logo Sign In

lordjedi

User Group
Members
Join date
8-Jun-2005
Last activity
9-Apr-2015
Posts
1,640

Post History

Post
#321174
Topic
Robert Harris Godfather Restoration WHY cannot lucas restore the oot ?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/321174/action/topic#321174
Time
Fang Zei said:

Thedigitalbits broke the news that the Godfather films will almost certainly be hitting blu-ray on 9/23.

An unaltered restoration of the Godfather films will hopefully help Lucas get the picture.


If the latest Blade Runner release didn't help Lucas "get the picture" what makes you think a Godfather restoration will? This is a serious question. The Blade Runner set is, in my opinion, exactly the way Star Wars should be released. He could even do the same options. A "final cut" of the 6 Star Wars movies, a slightly bigger set that includes the original unaltered versions completely remastered, and then possibly a final set that includes the workprint (or maybe just the version with the Biggs scene), if any, of ANH. Since the difference between the original release of Star Wars and the first rerelease is only a minor change to the crawl (might be some audio stuff too, not sure) then a seemless branched DVD would be perfect for that.

Of course, a "Final Cut" of the 6 movies probably wouldn't work for Lucas since he'd want to change them again in a few years. And, as the name suggests, a final cut is final. That shouldn't stop him from simply releasing a "Director's Cut" though.

I bought the briefcase version of Blade Runner so there's obviously a market for that type of set. There is nothing stopping Lucas from doing something similar. He simply doesn't want to do it. In my opinion, every classic movie could get the "Blade Runner treatment" and it wouldn't change Lucas' mind one bit.
Post
#321172
Topic
Crystall Skull has GL's fingerprints all over it
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/321172/action/topic#321172
Time
CO said:

I look at movie like Bladerunner, and then a movie like AOTC, and you tell me which one is more realistic? The CGI Coruscant Greenscreen Environment or the urban gritty look of the city in Bladerunner?


I think that would depend on what someone is looking for. If I'm looking for a gleaming city with tall spires and rounded buildings, Coruscant is the epitome of that. If I'm looking for a gritty, metropolitan area, with a bunch of downtrodden people, then downtown LA is the perfect location for that. Sure, you could build Coruscant as a model, but I'm sure it would take much longer to do with very little reward.

But what if I'm looking for a water planet where it's always raining as in the case of Kamino? Aside from building a huge tank, it just can't be done in a controlled environment. That's the key in some of these cases. Sure, you could do something like it 75 years ago, but you wouldn't get nearly the same effect. It would cost millions to either 1) build a tank and then build set pieces on the water or 2) build sets out on the open ocean and then deal with the environment as things change. Look at what happened with WaterWorld. They had to rebuild the set several times because they were filming out in the open water. Would it have looked any different with CG? I don't know. Would it have been possible with a tank? Not likely since the area they needed was so huge. Even The Abyss had to use a huge tank so they could control what was going on and so the people would look like they were under water.

The point is that sometimes it's more practical and safe to use CG then it is to try to use a real environment where you end up putting peoples lives in danger. But I guess from your perspective they should either 1) simply not use that environment or 2) keep it real anyway.

I get the feeling that if Jaws were made today, Spielberg would use a CG shark. The movie probably wouldn't do as well, but I attribute that to today's viewers rather than whether the shark is CG or a model. The story wouldn't change, so it really wouldn't matter if the shark was CG or not. And he could get a feel for whether or not what he was attempting would look better with a model right on the spot. A reversed situation would be that if Jurassic Park had been done with models, it probably would've looked lame. Since they were able to put a bunch of Dinosaurs on screen at once with CG, it actually made the movie far better.
Post
#321046
Topic
Crystall Skull has GL's fingerprints all over it
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/321046/action/topic#321046
Time
zombie84 said:

That said, the CGI in Crystal Skull is very tastefully done, except for the jungle chase--thats the most "unreal" part of the film, and its especially frustrating because theres absolutely no reason why it should be the most unreal, they could have easily done it better without using CG and if this movie was filmed in 1981 it would look every bit as realistic as the truck chase in Raiders.


According to that interview with Spielberg that was posted, they couldn't do the jungle chase practically because it simply wasn't safe. They couldn't find a jungle dense enough that allowed them to safely drive through at the speeds they wanted. So instead, they chose a less dense jungle and then added extra foliage. I guess I just didn't notice it nearly as much as everyone else.

CO said:

For me, the negatives of CGI is when the whole screen IS CGI! It just comes off as a cartoon, and for me, it is when guys like Lucas and many other directors these days, use these fake CGI environments that look like something different then we have every seen: Kamino, Utapau, Geonosis, but just don't hold up well, because....they aren't real environments.


So what you're saying is that if a director is envisioning a certain environment that simply doesn't exist, rather than do it with CGI the director should just throw their vision out the window and compromise everything in order to do it "realistically"? The problem I had with the prequels wasn't the "unreal" looking environments, it was the non story. Lucas could've shown us the most amazing, can't find this anywhere on Earth environments and if the story had been good, I wouldn't have given a shit if the environments were 100% CG. My biggest beef is simply the fact that most of the story elements in the PT didn't match up with the OT, which shouldn't have been that hard to do.

If there's a good story to the movie, it shouldn't matter if the environment is 100% CG or not. Sky Captain was heavily CG, but it had a great story too so that didn't matter.
Post
#321044
Topic
Crystall Skull has GL's fingerprints all over it
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/321044/action/topic#321044
Time
Fang Zei said:

LFL announced at least three years ago that it's supporting blu-ray, so I wouldn't be surprised if we saw all of the Indy movies (which would only be the second blu-ray release of any of Spielberg's films) and the new Clone Wars movie hit the format this fall.


Actually, if I'm not mistaken, what they said was that the format war needed to end soon and if it didn't they were going to seriously consider hi-def downloads. That was actually sometime last year if memory serves and it was said by McCallum. They were asked again after Warner went Blu-ray exclusive and the industry suddenly swung completely to Blu-ray in one month. They still haven't provided a direct answer other than that nothing was being planned at the moment.

You're right that we don't talk about it much because there hasn't been much news. I still stand by my opinion that if they do release Star Wars on Blu-ray, it's going to be the SEs or an even more tweaked version. I am holding no hope for a hi-def version of the OOT ever being released by LFL.
Post
#321042
Topic
Star Tours 2.0: A Podrace....
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/321042/action/topic#321042
Time
RRS-1980 said:

****. This was the only attraction I ever wanted to see if I ended up in Disneyland.

If they keep going in that direction, why don't they replace Mickey Mouse? "It's soooo old-fashioned", too :(
And to be frank with you, I've once glimpsed Donald Duck yelling "Sieg Heil!"... do I need to add anything more?


Maybe because Mickey Mouse is iconic of Disneyland? And the old Donald Duck Sieg Heil thing is from an old classic Disney cartoon. I'm pretty sure it was done as satire (that hasn't stopped it from being taken out of context though) and that it will never see the light of day outside of fan preservations. Much like Song of the South may never see the light of day.
Post
#320379
Topic
Apple/Mac thread
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/320379/action/topic#320379
Time
[quote=Jay]
ChainsawAsh said:

It's great to be out and about, decide you want eat, search for a restaurant, touch the phone number to call, and make a reservation.


You know you can do that with 800-Goog411 as well, right? Just call that number, give it your zip code, and tell it what you're looking for. Not to mention that if you're "out and about", a restaurant is probably very close by.

The iPhone is a nice phone, I'll give you that. And now it's reasonably priced.
Post
#319826
Topic
Web comics
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/319826/action/topic#319826
Time
sean wookie said:

4chan is having a field day shopping the comic.


Since 4chan is nothing but a bunch of retarded adolescents, that's not surprising. It's also nothing to worry about.

I agree with TipTup on the whole pedo thing. I didn't find anything except that he locked down some forums based on a rumor. Probably not the smartest thing to do, but they were his forums.

sean wookie said:

Shop I made.


[sarcasm] Your talent is astounding Sean. [/sarcasm]
Post
#319762
Topic
The Atheism thread
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/319762/action/topic#319762
Time
ChainsawAsh said:

I just don't understand why you WOULDN'T want your children to get immunized for it, really ... it's an extra step to preventing said preventable disease, and just because your daughter might not have sex until she's 20 doesn't mean she magically can't get it. It's just a lowered risk. Why wouldn't you want to take an extra step to prevent it if that step is available?


Well for starters, as with all vaccines, there are risks involved. Why get vaccinated for something that's totally preventable without the vaccine? This website spells it out perfectly:

http://www.planetc1.com/cgi-bin/n/v.cgi?c=1&id=1174623074

And second, again, whether or not you understand why I don't want my kids to have it (I'm an example now, since I don't have any daughters and my wife sees no reason to get it) is irrelevant. The simple fact is that we neither need or want it. Therefore, the state has no business telling us we have to do it. Make it available all you want. The people that want it can get it. Those that don't, don't.

This is not a public safety issue. The reason children are given certain immunizations before they're allowed in public school is quite simply for public safety. If we didn't immunize children against measles or whatever disease, if one kid got it you'd have an outbreak. HPV cannot do such a thing (it's not contagious).
Post
#319761
Topic
Web comics
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/319761/action/topic#319761
Time
Haha. Um, no, web comics are not serious business (I'm sure you're trying to be sarcastic here, but you're failing miserably again). You didn't make it like the rest of the comics though. The other ones are actually funny. Maybe you don't find them funny because you don't like to read. To much text, not enough pictures for your feeble mind?

Some comics are good with no text. Some need more in order to get the joke across. And others will still not be funny or serious if they're not in context. You failed on all three accounts.
Post
#319742
Topic
The Atheism thread
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/319742/action/topic#319742
Time
ChainsawAsh said:

lordjedi said:

California recently tried to require parents to give their kids immunization for cervical cancer. Cervical cancer usually comes about the younger you start having sex. The older you get, like over 20 or 22, the lower (much lower) your chances. The State has no business pushing its bullshit agenda on those of us that don't want it or need it.


Why the hell is it a bad thing to get an immunization for a deadly disease?


Did I say it was a bad thing? I don't recall saying that. What I said is that the government has no business pushing it on people that don't want it. Cervical cancer is preventable (don't have sex at a young age and you likely won't get it). If you want to get your 13 year old the immunization, go for it. But don't make my kid get it when we feel it's unnecessary. It's not like you're going to catch cervical cancer from somebody's kid. Cervical cancer isn't chicken pocks or measles. The easiest way to get it is to have sex at a young age. The easiest way to prevent it is to not have sex at a young age.

zombie84 said:

Tiptup I am aware of all the issue you are bringing up, if you read my original post my point was "if something you do harms no one, nor harms society, then why punish someone for it?", which is really as far as I wished that simplistic "live and let live" sentiment to be taken. You don't need to turn that into anything more than it is.


But what can you possibly do that has no effect on anyone else? This is a serious question. I've thought of a few things, but the moment you have any interaction with anyone beside yourself, there is an effect. Everything has what I call a "blast radius". The blast radius can be good or bad (it's generally considered bad). Generally speaking, the more off track a person gets, the larger the blast radius.

So please, give us an example of something you can do that doesn't harm anyone or society.
Post
#319740
Topic
Web comics
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/319740/action/topic#319740
Time
sean wookie said:


If you didn't notice I was joking. Also tim buckley doesn't know how to draw a pregnent woman and all his faces look the same and you can't understand internet sarcasm. I fixed the strip though.


You're still an idiot.

First, a pregnant woman doesn't even look pregnant until the 3rd trimester is coming to an end. Second, on his own page he said that when he first experienced a miscarriage it didn't bother him since his relationship, at the time, was pretty destructive. He then went on to say that people who are in good relationships will take it much harder than those that aren't. Do you read that comic daily? I didn't have to go back very far to see that they were planning a wedding.

Finally, you didn't "fix" anything. You turned into something Lucas would turn out these days. You completely took all the thought out of the comic (a comic that, when viewed in context, needed no text) and turned it into something completely lame.

BTW, take a look at most comics and/or anime. A lot of the characters look the same, even on different series. That's because the same animator draws everything in the same style.

I understand internet sarcasm just fine. It's usually best to include some type of smily or the [sarcasm][/sarcasm] tags. Unless of course you're retarded.
Post
#319719
Topic
Web comics
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/319719/action/topic#319719
Time
OMG, so you did completely miss the point of the "comic".

The one you posted isn't even suppose to be funny you idiot. Did you even read the spoiler page he posted? For those that won't bother to go check, the comic above is about a miscarriage. Of course, it makes no sense at all the way it's posted because it's completely out of context. ctrl+alt+delete also isn't always suppose to be funny. It's a comic about a guy that happens to also be a gamer. It's essentially a comic about his life.

Geezus sean you really are an idiot.
Post
#319717
Topic
The Atheism thread
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/319717/action/topic#319717
Time
MeBeJedi said:

Not only that, but doing it every morning in school, before every council meeting....etc, etc. It makes it little more than a procedure that everyone is supposed to follow, rather than something meaningful.


Only because that's the way it's treated. Explain it to people at an early age. Deconstruct it for them. Go through it line by line. Once that's done, it becomes something more meaningful. Feel free to blame the educational system for not treating it properly.

A friend of mine that was in the Marines now comes to attention whenever he hears the national anthem. I'm pretty sure he didn't do that before being a Marine. It's not "procedure" to him, it's a sign of respect.

Arnie.d said:

In Holland we now have this discussion if it's allowed to check eggs for a breast cancer gene and put eggs without it back. Now these so called pro life motherfuckers object ofcourse. I know this girl who saw her two sisters die before they were 30 years because of inherital breast cancer leaving 2 husbands and 4 kids behind. She had her breast and uterus removed before she could develop cancer because she also had the gene and didn't want to leave her kids and husband behind. Now there is a possibility to prevent all this shit and what happens, these you know who want to prevent legislation for allowing this procedure.



They usually object because it can't always be done with destroying the life. Ron and Nancy Reagan have been huge proponents of embryonic stem cell research, even though Ronald Reagan would have been vehemently opposed to it. Killing one life in order to preserve another should never be considered "progress". New advancements are being made in adult stem cell research (which poses no threat to the unborn) that are starting to render embryonic research unnecessary.

California recently tried to require parents to give their kids immunization for cervical cancer. Cervical cancer usually comes about the younger you start having sex. The older you get, like over 20 or 22, the lower (much lower) your chances. The State has no business pushing its bullshit agenda on those of us that don't want it or need it.

And Sky, I wouldn't call the founding fathers cultists. They were deists. Even Ben Franklin, an Atheist, called for prayer during a heated discussion at one point. Washington, who did not attend church regularly, even stated that it is good for the people to follow some form of religion (Methodist, Evangelical, etc, etc). That wasn't "to keep them in line". I believe he felt it necessary for people to answer to a higher power so they wouldn't fall into an "it's all about me" mentality.
Post
#319544
Topic
Crystall Skull has GL's fingerprints all over it
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/319544/action/topic#319544
Time
zombie84 said:

If your library has 100, 000 titles you want preserved, at roughly 200 GB per film thats 20 000 000 GB. But you can't have just one, because digital data is so easily corrupted, you would make a back up, so now its 40 000 000 GB. Not only do you have to pay the huge electric bill to keep those millions of hard drives spinning, you have to have a guy checking and maintaining them, and becase hard drives only have a lifespan of about 2 or 3 years, that means all 40 000 000 GB has to be back up almost bi-annually. Thats an enormous effort, not to mention a huge cost (just the act of telecining them alone would cost near a billion dollars).


I don't know where you get your numbers for hard drives, but it's definitely not accurate. I've got crappy IDE drives here that are 5+ years old and they're still ticking. And besides that, you obviously wouldn't store a single movie on a single hard drive. You'd use an array (RAID 5 anyone?). Shit, use RAID 5 with a hot spare for even more protection. The likelihood of having two drives go down at the same time in an array is pretty rare, but it can happen. That's why you use the hot spare. And on top of all that, yes, you'd still backup to tape, but tapes can very easily be tested for data integrity. You could even use mirrored RAID 5 arrays. You can also have redundant discs. And don't forget that you can get drives as small as 2.5" now that have huge capacities (500 GB+ per disc). So finding space for all those drives isn't going to be nearly the problem you make it out to be.

RRS-1980 said:

There is also another thing - and I'm surprised that noone mentioned it yet. Format compatibility. Reels can be "read" even after 50 years without problems here, but can you say the same about computer data? Ever tried to run 20-year-old program on modern system? Or imagine that you have to use those big 5+ inch floppies today - do you still use that obsolete drive in your 'puter?
Just like zombie said, it would require them to periodically "update" the hardware/software format the data is stored. And that costs $.


Maybe for a Hollywood studio with billions of dollars, but what do you do when the "reader" is no longer being produced? You'll at the very least have to build something to read it. Digital data is no different in that respect. As long as studios use open formats (mpeg2, mpeg4, VC-1), anybody can read the spec and write a program to read the file.

To answer your questions, yes I have. A 20 year old program will actually function just fine running in FreeDOS (I'll assume it's DOS based if it's 20 years old). As far as 5.25" floppies go, yes, I have had to hook those up in the past few years and pull data off them. Most of the time when data is left on media like that, it's because they've transitioned to another format and forgotten about the old stuff. I'd say a majority of the time, they don't end up needing what's on them anyway. I've done my share of rescuing data from 3.5" floppies, zip disks, and 5.25" floppies. As long as I was able to get a drive, most of the data was easily recovered. But none of those formats would be an issue now or in the foreseeable future. Everyone is moving to hard drive based storage, so all you'd have to do is move your entire data store into a larger capacity array as your needs grow (or as interfaces change). With the billions of dollars Hollywood has and the large IT staff, this shouldn't be a problem at all. They're already spending the money to increase storage everytime they work on a movie and do any CG to it. So it's not really an added cost.
Post
#319338
Topic
Crystall Skull has GL's fingerprints all over it
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/319338/action/topic#319338
Time
skyjedi2005 said:

Also film is archival digitally stored video is not.

I'm surprised nobody is shocked that the prequels and special editions being stored in this way is utterly foolish unless George Had them bounce the digital video back to film for archival purposes.


I don't know where you get this idea from. Film decays over time. Digitally stored video (think of an array of hard drives) will look the same in 10 years that it does today. Do you think LFL doesn't have redundant discs? They have all kinds of redundant storage and backups. As long as they keep moving the data to new storage as new media becomes available (large drives, larger optical media, larger tapes, etc), there will be no loss at all.

I have data on mirrored drives that goes back 10 years, possibly longer. If one drive fails, I simply replace it and I'm good to go. That's all digitally stored (1s and 0s) so it's all archival. I even have video on DV tapes that still looks the same today as it did when it was shot, just about 10 years ago. Assuming I get the video off the tape and onto a hard drive, I don't have to worry about the tape degrading.

Bouncing the digital video to film wouldn't do any good in the case of the PT anyway. They were shot in 1080p, so storing it on hard drives would be just as good, if not better, as storing it on film.
Post
#319337
Topic
Indiana Jones IV
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/319337/action/topic#319337
Time
canofhumdingers said:

While i know you probably didn't mean it, i actually found this rather insulting. I fenced for four years in college learning all three olympic weapons (foil, epee, & sabre). I've taken kendo (japanese fencing derived from samurai fighting techniques) for two years & still actively train with both the Minneapolis Kendo club & the Memphis Kendo club (when i'm in town down there). I know exactly how long a real sword fight would last. Sword fights in movies are almost never realistic b/c they wouldn't be very exciting to the general populace who has no idea that a real fight would last about 2 seconds once the opponents made a move. I can accept that & enjoy a good swashbuckling fight. The part of the scene that bugged me was not the sword fight, but the splits between moving vehicles while getting thumped in the nads. it wasn't an exciting sword fight, it was a childish circus act. It's possible to make a great movie that appeals to people of all ages without being childish & that's what i was hoping for. Unfortunately, it didn't happen, imo.


Well, I agree that it was a bit childish, but at the same time I thought it was kind of funny. Here you have this greaser that has some experience with a sword and while fighting an expert swordsman, he ends up getting whacked in the nads because he's standing on two moving vehicles. Yeah, I think that's a little funny. It's a hell of a lot funnier than seeing Jar Jar get kicked in the nuts (with no reaction) by a little droid.


canofhumdingers said:

I can see why you might say that about my post, but it's really not the case. I went into this movie with fairly low expectations, but i still had high hopes. Like when i walked into the theater for each prequel, i WANTED to like this movie so much! I WANTED it to be as much fun as the others. But then it wasn't & that left me disappointed, just as i feared i would be but hoped i wouldn't.


For me, I walked into this movie with low expectations and no hopes of any kind. I'm sorry you felt that way about the prequels. After TPM, I had extremely low expectations for the rest of the series. The only minor redeeming qualities were found in ROTS. I think I'm definitely going to have to watch Indy 4 again to see if it grows on me.

canofhumdingers said:

the thing is, with some minor edits & tweaks & someone ballsy enough to tell them to stop using so much CGI, i think it could've been a really good IJ adventure. Not great like Raiders, but as good as any of the sequels. That just makes it even more disappointing to me.


The only thing I'd remove is the gratuitous pan down to the Ark. It's one of the only things I had a problem with. The theme when entering the warehouse is all that's needed.

canofhumdingers said:

i really don't hate lucas(he DID make some of the greatest films ever), it's just that all the things that really killed this movie for me just feel so much like his influence. The gophers? the car race opening? the tarzan swinging? the ridiculous amounts of unconvincing cgi? tell me you don't see Lucas in every one of those


Every one of them? No actually, I don't. The gophers? Could've easily been a Lucas/Spielberg thing. The car race and greasers vs jocks in the diner? Lucas. Tarzan swinging? I'm not sure, since it didn't have the Tarzan yell that we're all familiar with from ROTJ and ROTS. The CGI? Every film has that these days, so I'm not going to pin that on Lucas. To be perfectly honest, I hardly notice the CGI these days anyway unless it looks really ridiculous (like Spiderman). I'm just not totally against CGI like most of the people here seem to be. Most of you say it's unconvincing, but I think most of you would say that whether it was convincing or not.

You guys seem to think that the movie would've been so much better if they had just used old fashion models instead of CGI. Uh, the story would be the same. If that were the only difference then I think it would simply look like crap. Just because someone uses models instead of CGI doesn't automatically make the movie look any better. It makes the movie cost more, but that's about it. As long as the story is good, it doesn't matter how much or how little CGI there is. Conversely, if the story sucks, no amount of models will suddenly make it great.
Post
#319154
Topic
Indiana Jones IV
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/319154/action/topic#319154
Time
I saw this last night. While watching it, I kept trying to remember the things that some of you say you didn't like. canofhumdingers is the post I remembered most vividly, so I'm going to use it to address my thoughts on what was liked/not liked.

canofhumdingers said:

The things that really ruined it for me were things like the stupid hot rod race at the beginning... what was that? it served no purpose but to look cool. ok, that happens sometimes in adventure films, but usually the "looking cool" sequences at least involve key characters or have SOME sort of relation to the story at large. This HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH ANYTHING ELSE IN THE MOVIE. It was just there b/c Lucas likes hotrod racing.


Apparently we both saw different movies. The hotrod race was their to introduce the Russians (or did that just completely go over your head?) as well as show the time period (am I the only one that figured out immediately that it was 1950's Nevada, somewhere outside Vegas?). Good God people. Yeah, it was a bit of a nod to American Graffiti courtesy of Lucas, but then again, so were a bunch of other scenes.

canofhumdingers said:

The gophers.... Oh my gosh, what the heck?!? Once again, totally pointless & out of place in the context of the movie itself, & definately in the context of the series.


Simple comic relief. The first gopher hole we see is in place of the Paramount mountain. Just like in Raiders when we see that mountain in place of the Paramount mountain. I'm pretty sure they did the same thing in ToD and Last Crusade. Do gophers usually live in the desert? I'm not sure, but it didn't bother me that much.

canofhumdingers said:

The way the gunpowder traveled in a perfectly level to the floor path that winded around the crates. This was just bizarre. The exact same thing could have been done in a much more beleiveable manner to the same (well, better) effect.


Uh, I don't know how you could've made this believable. My first thought was "Would that even work?". Looks to me like Mythbusters is going to have a lot of movie Myths to work on in the coming years. This was the first scene that I went "um, yeah, I don't think so".

canofhumdingers said:

The very inconsistent magnetic attraction of said crate. It pulls some guys' guns, but not the guns on the backs of the guys carrying the crate??? This, again was not a bad idea, just executed poorly & sloppily.


And I guess it wasn't possible that those guys tightened their gun straps? Give me a break. It was very obviously pulling on everything and there's no reason to believe that they didn't simply tighten the straps beforehand.

canofhumdingers said:

THE MONKEY SWINGING MUTT! UGH!! that was pure Lucas garbage at its worst.


Again, it was a little lame, but nothing that ruined the movie for me.

canofhumdingers said:

The monkeys themselves. Why did they need to be CGI? THEY DIDN'T. That little bit actually could have been ok if they used like monkeys for as much of the sequence as PETA would allow. & even the mutt swinging from the trees might've been ok if it were done with real stunt work, action set peices, etc like the stunts coreographed for the first three films.


Maybe because it was cheaper to have an animator do them in the computer than it would be to get permits for wild animals and deal with PETA. I know that if I had the choice between those two things, I'd go with the computer too.

canofhumdingers said:

Same goes for the sword fight. It was lame, but it didn't have to be. It could have been pretty cool & exciting if it wasn't blatantly blue screen CGI. Seriously, would the whole drug underneath the truck & crawling all over it, running from the boulder, fighting on the tank, fighting on the rope bridge, sequences have been half as exciting if they were'nt ACTUALLY happening, but filmed in a nice safe sound stage green screen & cgi'ed together?? NO. So why couldn't we get that kind of stuff in this one??


Wait, your problem with the sword fight is that it was blue screen? HAHAHAHAHA! How about the fact that a kid with some sword fighting experience was actually standing up to a woman that seemed to be an expert with a sword? My biggest gripe is that that sword fight would've ended in about two seconds. Have you ever seen real competitive sword fighters go at it? Even those fights last mere seconds and they've been doing it for years. To have this "greaser" stand up to her for that long was just a joke. But again, I can deal with it for the purposes of a movie. It seems to me that Spielberg wanted someone to fight a swordsman at some point in one of his movies and not run away. This was that fight.

canofhumdingers said:

The wedding. Not terrible, just doesn't really fit the Jones character very well imo.


I just didn't think this scene was needed.

canofhumdingers said:

The crystal skull's power was never explained in a way that we really understood why anybody wanted it so bad. a small bit of dialogue could've easily fixed this & made the adventure resonate a little more.


I think that's because everyone with a real knowledge of the skull believed it to be nothing more than a legend. The power is never explained because no one really knows what'll happen when someone gets it.

canofhumdingers said:

The nuclear explosion fridge survival was just too over the top. I might have bought it if the fridge didn't go flying hundreds of feet through the air. Indy is escapist adventure & he survives things no man really should, but that one was a bit extreme even for him.


Yeah, that was a bit extreme. This is probably the most extreme thing in the movie.

canofhumdingers said:

The way Indy & Mutt initially get away from the KGB in the diner. Indy getting mutt to start a fight between the greasers & the jocks made me laugh. Classic Indy using his wits to get out of something on the fly.


This was the other scene I mentioned before. This was a total American Graffiti moment that was probably more inspired by Lucas than anything else.

Personally, I found the shot of the ark unnecessary. Not because I didn't like the nod, but I felt it had been done effectively enough by the music when Indy walked into the warehouse. The moment the Ark theme played, you know the Ark is in the warehouse somewhere. Besides, didn't they put the Ark into a box and then put that box into a crate?

I forgot something until just now. What the hell was with Marion's damn smile? She seemed to be enjoying herself way to much. She was smiling for about the first half of her introduction (just about until they went over the falls). It was like the danger they were in didn't even dawn on her. Maybe she was high during filming or something. I can understand being happy to see Indy, she seemed overly happy to me.

I don't really know how I feel about this one yet. It was an ok movie. Definitely not up to Raiders or Last Crusade (I actually like Last Crusade the best of the original 3). I'd have to watch ToD again. Then again, I'm not a big fan of the dining sequence with the eyeballs and insects.

I think a lot of you are simply ripping this movie apart because Lucas was involved. I don't think Crystal Skull was nearly as bad as you're making it out to be ("it was aweful!"). Even the alien reveal at the end didn't bother me that much. It kind of reminded me of ET and Close Encounters, so I'm willing to bet it was Spielberg's idea to begin with.
Post
#318839
Topic
State of the Trilogy/ annual SW depression
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/318839/action/topic#318839
Time
bkev said:

Sheesh, the old cliff looks way more realistic. The background looks nice in the new one, though.


You can't be serious. The new shot actually looks more realistic to me. Either way, both shots don't scream "OMG CGI!" like most of you are doing. Who cares if the matte painting is digital or not? I wouldn't expect anyone to hand paint a piece of glass for a shot like that these days.

To me, the shot looks a lot cleaner and a lot better now. But don't let my opinion sway you from your "OMG CGI sucks!" mentality. It may be that the shot was replaced to make it actually look good for a Blu-ray release.

The problem with the CGI tweaks that were done to Star Wars are that some of them actually changed the story (whether Lucas wants to admit that or not doesn't matter). The minor tweaks, like making the fighters more fluid in the space battles, don't bother me nearly as much as the lame tweaks like Greedo shooting first and Hayden replacing Shaw at the end of Jedi. Hell, the Greedo shooting first probably wouldn't even bother me if he hadn't missed! 3ft away and he can't hit a stationary target. He deserved to die for that alone.

Post
#318813
Topic
EU books: Thats it..
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/318813/action/topic#318813
Time
Johnboy3434 said:

lordjedi said:

Um, no. Someone who listens to others with common interests, that's who. Hence why product reviews by customers (in this case book reviews by readers) are such a powerful tool. If a product is bad, enough people bitch which causes others to not buy it because it's bad and then it fails in the market.


True, but very rare is the product that every single consumer dislikes. There are fans of just about everything. Someone who reads this thread could potentially find enjoyment in the EU, but if they listened to Cable, they'd never know it.


Yes and there are Star Wars fans who don't care how good or bad something is, they read it/watch it/listen to it/buy it. Most of those fans will probably never find their way here though. It could be absolute dreck like most of the EU (super weapon of the week anyone?) and they simply don't care. As long as it has their favorite characters, they keep on buying the books and reading them.