but again, that's a fairly subjective opinion.
graz
New member
Darth Vile said:
The thing for me is, movies have changed alot since Raiders. I love those old style effects and stunts, and in an ideal world CGI wouldn't exist for me. I'm not the future audience for these films though, my kids are, and they are growing up to EXPECT fancy CGI enhanced special effects. Hence they think Raiders is a bit boring and KOTCS is one of the best movies they have seen.
I think Speilberg and Lucas have had a precarious balancing act to perform with KOTCS to appeal across the generations, and, compared to the level of CGI in such as the Star Wars prequels, I think they suceeded in bridging the gap pretty successfully (its just an opinion though obviously...)