George Lucas is detroying franchises. STOP HIM!!

One of the big problems with GL's use of CGI is that he uses it to economise too much. CGI sets and characters where they are cheaper than the real thing. That's all well and good but I feel it impairs the actors' ability and as yet is not real enough to be 100% indistinguishable from the real thing. I'm surprised that in IJ4 SS seems to have followed suit. One interesting point about IJ4 is that it is the only one of the series to have been filmed entirely within the US. All the others had major 'on location' shoots but IJ4 used blue screen or studio sets instead. Add to that the CGI creatures where 1000's of the real things (snakes/bugs/rats) were used before and I get the feeling this film was done on the cheap some what!
 
The original IJ films were indeed just as bonkers as the new one. They just didn't have CGI in them (obv), and Lucas wasn't hated by everyone (thanks Phantom Menace, we love you too).
 
The Technical term is: Stop Motion Animation.

But yeah, there sure as Hell ain't any CGI in The Last Crusade. The Technology wasn't even around back then as far as I'm aware anyway.
 
What I really meant was that in the previous three films they globe-trotted to locations to make the films - Tunisia, Sri Lanka, Venice & Jordan. The furthest they went in IJ4 was Hawaii! I'm sure it would be very expensive & difficult to film on location in the Amazon, but plenty of other films have done so.
 
Spielberg, Ford and Lucas have been trying to get a fourth Indy pic together for well over ten years. There have been enough scripts (Indiana Jones and the Garden of Life, Indiana Jones and the Saucer Men From Mars, the [depressingly rejected and unnamed] Frank Darabont script) and false starts over the last god-knows-how-long that your assertion about Shia (who is Spielberg's wunderkind, not Lucas's) simply cannot be true. Sure, GL is a little over-excited now (an IJ film with Sheepy LeBeef in the lead will never happen, IMO), but this film has been in the works since young Shia was in short trousers.
 
And it says the scene of rapid aging/hair growing was done with morphing - which means many frames were created by the computer.

Anyhow, CGI has been around for donkey's years. From basic fractal stuff like the Genesis planet in The Wrath of Khan, to the first ever 'proper' CGI character in Young Sherlock Holmes, on to the first 3D morphing in Willow.
 
Well, I don't know if you saw that documentary about Indy 4 on BBC1 the other week, but SS said they didn't use digital sets, in fact they had more & larger sets than any of the other films.

They had no choice with the CGI ants, as they needed to act! And some of the creatures used before weren't real either. Most of the swimming rats in TLC were clockwork (and can be see to be!).
 
I don't disagree but they (I say they, we all know Lucas was the driver) plumped for the script which had Shia's character in. Lucas wants another films series and knows that a Ford led Indy series won't be realistic. If they (Lucas) truly wanted a decent Indy film, they'd have made the Darabont one a few years back when Ford and Speilberg both gave it their seal of approval.
 
I have to say I have no problem with the ants as I thought they were nicely done - the swarming technology seemed to be working really well!

The only thing I thought was too obvious was the false backgrounRAB during the amazon car chase - they didn't gel with the live action well enough at times.
 
Exactly. There's nothing in the new film that is more or less ludicrous than the older ones. It's as audacious as it's always been, and I'm glad of that. I feel much the same way about the SW prequels. Sure there's some naff acting (isn't that the series trademark, with one or two exceptions?), but I found the new ones just as much fun as the old ones. I must just be able to see something for what it is, not for what I want it to be...
 
I know what you mean, but to me they were only reminiscent of the painted backdrops in the older Indy films. It's only the same thing, just a different tool.

As for all this "Lucas raped my childhood" crap, honestly I'm am absolutely sick of hearing it. Don't blame Lucas if you no longer have the same sense of imagination you had when you were a kid. If you don't get anything from the films, then go watch something else and quit boring everyone with these threaRAB. They are done now.

Luckily for me, I loved the new Indy. I thought the new B movie stylings were great fun.
 
I've asked this question before - what is driving Mr Lucas these days? He's got more money than he can ever spend, he's completed his life's work in SW, he's had a bigger impact on the film industry than probably any other person in history, what else does he need to do?

I read an interview with him a couple of years ago after RotS and he said he'd like to return to some of his early works - small, intimate and intelligent art-house film. So, where is it? Why did he feel the need to do IJ4? Yes, he, SS and HF have all been wanting to do this for ten years... so it was just an excuse for the three of them to get together for an extended Lad's holiday? Fine, but don't inflict the results on the rest of us. What about the 2 SW TV series? Are they really necessary? I'm sure they'll be very successful and as a SW fan I'm looking forward to seeing them, but I'd not be lieing awake at night worrying if they weren't being made. The driving force is not artistic it's financial. Same with IJ4. I can only assume GL has developed such a huge organisation around him that he has to keep supplying it with work to keep bread on everyone's tables.

Basically I feel that any artistic integrity GL had has been lost a long time ago. What I'm afraid of is that SS is going the same way. HF too - he's apparentely talking about returning to the Jack Ryan franchise!
 
Lucas knows what kiRAB want. The new Indy is adored by the kiRAB. KiRAB prefer the Star Wars prequels to the original trilogy. Sure, as 30-somethings, the magic is gone and the films should not have been made but then, we'd also argue that Creme Eggs are getting smaller and Wagon Wheels used to be the size of our heaRAB.

We're growing up whether we like it or not...the Ghostbusters game coming out will sell by the cart load cause us oldies with a bit of disposable income will lap it up, remembering those heady days in the 80's when Ghostbusters was a piece of art. Yet if they made part 3, we'd all be up in arms about it.

It's time for a reality check for some of the moaners out there.
 
This is very true. People tend to get rose-tinted about things from their childhood. My nephew loves the new Star Wars films as much as I loved the old ones as a kid. At the end of the day SW is GLs project so he ca nmake it how he likes and for all those people who didn't like the prequels there will be plenty fo people who did. Lets not forget too Lucas made the prequels with his own money so he is bound to find the cheapest way to do them
 
Yeah I just wished they'd painted them - they just didn't look quite right.



Ditto. I loved it more the second time when I knew what sort of style movie to expect. I did laugh a lot today when I pointed out to a colleague (who was complaining about the fridge scene) some of the more ludicrous aspects of the first three films. I don't think people look at them as objectively as they do the new one. Raiders is probably the best film, although LC is my favourite - that has equally silly moments as the new one. And the important thing, I think, is that the character of Indy remains intact.
 
Saw it on Saturday, will never watch this film again. Was fine for first 30 minutes, I read chariots of the goRAB when I wur a lad, so I knew where it was going. It really went downhill for me at the Graveyard, didn't recover after that. I was enjoying the old Indy references (for instance, when Mutt looked at Indy on the back of the bike, Much like Indy looking at Henry Snr). Overall, never been so let down by a film.............ever. Mostly I suppose because the first 3 played a hugepart in my childhood through to late teens. In fact it was an even bigger kick in the crotch than the last 3 Star Wars films. Please no more Mr Spielberg, unless you can really deliver. P!sh.
 
Back
Top