2. The animals. I hate when Lucas goes "kiddie" on us and he did it again. The opening "mountain" clip was ok, but they should have stopped there. The "Tarzan/monkey" scene was too much and pretty much unbelievable. Other than that, no major complaints.
Ummm Spielberg directed the film... not Lucas. His choice... Spielberg never goes kiddie on us... cough, cough.... Lost World gymkata velociraptor take down... cough, cough... Hook... cough cough.... Lost Boys.... cough cough....
Location: Note about username: I made this back when we thought Shia's character COULD have been Matthew Jones. Oh well...
Posts: 251
Quote:
Originally Posted by gallandro
Ummm Spielberg directed the film... not Lucas. His choice... Spielberg never goes kiddie on us... cough, cough.... Lost World gymkata velociraptor take down... cough, cough... Hook... cough cough.... Lost Boys.... cough cough....
Yancy
I never had a problem with the Velociraptor take down from Lost World...
That's the scene. People will have trouble with the amount of CGI in the scene and the overall comedic/fantastical nature of the moment. It's goofy, but it didn't pull me out of the film. It might destroy the movie for some. It's surely a "Lucas" moment.
Fantastical things have been the hallmark of Indy movies. Nobody should complain at all.
There is a suspension of disbelief for ghosts, lightning, faces melting, flaming sacrifices, mine cart chases, burning stones, a joust with a flagpole against a nazi with a gun, an invisible bridge and a 700 year old knight.
When did swinging on vines get to be so ridiculous in comparison? I think it'll be cool to watch.
Btw, if Indy had done the swinging, nobody would say anything.
I don't see why it would be any more outrageous than Short Round and the ladder grabbing a hold of the rope (always liked that as a kid)
And when it comes to the amount of CGI and it's fake-looking nature, think about this. The other three movies had those wonderful blue-screen black outlines around people, and 12-inch stop motion miniatures.
CGI doesn't look any faker than those did but it doesn't ruin the movie if it's good storytelling ;-)
Exactly. I don't see how the CGI in this movie can be any worse than some of those zeppelin shots in Last Crusade. Now THAT was some truly bad bluescreen work.
Plus most scifi fans tend to be a lot more demanding and hard to please when it comes to CGI than normal people. Sure, even the very best CGI never looks 100% convincing (just like even the best stop-motion and model work of the past never did), but that doesn't necessarily make it bad or low quality work.
I think that the quality of the modern CGI and older blue screen/stop motion can be on a par (both good and bad). I think it's just that CGI is sometimes left to linger in a shot for perhaps longer than it should. A poor matte or blue screen shot can be gone before you know it with a fast cut, whereas excessive CGI tends to dominate the screen (and I say that as a fan of CGI).
How many Cemetary Warriors are in the movie? According to the Hasbro 3.75 inch figure insert there's three. Is this true. I want to know so I can build my cemetary warrior gang.
How many Cemetary Warriors are in the movie? According to the Hasbro 3.75 inch figure insert there's three. Is this true. I want to know so I can build my cemetary warrior gang.
And you posted this in the spoiler section....why?
Just thought I'd pop my head in here - I'm not a die-hard fan like you guys, I loved Raiders, and I'm actually the equivalent of you guys only for Clint Eastwood movies. Just wanted to say this was fantastic, at least on par with Last Crusade - if you had fun with that one you'll love this one.
Just so you know an unbiased opinion of someone who isn't as hardcore as you guys. It has a couple silly moments but so do all of them. Overall it was very very well done, the plot was slightly confusing at times, but a thoroughly enjoyable Indy film - nothing wrong with it.
Exactly. I don't see how the CGI in this movie can be any worse than some of those zeppelin shots in Last Crusade. Now THAT was some truly bad bluescreen work.
Plus most scifi fans tend to be a lot more demanding and hard to please when it comes to CGI than normal people. Sure, even the very best CGI never looks 100% convincing (just like even the best stop-motion and model work of the past never did), but that doesn't necessarily make it bad or low quality work.
the film opens to the Elvis Presley song "Hounddog". I think it's cool that Lucas is finally getting to use Elvis music, since he couldn't afford the rights for his music for American Graffiti.
Ummm Spielberg directed the film... not Lucas. His choice... Spielberg never goes kiddie on us... cough, cough.... Lost World gymkata velociraptor take down... cough, cough... Hook... cough cough.... Lost Boys.... cough cough....
Yancy
What did Spielberg have to do with the Star Wars I, II or III? We got some kiddie moments in those...such as Binks farting. I think it takes away from the film. Just because Lucas is the director doesn't mean Lucas can't have kiddie moments already in the story.
TARZAN/MONKEY SCENE
My problem with this scene, in addition to it being a littler over the top, is that there was no groundwork set to allow it to happen. For example, the sword fight scene has a base because of Mutt revealing his fencing training earlier in the film. I don't ever recall him talking about living with monkeys or saving a girl named Jane! His ability to just pick up the swining techniques of the monkeys without any problem was just a little much. There had to be a different way for them to move Mutt from Point A to Point B.
When I was a kid in Kentucky, we'd swing off a cliff on three 60-ft high "vines" 1-2-3, and then into a lake for fun. It was very much like what Tarzan would have done, that's what we were sort-of mimicking. Anyway, though I haven't seen the film, or how this scene is depicted, Tarzan-esque vine swinging isn't that hard to do.
What did Spielberg have to do with the Star Wars I, II or III? We got some kiddie moments in those...such as Binks farting. I think it takes away from the film. Just because Lucas is the director doesn't mean Lucas can't have kiddie moments already in the story.
The point... which you missed... is that Spielberg is equally capable of writing and directing "goofball" scenes, and attributing them solely to Lucas is plain silly.
Some more Spielberg over the top moments:
1) E.T.: The newly added E.T. hiding in the bathtub is incredibly silly.
2) The Color Purple: Mister (Albert) trying to run the house after Celie leaves, there's an entire slapstick cooking scene with Mister which borders on painful. Also Shug confronting her father at church... we go from drama to big musical production number.
3) Jurassic Park: Tim is trying to climb down an electrified fence... fence turns on Timmy goes flying. Then the goofy part... he's fine, just a little dazed and his hair is mushy.
4) Hook: Practically the whole movie is an excercize in goofball. Lost Boys ride skateboards... Lost Boys play basketball. Hook Lost Boy dinner scene puts Jar Jar Binks stepping in crap to shame.... and this is a movie I generally like.
5) War of the Worlds: Tom Cruise and his kids hide in an abandoned house suddenly all Hell breaks loose and the home they are hiding in is engulfed in flame... they wake up the next morning... everything's fine... just a plane crashing on top of them... no problem.
6) A.I.: The entire "monster truck/robot demolition derby" is almost painful to watch. It's really silly in the context of the rest of the film.
7) Always: The runaway dolly truck scene gets pretty silly.
8) 1941: Need I say more.
Mr. Spielberg is not immune to fits of silliness in his movies.
