Lord Phillock said:
that may be true, bkev....
but tell me this... according to my observation, why is the cinematography looking very distinct and "modern" as opposed to the older "Jones" movies? Look at the shot where Indy and Mac are cornered by the soldiers. Is that digital glow I see? Also, I hate the green tint in that shot. Not very natural. The old Indy movies never had those.
THAT made me feel a bit, well, sad.
that may be true, bkev....
but tell me this... according to my observation, why is the cinematography looking very distinct and "modern" as opposed to the older "Jones" movies? Look at the shot where Indy and Mac are cornered by the soldiers. Is that digital glow I see? Also, I hate the green tint in that shot. Not very natural. The old Indy movies never had those.
THAT made me feel a bit, well, sad.
Its shot by Kaminsky. Thats his style. I actually thought it was pretty neautral. Its higher contrast than the previous films, but thats because modern taste is contrast, whereas before modern taste was more high-key (ie Raiders looks the same as ET, Jaws, Close Encounters and any other Speilberg movie of that era). I really don't think its all that distracting, its not like Minority Report or War of the Worlds or anything, I think you have to accept some degree of modern updating when you are considering an Indiana Jones sequel in the year 2008.