The CGI thread

[DoomTownJones]

Here's the thing:

In a world where the Siafu ants could be wrangled up in the billions, trained to march in perfect formation and execute everything seen onscreen, would they look that different? Or are we complaining for complaining's sake?

The ant CGI looks great to me.

 

[No Ticket]

Here's the thing:

In a world where the Siafu ants could be wrangled up in the billions, trained to march in perfect formation and execute everything seen onscreen, would they look that different? Or are we complaining for complaining's sake?

The ant CGI looks great to me.

I feel like nobody is listening to my main point that I am upset that the ants do things no ants could do more than that they are CGI. But if there was a world where you could do that then you should just use the real thing. You should always go for the real thing instead of using a special effect if it can be achieved... especially I think when it comes to Indiana Jones.


The only thing that bothers me particularly about the ants is that they eat humans alive in seconds and carry them off. I know they HAD to be CGI but if they at least didn't do that and only stung people and were a huge nuisance to the Russians I would like it more. Yes, the "danger" level would go down a few notches but the Bullet ant's bite is no joke so it wouldn't necessarily mean it wouldn't be awful. It would seem less cheesy to me, at least. The threat should have mainly been the Russians... maybe some GUNS or something?? ... with the ants being a very painful nuisance to everyone, possibly causing Indy to pull a grenade pin on the big Russian and then push him down into the ants so he is too busy fighting them off and then the grenade blows him up or something while Indy finds cover. They could still have done the "ants taking off with his hat" bit because I'm sure they could carry his hat... but a full-grown adult human being kicking and screaming??

It's not about how REAL they look. Of course the CGI was great. But despite how great CGI looks these days, the cgi of animals always still looks very CGI and slightly out of place to me... but again, I'm talking less about that and more about the way the ants are portrayed. Two points that I feel like I'm just not conveying across.

I promise I shut up about the ants now. lol.

 

[Agent Z]

^^^ I got your main point from earlier: You are left more cold with the concept, rather than the execution.

Which is fine, I think. Kingdom is the Indy adventure put through the most fantastical filter yet, and I can see how some would not be ready for that change in tone/shock to the system.

 

[Darth Vile]

I feel like nobody is listening to my main point that I am upset that the ants do things no ants could do more than that they are CGI. But if there was a world where you could do that then you should just use the real thing. You should always go for the real thing instead of using a special effect if it can be achieved... especially I think when it comes to Indiana Jones.


The only thing that bothers me particularly about the ants is that they eat humans alive in seconds and carry them off. I know they HAD to be CGI but if they at least didn't do that and only stung people and were a huge nuisance to the Russians I would like it more. Yes, the "danger" level would go down a few notches but the Bullet ant's bite is no joke so it wouldn't necessarily mean it wouldn't be awful. It would seem less cheesy to me, at least. The threat should have mainly been the Russians... maybe some GUNS or something?? ... with the ants being a very painful nuisance to everyone, possibly causing Indy to pull a grenade pin on the big Russian and then push him down into the ants so he is too busy fighting them off and then the grenade blows him up or something while Indy finds cover. They could still have done the "ants taking off with his hat" bit because I'm sure they could carry his hat... but a full-grown adult human being kicking and screaming??

It's not about how REAL they look. Of course the CGI was great. But despite how great CGI looks these days, the cgi of animals always still looks very CGI and slightly out of place to me... but again, I'm talking less about that and more about the way the ants are portrayed. Two points that I feel like I'm just not conveying across.

I promise I shut up about the ants now. lol.

I understand your point of view from your last post. CGI or real, you don't like the ants doing things they couldn't/shouldn't do in the real world. I get that completley... I just think it sort of limits the scope of what could happen in an Indy movie.

Whilst I'm sure we'd agree, that there should be a boundary/limit as to what unbelievable/improbable things the movie makers should conjure up, I felt that the ants were the right side of that line and actually improved the standard Indy/beastie interation. It's the one element of KOTCS that I actually thought surpassed the originals.

 

[Benraianajones]

I don't think it's the CGI per se (as it's quite good)... rather it's the concept, and trying to achieve that concept by visual effect.

I don't like the CGI on that scene because it looks very very cartoon for an action scene within Indiana Jones, it does literally just look like you've come from live action and then been dumped in "Disney's - The Jungle Book", and the way Mutt grabs one vine, and then the other, it looks really odd. I wouldn't mind the concept as much if they hadn't made it look so horrible and misplaced. A small swing, maybe, but the swing he does is outlandishly huge and as a result the effects look very shoddy and out of place in the middle of what is generally live action in the jungle. I don't think it is cute, and I don't really want cute in the middle of a fast paced jungle chase, when there is enough amusing antics occuring within it anyway.It isn't just as simple as "I don't like the scene because of the CGI" or "because of the concept", because if they had made slight changes to either aspect, it would have been enjoyable to me and not just seem really stupid. My neice, who is 19 and likes the originals, went with me to see Indy 4, and she said afterwards "I was worried I'd not like it, but I loved it, it could be my favourite , well 2nd to Last Crusade, Indy 4 was pure Indiana Jones, though one bit - when Mutt swang with the monkeys I thought "oh this bits awful, what are they doing! But luckily it didnt last for too long".

I'd have been happier with Irina's jeep being forced in to a bush and the monkeys attack with rage - I wouldn't even mind if they were CGI as no one wants a dangerous angered monkey on set. (I don't care if its homeage to Tarzan, one isn't needed, and they did a more grounded convincing, less outlandish version with Chewie in ROTJ anyway).

I get your view on the ants No Ticket. I think the CGI does look good on them. But I get what you are saying. I am borderline with the ants, I do like them, and like the scene, but I can see how it somewhat on the outlandish side in comparison to the other Indy "creepies" scenes. (On a sie note: CGI always looks somewhat out of place in movies to me too, it tends to be too smooth, flowing and "flexy")

 

[emtiem]

I really think Indy should be meeting outlandish and crazy creatures- I wouldn't mind him going into fantasy in the same way that Tarzan did; it's all crazy fun.

 

[Major West]

I really think Indy should be meeting outlandish and crazy creatures- I wouldn't mind him going into fantasy in the same way that Tarzan did; it's all crazy fun.

I agree. I don't subscribe to this ''it has to be real world'' nonsense.

 

[deckard24]

Although I still think certain scenes looked very out of place for an Indy film, ie. the crater breaking apart at the end and filling with water, I was pleasantly surprised to see the majority of the film was done the old fashioned way with CGI for touch ups! The making of docs on the KOTCS DVD were very enlightening, because up until this point I assumed a great deal more of the film was done with CGI! The slicker look of KOTCS plus Kaminski's cinematography only exacerbated this!

 

[Benraianajones]

I agree. I don't subscribe to this ''it has to be real world'' nonsense.

If i did subscribe to that, I wouldn't like the franchise at all. Indy does have a supernatural element to it, but it's never been pure, all out fantasy, with skeletons coming to life wielding swords, dragons breathing fire or mummys running down corridors. And a giant snake eating him would be part of that "too far out" element,and as it stands, Mola Ram may as well have popped out of the crocodiles mouth and said "Im ok!" if we go down that path too far.

"Tarzan did this, tazan did that!"...this isn't Tarzan. It is a different franchise even if they share a similarp pulp aspect.

Can anyone honestly watch Raiders, TOD, Last Crusade (or even KOTCS) , baring in mind their mehanics and contents, and say someting such as a fire breathing dragon or giant man eating snake that spits you up alive seems like its part of the same franchise? Indy is on that border where it can include outlandish segments - plummting from a plane/falling down 4 waterfalls, but including mythical beasts/ghoulies running around in armour and such would truly alter the franchise to another one. Yeah, we saw God's power which had angels and spirits, they had a sensible source. They didn't just come from nowhere. If they made a new film where Indy was lost in a labyrinth, I would not expect to see a CGI rendered Minator chasing after him. It could be done, but Indy tends to be about finding remains and not the actual living source. I'd be more thrilled to see him find some bones or remains or statues, implying a fire breathing dragon, or minator once existed. I get more of a chill, and thrill, seeing Indy walking where something Godly and unworldy once ruled or stood, over being face to face with it. Hate to say it, but too much creature wise and it really would seem like "The Mummy". The original film had mummys - fair enough. But the new one has dragons and alsorts, and really isn't quite what The Mummy is about.

Same with "Fate of Atlantis", horned humanoid "higher beings"looking a bit like like cows, were praised as Gods. Statues were made of them, bones where people had tried to turn themselves in to them. Any of this, "real life"? Not really, but it doesn't stop me enjoying it. But this method, remais over the actual living beasts, it left room for thought. It seems like a lost, ancient civiziliation, we don't see any of these humanoids walking aroumd giving Indy issues. We just see their remains and the haunting facts and evidence these beings were once around.

 

[UltimateManGod]

Although I still think certain scenes looked very out of place for an Indy film, ie. the crater breaking apart at the end and filling with water, I was pleasantly surprised to see the majority of the film was done the old fashioned way with CGI for touch ups! The making of docs on the KOTCS DVD were very enlightening, because up until this point I assumed a great deal more of the film was done with CGI! The slicker look of KOTCS plus Kaminski's cinematography only exacerbated this!

Yeah, watching the production diaries made me feel there was a lot less CGI than many people thought was present. Indy smashing through the crates and the Akator trap door scene ar ethe ones that really stuck out for me.

 

[emtiem]

If i did subscribe to that, I wouldn't like the franchise at all. Indy does have a supernatural element to it, but it's never been pure, all out fantasy, with skeletons coming to life wielding swords, dragons breathing fire or mummys running down corridors. And a giant snake eating him would be part of that "too far out" element,and as it stands, Mola Ram may as well have popped out of the crocodiles mouth and said "Im ok!" if we go down that path too far.

Mola Ram pulled hearts out of guys while they were alive and had a set of magic glowing rocks- not the best example! A giant snake seems just fine to me.

"Tarzan did this, tazan did that!"...this isn't Tarzan. It is a different franchise even if they share a similarp pulp aspect.

'Now ya gettin' nasty!'. Come on- play nice.

Can anyone honestly watch Raiders, TOD, Last Crusade (or even KOTCS) , baring in mind their mehanics and contents, and say someting such as a fire breathing dragon or giant man eating snake that spits you up alive seems like its part of the same franchise?

If it works, yeah. I don't want to see the same thing over and again with Nazis and tank chases for ever. Why not take it to another level? I'd agree that he shouldn't be going up to space and meeting God etc. but I think there's a level of pulp fun to be had. I can picture Indy on the front of any number of those pulp comics from the early 20th century. Hell, I'd like to see him meeting robots, even.

Indy is on that border where it can include outlandish segments - plummting from a plane/falling down 4 waterfalls, but including mythical beasts/ghoulies running around in armour and such would truly alter the franchise to another one. Yeah, we saw God's power which had angels and spirits, they had a sensible source. They didn't just come from nowhere. If they made a new film where Indy was lost in a labyrinth, I would not expect to see a CGI rendered Minator chasing after him. It could be done, but Indy tends to be about finding remains and not the actual living source. I'd be more thrilled to see him find some bones or remains or statues, implying a fire breathing dragon, or minator once existed. I get more of a chill, and thrill, seeing Indy walking where something Godly and unworldy once ruled or stood, over being face to face with it. Hate to say it, but too much creature wise and it really would seem like "The Mummy". The original film had mummys - fair enough. But the new one has dragons and alsorts, and really isn't quite what The Mummy is about.

I think you should stay away from feeling like The Mummy purely because it's the Mummy. Whole armies of undead folk rising up or even a baddie from another time would be too Mummy-ish, yeah. But there's a whole lot else, and I wouldn't mind them having fun with the world he's in a bit.

 

[Benraianajones]

Mola Ram pulled hearts out of guys while they were alive and had a set of magic glowing rocks- not the best example! A giant snake seems just fine to me.



If it works, yeah. I don't want to see the same thing over and again with Nazis and tank chases for ever. Why not take it to another level? I'd agree that he shouldn't be going up to space and meeting God etc. but I think there's a level of pulp fun to be had. I can picture Indy on the front of any number of those pulp comics from the early 20th century. Hell, I'd like to see him meeting robots, even.


I think you should stay away from feeling like The Mummy purely because it's the Mummy. Whole armies of undead folk rising up or even a baddie from another time would be too Mummy-ish, yeah. But there's a whole lot else, and I wouldn't mind them having fun with the world he's in a bit.

Mola Ram uses black magic and supernatural powers - a staple of Indiana movies, since Raiders and the ark's power. Being gobbled up by a snake, or crocodile would not involve supernatural powers and that is how they differ. Both unrealistic or not, even Indy has its rules. Just because something can use unrealistic elements doesn't mean it should include all angles of unrealism in it.

Actually, in The Fate Of Atlantis, Indy does kind of meet ancient designed robots, made by the Atlanteans, out of stone and some "higher technology". I would not mind that, they don't talk or bleep, they are more tools to open doors and act as simple guards that stomp up and down outside cells to scare the prisoners locked away so they attempt no escape. But talking bleeping robots, no thanks.

"Its pulp, it should be fun" gets said a lot, but...Indiana is fun, even without having to resort to giant snakes and dragons and such. And we don't always see Indy doing Nazi tank chases, we see that in one movie, in KOTCS, he races Russians through a jungle, we get the ants and other things. It is fun. Like I say, only part that taints it is the tarzan swing because it just isn't needed and does seem totally un-Indiana Jones. But, generally Indiana Jones will always be about Indy and his enemy team having some form of race to a goal, that is the main structure of the franchise.

 

[Darth Vile]

Mola Ram uses black magic and supernatural powers - a staple of Indiana movies, since Raiders and the ark's power. Being gobbled up by a snake, or crocodile would not involve supernatural powers and that is how they differ. Both unrealistic or not, even Indy has its rules. Just because something can use unrealistic elements doesn't mean it should include all angles of unrealism in it.

Actually, in The Fate Of Atlantis, Indy does kind of meet ancient designed robots, made by the Atlanteans, out of stone and some "higher technology". I would not mind that, they don't talk or bleep, they are more tools to open doors and act as simple guards that stomp up and down outside cells to scare the prisoners locked away so they attempt no escape. But talking bleeping robots, no thanks.

"Its pulp, it should be fun" gets said a lot, but...Indiana is fun, even without having to resort to giant snakes and dragons and such. And we don't always see Indy doing Nazi tank chases, we see that in one movie, in KOTCS, he races Russians through a jungle, we get the ants and other things. It is fun. Like I say, only part that taints it is the tarzan swing because it just isn't needed and does seem totally un-Indiana Jones. But, generally Indiana Jones will always be about Indy and his enemy team having some form of race to a goal, that is the main structure of the franchise.

I see where you are coming from. It's a fine and fuzzy line though... For me, KOTCS just about managed to stay the right side of that line (and is better for it). If we'd have seen giant ants (as in 10 feet tall) or aliens blasting washington with laser guns... that would have probably been a step too far for me.

 

[Benraianajones]

I see where you are coming from. It's a fine and fuzzy line though... For me, KOTCS just about managed to stay the right side of that line (and is better for it). If we'd have seen giant ants (as in 10 feet tall) or aliens blasting washington with laser guns... that would have probably been a step too far for me.

I agree, KOTCS just managed to stay on the right side of it. Ants I dont mind them being CGI and "doing a bit more" than bugs in the other movies. When I heard "giant ants are in it" I thought "Oh no? Giant?How big?!" Actually they were fine. At the end of the day they were ants, nothing more really

The aliens dont bother me, they are just painted in the same way as God really, a higher being, and we don't see much of them. Though I would prefer the crystal skeletons remained that way. Again, Fate of Atlantis, put across the fact of some form of alien entity existed in a more subtle and eerie way, without us needing to see one. Sometimes less is more.

 

[Major West]

Mola Ram uses black magic and supernatural powers - a staple of Indiana movies, since Raiders and the ark's power. Being gobbled up by a snake, or crocodile would not involve supernatural powers and that is how they differ. Both unrealistic or not, even Indy has its rules. Just because something can use unrealistic elements doesn't mean it should include all angles of unrealism in it.

Actually, in The Fate Of Atlantis, Indy does kind of meet ancient designed robots, made by the Atlanteans, out of stone and some "higher technology". I would not mind that, they don't talk or bleep, they are more tools to open doors and act as simple guards that stomp up and down outside cells to scare the prisoners locked away so they attempt no escape. But talking bleeping robots, no thanks.

"Its pulp, it should be fun" gets said a lot, but...Indiana is fun, even without having to resort to giant snakes and dragons and such. And we don't always see Indy doing Nazi tank chases, we see that in one movie, in KOTCS, he races Russians through a jungle, we get the ants and other things. It is fun. Like I say, only part that taints it is the tarzan swing because it just isn't needed and does seem totally un-Indiana Jones. But, generally Indiana Jones will always be about Indy and his enemy team having some form of race to a goal, that is the main structure of the franchise.

You can't accept one thing and not the other. Otherwise it's double standards.

 

[Benraianajones]

You can't accept one thing and not the other. Otherwise it's double standards.

In the movie Star Wars, I wouldn't expect Indiana Jones to pop up flying a ship. Yes, you can. In Indiana Jones I would not expect Chewbacca to walk in to the Holy Grail chamber and drink from a grail. Just because a movie uses unrealism in them doesn't mean every aspect of what equals unrealistic has a place within it.

Some aspects are more Indiana Jones than others. A plain outlandish stunt like thr fridge/plane drop are pushing it, but you laugh. Supernatural elements such as what is at the end of the movies, yeah, thats in check, that is what Indy is about.

Giant snakes eating and spitting out Indy, fire breathing dragons, robots that wheel around and bring food on a plate. Nope.

Remains of giant snakes? Fair enough. Remains of dragons, ok fair enough. But never, should, or has Indy been about stumbling upon such things in a living state. It is more interesting to see Indy stumbling on remains and evoking the feeling and the fact they once roamed is more in line with IJ movies.

 

[James]

Actually, in The Fate Of Atlantis, Indy does kind of meet ancient designed robots, made by the Atlanteans, out of stone and some "higher technology"...

...and he encounters a giant snake in The Golden Fleece and Infernal Machine...crosses over into another dimension in The Emperor's Tomb...fights an army of living skeletons in The Further Adventures of Indiana Jones...etc.

In other words, Indy has always been represented as a pulp hero on par with Doc Savage, Tarzan, or Conan. Some of his craziest adventures were featured in the original comic line. I can't imagine how fans today would react to those comics, especially since- at the time- Raiders was still the only film in the series!

But I'm not really trying to single you out here, since I think we all seem to be on the same page. There's definitely a point at which you can go overboard. I think the key lies in how the idea is presented. For example, I always thought Indy witnessing flying saucer battles was going too far. But having him glimpse a ufo over some Mesoamerican ruins felt just right.

So while I agree with you about Darabont's snake scene, I wouldn't rule out a giant snake altogether. You can't send Indy to Russia and have him encounter a giant snake for no reason. However, if they decide to continue the B movie idea and use the Garden of Eden as a Macguffin...then a giant snake begins to sound pretty inspired...

 

[Benraianajones]

...and he encounters a giant snake in The Golden Fleece and Infernal Machine...crosses over into another dimension in The Emperor's Tomb...fights an army of living skeletons in The Further Adventures of Indiana Jones...etc.


So while I agree with you about Darabont's snake scene, I wouldn't rule out a giant snake altogether. You can't send Indy to Russia and have him encounter a giant snake for no reason. However, if they decide to continue the B movie idea and use the Garden of Eden as a Macguffin...then a giant snake begins to sound pretty inspired...

Keep the giant snake and such to games/comics - the actual movies have never been about giant snakes gobbling him up. Remember where the Jones franchises started, despite the ideas that concieved it, Raiders. The films should not be borrowing extremes from comics and video games, in fact usually converting games to films and the other way around end up bad.

Just because he enounters monsters and meets Marduk and goes to other dimensions in comics/games (which are made more extreme because they can be), it doesn't mean anyone should decide "Hey! In Indy 5, we will have a huge dragon made of fire chase him! Then also, a monster made of ice than runs on 2 arms!"...there is a borderline where Indy can easily go too far in the movies if not careful. The games and comics though, can do what they like. Though FOA does a great job of not really doing anything extreme, it seems like Raider's style, or LC's, that is why it is so good. The only supernatural element is Sophia's necklace giving her vague psychic powers due to it containing Nur An Sal's spirit, wanting to get her back to Atlantis to regain control, and the God Machine. Nothing else is that unworldly about it, other than the God entities, that we never seen. Nothing extreme at all is really seen. In fact I was let down when Infernal Machine went so extreme, and Marduk combined with Sophia at the end...

When I played Infernal Machine I thought "its a good game, but the movies have never been this far-out, including monsters made of ice and things, but its fine for the games, they need to do something to make it on par for a video game". And that is where things like that should stay for Indy.

 

[James]

Keep the giant snake and such to games/comics - the actual movies have never been about giant snakes gobbling him up. Remember where the Jones franchises started, despite the ideas that concieved it, Raiders.

I'm just not a big fan of the "it's never been like that before" argument. If it had been up to the fans, TOD would've just been a Raiders Redux.

I agree with you up to a point, but I think there's far more room for creativity and imagination than many fans allow. I don't think Indy needs to be swallowed by a snake. But encountering a giant snake is something that could probably be done. Now, I don't mean to suggest a snake so big that it covers the screen- which may be what you're referring to. But if you sent Indy to the Garden of Eden, most audiences would probably be expecting him to run into the granddaddy of all serpents.

Even though the series began with Raiders, I don't think it should be confined there. The comics and games obviously have a great deal of freedom, but it doesn't mean the films were always meant to be realistic. Look at what we almost got in the wake of Raiders: Ghosts, flying saucers with death rays, and gorillas battling Nazis. Lucas obviously never intended his creation to be confined to a mundane reality.

 

[Benraianajones]

I'm just not a big fan of the "it's never been like that before" argument. If it had been up to the fans, TOD would've just been a Raiders Redux.

The comics and games obviously have a great deal of freedom, but it doesn't mean the films were always meant to be realistic. Look at what we almost got in the wake of Raiders: Ghosts, flying saucers with death rays, and gorillas battling Nazis. Lucas obviously never intended his creation to be confined to a mundane reality.

Why is it, we need giant snakes and over the top creatures to keep Indy fresh and entertaining? That isn't the answer. Why would Indy be mundane just beause he doesn't encounter a dragon made of fire? Just because extremes such as this aren't used, does it mean we aren't exploring further than Raiders. That is why games and comics exist, to take things further. But it doesn't mean the extremes of these need to then be put in an Indy movie to better it.

But hey, if people can seriously watch a new Indy film cosisting of snakes eating eating spitting him out, firey dragons, battling marduk in another dimension, ice creatures and such, and say "Hey, this is what Indy is about", then whatever. Stray too far and you get, essentially a totally different franchise, and that is where you get fans dropping out of the fun adventure.

I wouldn't mind a large snake encountered, but within limits of large. Nothing too huge. For example, the size of a Whale.