"We're not done with the script on Indy 4 but I think we're going to try and rely, like the first two movies, on realism and not try to do too many things with the computer." Yes, yes, something we've heard many times before but Marshall seems quite earnest on maintaining the purity of the franchise. "When you start getting into computers you get fantastical situations like in the Matrix or movies like that. We don't want that, we want exciting heroism, we want seat-of-your-pants, skin-of-your-teeth action. We didn't have all the money in the world on the first films and we want to keep that B-Movie feel. We want to make Indy 4 like we made the first three."
Great!! I thought the CGI in LC was out of place, let alone what damage could be done nowadays. Glad too hear about the action as well. I just hope no characterization is sacrificed for its sake.
frank marshall is just damn right about what he says about the enhanced creativity through less effect possibilities... *sigh*...i love these folks!!-)
This is a big relief to me... this movie is starting to show signs that it'll actually be good! Everyone involved seems very enthusiastic about it, most importantly Ford himself... and with very little CGI, that gets rid of one way they could ruin it.
Technically speaking......they could've gone much further with the CGI.
If you take away background enhancements, there's very little CGI.
Just about all the sets are physical, and just about all the action is still physical.
And personally, I don't know when it was a sin just to use CGI. I feel like I'm using a dirty word or something when I type "CGI."
The use of modern effects is something that I actually enjoy about 'Crystal Skull,' because the ants scene for example, is something I really enjoyed and you couldn't do it like they did it 10-20 years ago. The realism is simply astounding.
If we started seeing digital Indy's or something, then I think they would have crossed the line because the series does have a reputation regarding its physical stunts........but they didn't do that. All the other Indy movies still employed the use of special effects, so why should they have prohibited the use of modern special effects? Doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.
Location: In the Map Room playing with a laser pointer
Posts: 2,923
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cole
Technically speaking......they could've gone much further with the CGI.
If you take away background enhancements, there's very little CGI.
Just about all the sets are physical, and just about all the action is still physical.
As much as I hate quoting wikipedia, I'm too lazy to search for, find, and cite a separate source
Quote:
Steven Spielberg stated before production began that very few CGI effects would be used to maintain consistency with the other films. During filming however, significantly more CGI work was done than initially anticipated as in many cases it proved to be more practical. There ended up being a total of about 450 CGI shots in the film, with an estimated 30 percent of the film's shots containing CG matte paintings. Spielberg initially wanted brushstrokes to be visible on the paintings for added consistency with the previous films, but decided against it.
Would they have initially stated their use of cgi instead of ramping up my expectations for an old-school Indy adventure complete with old-school effects, it would not have felt like a broken promise (which it was).
As for your other comments, I whole heartedly agree with you about the ants, I have zero issue with that. Also, the flying boulders around the ufo was fine with me. Perhaps if Mutt got hit in the groin with REAL plants it might have sat better with me...
And of course digital Dr. Jones's would have been really crossing the line, and I'm glad that didn't happen.
But my position remains as it always has on this subject: If they were going to rely on cgi, they should have either been forthright about it, or never brought it up how they were going to do the effects at all.
Would they have initially stated their use of cgi instead of ramping up my expectations for an old-school Indy adventure complete with old-school effects, it would not have felt like a broken promise (which it was).
As for your other comments, I whole heartedly agree with you about the ants, I have zero issue with that. Also, the flying boulders around the ufo was fine with me. Perhaps if Mutt got hit in the groin with REAL plants it might have sat better with me...
And of course digital Dr. Jones's would have been really crossing the line, and I'm glad that didn't happen.
But my position remains as it always has on this subject: If they were going to rely on cgi, they should have either been forthright about it, or never brought it up how they were going to do the effects at all.
What I'd say is that... 1) Most of the CGI contained in KOTCS seems to be in keeping with the visual effects of the originals (to me anyway), sans the usual suspects e.g. flying fridges, vine swings and monkeys (which are more a result of bad ideas than bad use of effects). Also, the vistas of Akator, impossible shots etc. is exactly where I wanted to see new technology deployed in a new Indy movie... and scenes like the 'waterfall' seem to contain a similar mix of practical/effects shots as the mine cart chase or Zeppelin escape scenes (like them or loathe them).
2) I agree that whilst Spielberg in his head may have been thinking about all the practical sets/effects that KOTCS would still consist of, in terms of setting expectations, he should have played it down rather than big it up.
Last edited by Darth Vile : 10-12-2010 at 10:43 AM.
Location: Neuchâtel, Switzerland (Canadian from Montreal)
Posts: 7,006
Just saw a brief piece about "Crystal Skull" on a filler program called "Stars On". It said that the film makers wanted Indy's whip to be CG but Harrison said, "No".
Just saw a brief piece about "Crystal Skull" on a filler program called "Stars On". It said that the film makers wanted Indy's whip to be CG but Harrison said, "No".
Anyone else hear of this before?
I have heard that one before... and to be frank, the limited whip action seen in KOTCS could have easily been achieved via CGI (as it's only those 2 quick shots in the warehouse isn't it?).
Harrison Ford was adamant that he got to wield Indiana's famous whip. Paramount executives wanted the weapon to be computer generated because of new film safety rules, but the actor branded the rule "ridiculous".
Gotta love when filmmakers break the rules. Though its a shame safety rules are probably the reason Indy's whip scene at the graveyard was cut. I guess it'll be the same story for Indy 5 if it gets made.
Though its a shame safety rules are probably the reason Indy's whip scene at the graveyard was cut. I guess it'll be the same story for Indy 5 if it gets made.
