Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull [Archive] - Page 21

4516232

02-14-2008, 10:11 AM

right im prob goin to get banned with all the bad language and slaggin but the people who are complaing are ****in morons in my opinion...who the **** are u ppl..get a life..its indy jones..its a new indy jones movie!!!!!!...all u jerkoffs who complain about the cgi..u know ur goin go see it a million times and buy all the toys...if ur not gonna see it or complain then why bother coming into this forum...i think i speak for the ppl who cant give out to u(for fear of bein banned)...**** off u stupid *******s..the film looks great..as for the cgi..wat do u want...a film wit no adventure..the old film used special effects...yes cgi is cheating to a certain degree but as long as its not completely overwhelming the film(like stars wars episode 2 and 3) then its fine...the trailer loks good...ligthing and cinematography and camera work looks consistent so who gives a ****..as someone said before u have to have some cgi for the cliff chase..the only other alternative is to not have it...id rather have it..it looks amazing...thats my rant..u naysayers sicken me

dark_b

02-14-2008, 10:11 AM

Donovan changing into a skeleton was a computer morph between puppets.computer generated means that it is build in a computer.

a morph is from what i knwo not computer generated.

Rocker22

02-14-2008, 10:11 AM

Great trailer

Carmine Falcone

02-14-2008, 10:13 AM

I watched it with a big smile on my face. Indy is back.

steintym

02-14-2008, 10:13 AM

OMG, I think I just messed myself. I loved it and was very pleasantly surprised. I got chills when he picks up his hat and the music starts building. Awesome!

Noir

02-14-2008, 10:13 AM

CaptainClown

02-14-2008, 10:14 AM

terry78

02-14-2008, 10:14 AM

Not too shabby. I liked that. My dad watched it earlier and he was freaking out.

Noir

02-14-2008, 10:14 AM

He's a teacher.. Part time:
http://img150.imageshack.us/img150/3482/parttimedf3.jpg
Not as easy as it used to be:
http://img150.imageshack.us/img150/5818/indyjj8.jpg
Possibly inside White Sands Military Base or Area 51 (I'm going with Area 51 cause it looks like a secret testing chamber):
http://img337.imageshack.us/img337/8248/area51maybtgp4.jpg

Lord Blackbolt

02-14-2008, 10:16 AM

that was a cool trailer. For a minute there I thought it would end when he picks up the hat...but we got to see more stuff so that was cool

dark_b

02-14-2008, 10:17 AM

the lighting is really amazing.

terry78

02-14-2008, 10:18 AM

I like the mystery behind what's in the Roswell crate, with the glasses being magnetically attracted to it.

Lord Blackbolt

02-14-2008, 10:18 AM

Is it me or is Indy more badass with the whip now than in the other movies....dude was jumping around like Batman. I loved that

Nirvana

02-14-2008, 10:20 AM

Ahhh!!! So amazing! I recored USA Today (Good Morning America? Whatever its called) and just watched the trailer, and when I saw his hat on the floor and puts it on with the "Raiders Theme" playing I got this huge smile on my face. I cannot wait for this movie! I'm so excited! Watching that trailer before exams might distract me now....

Noir

02-14-2008, 10:20 AM

http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/5830/witwickyur8.jpg

^ Its nice to see Shia kept the Witwicky glasses from Transformers.

Also, Roswell 1947, yep, no aliens :o

Mr. Socko

02-14-2008, 10:20 AM

The shot where the cars crash was rough with the CG, but other than that, I thought the trailer was great. It definitely had that old school feeling to it when Indy punches the guys and swings on the whip and lands in the car. A very solid trailer, would have been perfect had the first half been Crystal Skulls related instead of looking back on the previous films.

DieSmiling

02-14-2008, 10:20 AM

that was a cool trailer. For a minute there I thought it would end when he picks up the hat...but we got to see more stuff so that was cool

If it had ended there I would not have been a happy camper.

Mr. Socko

02-14-2008, 10:22 AM

Someone get me a downloadable .avi link! I can't find any site that converts damn qtl extensions!

Hunter Rider

02-14-2008, 10:23 AM

Bah. I don't understand todays complaints about CGI. The only way I knew the chase scene near the cliff was CG was because there's no way they'd actually film something that dangerous near a real cliff. It looked fantastic.

Agreed.

http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s42/indirav1/indy5.jpg

Looks great to me.

Noir

02-14-2008, 10:23 AM

http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/6092/stickeyehm3.jpg
He's piercing your soul..

CaptainClown

02-14-2008, 10:23 AM

Were there a lot of explosions like what we saw in the originals. If so they elude my mind as of now.

P.B.&Chocolate

02-14-2008, 10:24 AM

Very nice trailer . Harrison looks great ..

Stotch

02-14-2008, 10:27 AM

My reaction to the trailer:

http://img262.imageshack.us/img262/7896/holygodfj1.jpg

Noir

02-14-2008, 10:27 AM

okay last one from me:

http://img161.imageshack.us/img161/1946/strkge7.jpg

CaptainClown

02-14-2008, 10:28 AM

ew shia!

xwolverine2

02-14-2008, 10:30 AM

holy crap i didnt know the movie would look THIS GOOD!!!

totally got me by surprise!

AMAZING!!!:eek:

xwolverine2

02-14-2008, 10:30 AM

http://img337.imageshack.us/img337/8248/area51maybtgp4.jpg

is he gonna fight lady deathstryke with his whip?:wow:

That'ssuper!

02-14-2008, 10:31 AM

BETTER THAN HD QUALITY! Greatest movie of the year hands down!!

Mr. Socko

02-14-2008, 10:31 AM

Shia looks great in here:woot:

steintym

02-14-2008, 10:32 AM

Noir

02-14-2008, 10:32 AM

Shia looks great in here:woot:
I was surprised by how good he looked.

WompuM

02-14-2008, 10:33 AM

Tell me that's the same warehouse from raiders. Someone please tell me that.

luke1234

02-14-2008, 10:34 AM

This movie looks awesome, the cinematography looks amazing and its great to see an old friend back with Harrison ford back as indiana jones.

CaptainClown

02-14-2008, 10:34 AM

its the same warehouse in raiders..

Prefix

02-14-2008, 10:34 AM

Tell me that's the same warehouse from raiders. Someone please tell me that.It is.

Noir

02-14-2008, 10:34 AM

It is :D

dark_b

02-14-2008, 10:34 AM

Prefix

02-14-2008, 10:35 AM

stunt doubles?

CGI head replacements?

Harrison Ford is awesome?

Noir

02-14-2008, 10:35 AM

Harrison was in pretty good shape.
I'm sure he could pull off alot of that stuff.
and the other stuff, I'm sure they put him infront of a green-screen.

luke1234

02-14-2008, 10:41 AM

yeah but the main thing weve learned from this trailer is that harrison ford still has it, especially when he kicks that guy through the glass at the end of the trailer

Rezzo

02-14-2008, 10:41 AM

I am so glad they were able to pull off the action with Harrison (at least it looks like they have). I was concerned that it would just look like an old fart stumbling around. Looks like they made it work, though.

Here´s a quote from Harrison on the stunt work.

I probably did more in this film than I did in the ones previous because there have been advances in the area of stunt technology," he says. "I was nothing but happy to get back to that kind of filmmaking.

Gallagher

02-14-2008, 10:43 AM

okay last one from me:

http://img161.imageshack.us/img161/1946/strkge7.jpg

It's over mutt! I have the high ground!

SEE GEORGE ****ING LUCAS INTERFERING!

Jk =P

The_Vision

02-14-2008, 10:46 AM

Absolutely love it!!!

and the cgi looks fine :o

Hunter Rider

02-14-2008, 10:46 AM

The warehouse sequence is gonna be amazing!

Banana-Hotdog

02-14-2008, 10:48 AM

The one thing I dreaded was to see Indiana Jones saying a bunch of "I'm gettin' too old for this ****." lines, but they put on in the teaser! "Not as easy as it used to be..."

And there looked to be a lot of CG too. I expect this to be a disappointment or worse, flat out rape my childhood.

We need a poll for the teaser.

Mr. Socko

02-14-2008, 10:48 AM

Third viewing! It gets better each time.

Oh how I have missed your raiders march Mr. Williams! It finally returns.

Prefix

02-14-2008, 10:49 AM

Prefix

02-14-2008, 10:50 AM

According to some people here, a single quip about age and the use of current special effects technology is all you need to know whether a movie will be good or not.

Rezzo

02-14-2008, 10:52 AM

Red X

02-14-2008, 10:52 AM

Looks awesome.

Noir

02-14-2008, 10:52 AM

OH EM GEEZ! INDY SEZ HE IS OLD! AND TEHY HAVE CUM POOTER GRAFIX! THIS IS TEH SUXORZ!!1!

:o

Rezzo

02-14-2008, 10:52 AM

According to some people here, a single quip about age and the use of current special effects technology is all you need to know whether a movie will be good or not.

It appears to be that way sadly. :huh:

Banana-Hotdog

02-14-2008, 10:52 AM

According to some people here, a single quip about age and the use of current special effects technology is all you need to know whether a movie will be good or not.

And others could just see the Title "Indiana Jones" and declare it movie of the year...
:whatever:

Only time will tell.

Mr. Socko

02-14-2008, 10:52 AM

Indy even has an age line in Raiders, "It's not the years honey, it's the mileage"

"Not as easy as it use to be," cool line that was perfect in character. Some of you are complaining for no reason.

KALEL114

02-14-2008, 10:53 AM

Anyone else here have any Indy gear or am I the only one that geeky? I have dressed up as him for the past 2 years.

Rezzo

02-14-2008, 10:54 AM

Anyone else here have any Indy gear or am I the only one that geeky? I have dressed up as him for the past 2 years.

I´m going to get some soon. :woot:

kedrell

02-14-2008, 10:55 AM

I loved it! Bye, bye TDK!:woot:

Prefix

02-14-2008, 10:55 AM

And others could just see the Title "Indiana Jones" and declare it movie of the year...
:whatever:

Only time will tell.

The difference is, I haven't made any judgment of how good it will be, you have. I'm optimistic, but you have just plain decided how good it will be right away. So unfortunately, you don't have a leg to stand on when it comes to the topic of opinions.

Banana-Hotdog

02-14-2008, 10:55 AM

*Fleas after he remembers that you can't have a negative opinion about a teaser on the day of its release without suffering the wrath of the fanboys*

Hunter Rider

02-14-2008, 10:56 AM

You have fleas ? :wow: :woot: :cwink:

kedrell

02-14-2008, 10:56 AM

Wouldn't he be basing it off how good the previous ones were. Indy has a sterling track record so far.

Prefix

02-14-2008, 10:57 AM

*Fleas after he remembers that you can't have a negative opinion about a teaser on the day of its release without suffering the wrath of the fanboys*

Seems to me you're running away because you can't handle someone disagreeing with you.

Dr. Watson

02-14-2008, 10:57 AM

*Fleas after he remembers that you can't have a negative opinion about a teaser on the day of its release without suffering the wrath of the fanboys*

You have fleas ? :wow: :woot: :cwink:

We don't want you here anyway then!!!

:grin:

CaptainClown

02-14-2008, 11:01 AM

your allowed to have a negative opinion as long as its sensible... like there is a lot of cg in this INdy..

Banana-Hotdog

02-14-2008, 11:03 AM

Seems to me you're running away because you can't handle someone disagreeing with you.

I'm perfectly fine with your optimistic view of the film, Prefix. I just don't want to get in a war over a teaser since I have reservations after "Episode I" having an amazing teaser and then...well...we know how that turned out.
I hope that you are right and that it is a great addition to the Indiana Jones franchise, but from what I see and from what I experienced with Star Wars in the last decade, I have low expectations for this flick after what I saw in the teaser for Krystal Skull wasn't my bag.

http://forums.superherohype.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Dr. Watson

02-14-2008, 11:04 AM

your allowed to have a negative opinion as long as its sensible... like there is a lot of cg in this INdy..

I didn't think it was too bad as far as CG. Some scenes clearly had it, but some scenes had it in the original ones (and they did not look as good as they appear to be now). I don't think we are getting anything like Spider-Man or Star Wars level CG though.

Rocker22

02-14-2008, 11:05 AM

I don't care about the CG as long as it works and looks good.

CaptainClown

02-14-2008, 11:05 AM

CaptainClown

02-14-2008, 11:06 AM

I don't care about the CG as long as it works and looks good.

Ya I didn't think it looked good and didn't think it worked.

Kal-El 8

02-14-2008, 11:06 AM

That was an Intresting teaser

Hunter Rider

02-14-2008, 11:06 AM

I didn't think it was too bad as far as CG. Some scenes clearly had it, but some scenes had it in the original ones (and they did not look as good as they appear to be now). I don't think we are getting anything like Spider-Man or Star Wars level CG though.

i can only see one CGI scene and if you look at TLC with the plane sequence it looks very fake.

KALEL114

02-14-2008, 11:07 AM

I´m going to get some soon. :woot:

Sweet! Be carefull. It can get quite expensive, but well worth it. :up:

Rocker22

02-14-2008, 11:07 AM

Ya I didn't think it looked good and didn't think it worked.

Yeah, it is disappointing that they are using it to keep up with the times. I didn't think they would.

CaptainClown

02-14-2008, 11:07 AM

the rocketlauncher scene with the stuff flying over their heads got me as well

Hunter Rider

02-14-2008, 11:08 AM

I said this in another thread and I will say it here. It seems that this IJ4 is going to be more of an action flick rather then an adventure one which is the vibe I got from the trailer. I hope the movie isn't like the trailer with that being said.

If you look at the TDK trailer you'd think it was gonna be an action flick as well, that's what they do with these teaser trailers, they looks to capture ppl with spectacle in 90 seconds.

CaptainClown

02-14-2008, 11:08 AM

Yeah, it is disappointing that they are using it to keep up with the times. I didn't think they would.

Ya same here. I was hoping for the old school action we got like Indy stuck on that tank, or that fight scene in front of the giant plane.

kedrell

02-14-2008, 11:08 AM

Prefix

02-14-2008, 11:08 AM

I'm perfectly fine with your optimistic view of the film, Prefix. I just don't want to get in a war over a teaser since I have reservations after "Episode I" having an amazing teaser and then...well...we know how that turned out.
I hope that you are right and that it is a great addition to the Indiana Jones franchise, but from what I see and from what I experienced with Star Wars in the last decade, I have low expectations for this flick after what I saw in the teaser for Krystal Skull wasn't my bag.

http://forums.superherohype.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

This is a better way of expressing your opinion than 'flat out rape my childhood', but you must still understand that the reason I took offense to your opinion was that you judged it from the trailer. I cannot be right, because I have not made a judgment, I am just optimistic. This is the difference between those who are excited by the trailer and those who come in complaining that the Indiana Jones franchise has been ruined.

CaptainClown

02-14-2008, 11:09 AM

If you look at the TDK trailer you'd think it was gonna be an action flick as well, that's what they do with these teaser trailers, they looks to capture ppl with spectacle in 90 seconds.
but TDK is coming from a movie already like that where as Indiana wasn't really like that before.

Noir

02-14-2008, 11:10 AM

I doubt its going to be "just an action movie" Judging a movie by the trailer isn't really a fair thing, I mean, some movies are nothing like the trailer look at the movie "The Eye" the trailer made the movie look interesting, but the Movie made the movie ****ty.

Rocker22

02-14-2008, 11:11 AM

Ya same here. I was hoping for the old school action we got like Indy stuck on that tank, or that fight scene in front of the giant plane.

Yeah but I am hoping they pretty much showed all the CG in the trailer and we will get some other great action like that in the movie and we just haven't seen it yet.

Rezzo

02-14-2008, 11:11 AM

Sweet! Be carefull. It can get quite expensive, but well worth it. :up:

What stuff do you have?

Hunter Rider

02-14-2008, 11:12 AM

but TDK is coming from a movie already like that where as Indiana wasn't really like that before.

:huh: BB wasn't an action flick, it has way less action in than any of the previous Indy movies.

CaptainClown

02-14-2008, 11:12 AM

Well why would Indiana be an exception to the "just an action movie" I mean TDK might be the same way.

I just hope its not like the trailer

PWN3R

02-14-2008, 11:13 AM

Beautiful. Beautiful, beautiful, beautiful. I have the biggest smile right now. May 22:up:

*watches again*

CaptainClown

02-14-2008, 11:13 AM

:huh: BB wasn't an action flick, it has way less action in than any of the previous Indy movies.

I dunno, the tumbler chase, the fight scenes and so on. It was an action flick in the guise of a drama/crime movie. It had crazy stunts that required cg and so on where as Indiana hardly had those moments.

Red X

02-14-2008, 11:13 AM

According to some people here, a single quip about age and the use of current special effects technology is all you need to know whether a movie will be good or not.

BINGO!

Dr. Watson

02-14-2008, 11:17 AM

i can only see one CGI scene and if you look at TLC with the plane sequence it looks very fake.

No kidding. There are lots of examples of cheap/80s cheesy CG in the old films. One that drives me crazy is the background storm when they find the location of the ark in RoLA.

Ya same here. I was hoping for the old school action we got like Indy stuck on that tank, or that fight scene in front of the giant plane.

I feel like we were watching different trailers. The fight scene in the warehouse smacks of classic Indy. And it looks like we're getting another good chase scene (two in fact if we count them running through the temple).

No one has said much about this, but bad ass does Cate Blanchett look in this trailer? She very steely and cool.

Prefix

02-14-2008, 11:18 AM

I dunno, the tumbler chase, the fight scenes and so on. It was an action flick in the guise of a drama/crime movie. It had crazy stunts that required cg and so on where as Indiana hardly had those moments.The action scenes in the Indiana Jones movies are far more out there than anything in Batman Begins. CGI wasn't used when they were made because CGI wasn't used like that back then. If CGI existed back then in the way it does now, you bet Speilberg would've used it.

Hunter Rider

02-14-2008, 11:19 AM

I dunno, the tumbler chase, the fight scenes and so on. It was an action flick in the guise of a drama/crime movie. It had crazy stunts that required cg and so on where as Indiana hardly had those moments.

The Tumbler chase is the only actual sequence in the movie, the rest is just very brief shots of Batman taking ppl out.

Raiders-

Opening bolder chase
Fight in Marion's Bar in Nepal
The market fight/chase
The Truck chase

Temple -

The fight in the restaurant
riding the mountain on the dingy
Indy attacked by the Assassin in his room at pancott
The entire last 40 minutes is all action

Last Crusade -

Opening chase with young Indy
Indy fighting on the boat
The boat chase in Italy
Escaping on the motorbike/side car
The plane sequence
The Tank sequence/chase/battle

CaptainClown

02-14-2008, 11:20 AM

The action scenes in the Indiana Jones movies are far more out there than anything in Batman Begins. CGI wasn't used when they were made because CGI wasn't used like that back then. If CGI existed back then in the way it does now, you bet Speilberg would've used it.

What are you talking about? I am not comparing the use of cgi in BB to Indiana Jones. I was stating that the trailer unlike its predacessor is a different tone. IJ4 to the old series and TDK to BB. There is nothing about which one was more over the top.

Rezzo

02-14-2008, 11:20 AM

No one has said much about this, but bad ass does Cate Blanchett look in this trailer? She very steely and cool.

I can´t wait to see her performance. :woot:

krisl

02-14-2008, 11:21 AM

i can only see one CGI scene and if you look at TLC with the plane sequence it looks very fake.

What bugs me is why include CGI in 2008 if it looks as ropey as the effects in 1989..??? I don't really find that any excuse..."it's alright if the effects look crap now because they did in all the old ones"..!!!

CaptainClown

02-14-2008, 11:21 AM

The Tumbler chase is the only actual sequence in the movie, the rest is just very brief shots of Batman taking ppl out.

Raiders-

Opening bolder chase
Fight in Marion's Bar in Nepal
The market fight/chase
The Truck chase

Temple -

The fight in the restaurant
riding the mountain on the dingy
Indy attacked by the Assassin in his room at pancott
The entire last 40 minutes is all action

Last Crusade -

Opening chase with young Indy
Indy fighting on the boat
The boat chase in Italy
Escaping on the motorbike/side car
The plane sequence
The Tank sequence/chase/battle
Those are all mild in comparison to what we saw in the new trailer. In terms of special effects alone. I am not talking about the actual act. All of those that you mentioned weren't hmm hows a good way to put it. Insane as we saw today.

Hunter Rider

02-14-2008, 11:22 AM

No kidding. There are lots of examples of cheap/80s cheesy CG in the old films. One that drives me crazy is the background storm when they find the location of the ark in RoLA.

Ive never actually noticed that one, i always noticed the water after the mine cart chase though. :woot: The mine cart chase itself was cleaned up a lot when they remastered them for DVD.

No one has said much about this, but bad ass does Cate Blanchett look in this trailer? She very steely and cool.

I think she looks awesome, potentially the best villain of the series IMO.

Dr. Watson

02-14-2008, 11:23 AM

What bugs me is why include CGI in 2008 if it looks as ropey as the effects in 1989..??? I don't really find that any excuse..."it's alright if the effects look crap now because they did in all the old ones"..!!!

hunter is refering to the plane scene in The Last Crusade I believe.

CaptainClown

02-14-2008, 11:23 AM

I think she looks awesome, potentially the best villain of the series IMO.
I hope she kicks out someones heart then. KAHLIMA!

krisl

02-14-2008, 11:23 AM

hunter is refering to the plane scene in The Last Crusade I believe.

Yep, I know.

Hunter Rider

02-14-2008, 11:24 AM

Those are all mild in comparison to what we saw in the new trailer. In terms of special effects alone. I am not talking about the actual act. All of those that you mentioned weren't hmm hows a good way to put it. Insane as we saw today.

I don't see how they are mild, they are pretty huge in scale, no different to the ones we saw there only Spielberg is using more advanced camera set ups to capture better spectacle, i don't see why that is wrong, why limit himself. :huh:

danoyse

02-14-2008, 11:24 AM

No kidding. There are lots of examples of cheap/80s cheesy CG in the old films. One that drives me crazy is the background storm when they find the location of the ark in RoLA.

Agreed. There's as much obvious matte work in the original films as there is CG today. It's really no difference...except people complain today like everything was real back then.

There are shots during the mine car chase in Temple of Doom that are clearly miniatures. Still a great scene.

Hunter Rider

02-14-2008, 11:25 AM

What bugs me is why include CGI in 2008 if it looks as ropey as the effects in 1989..??? I don't really find that any excuse..."it's alright if the effects look crap now because they did in all the old ones"..!!!

Well I didn't think it looked ropey, it's only b/c we know they wouldn't really film on the side of a mountain that we could gather that one shot was CGI.

Dr. Watson

02-14-2008, 11:25 AM

I can´t wait to see her performance. :woot:

I think she looks awesome, potentially the best villain of the series IMO.

I agree 100%. Should be an interesting summer villian wise because she will be a polar opposite from the other big villian of the summer, the Joker, who is very outlandish.

CaptainClown

02-14-2008, 11:26 AM

I don't see how they are mild, they are pretty huge in scale, no different to the ones we saw there only Spielberg is using more advanced camera set ups to capture better spectacle, i don't see why that is wrong, why limit himself. :huh:
they weren't mild in the terms of scale but I guess the best way to put it is he used sets. It is like George Lucas going from puppets then to cgi characters. He lost that sense of realism that you get from something thats actually there.

Hunter Rider

02-14-2008, 11:28 AM

they weren't mild in the terms of scale but I guess the best way to put it is he used sets. It is like George Lucas going from puppets then to cgi characters. He lost that sense of realism that you get from something thats actually there.

There were lots of shots in the old indy movies that are miles removed from realism, the whole warehouse sequence is total oldschool stunts and sets and the one sequence on the cliff needed CGI b/c it was impossible otherwise.

krisl

02-14-2008, 11:28 AM

Agreed. There's as much obvious matte work in the original films as there is CG today. It's really no difference...except people complain today like everything was real back then.

There are shots during the mine car chase in Temple of Doom that are clearly miniatures. Still a great scene.

Yeah and then a lot of filmakers go back and correct all that stuff with CGI. My point is, what's the point of including CGI in 2008, like the shots being discussed here, if it looks just as obvious? Especially in Indiana Jones where the idea, as far as I thought, was to keep it as realistic as possible....

CaptainClown

02-14-2008, 11:30 AM

There were lots of shots in the old indy movies that are miles removed from realism, the whole warehouse sequence is total oldschool stunts and sets and the one sequence on the cliff needed CGI b/c it was impossible otherwise.

There is a big difference in using cgi instead of a backdrop. That is a very mild case and as for the cliff, you are going to say that they couldn't have used clever camera work and that hte only option was a Micheal Bay moment.

krisl

02-14-2008, 11:31 AM

There were lots of shots in the old indy movies that are miles removed from realism, the whole warehouse sequence is total oldschool stunts and sets and the one sequence on the cliff needed CGI b/c it was impossible otherwise.

Then my opnion is simply don't do it, at least not in an Indy film. To me trying the impossible is a slippery slope and we're heading into major Lucas territory here..!!

CaptainClown

02-14-2008, 11:32 AM

Then my opnion is simply don't do it, at least not in an Indy film. To me trying the impossible is a slippery slope and we're heading into major Lucas territory here..!!

Ya, you don't have to include every little thing in a movie.. well put

Dr. Watson

02-14-2008, 11:33 AM

Then my opnion is simply don't do it, at least not in an Indy film. To me trying the impossible is a slippery slope and we're heading into major Lucas territory here..!!

You're not in Lucas territory till you have several CG, mildly racist characters crawling about :o

Hunter Rider

02-14-2008, 11:33 AM

There is a big difference in using cgi instead of a backdrop. That is a very mild case and as for the cliff, you are going to say that they couldn't have used clever camera work and that hte only option was a Micheal Bay moment.

Backdrops always look much faker, like the plane sequence in the old movie. Michael Bay uses CGI better than anyone in the business so i don't see your point, why not use the tools available to you ? i am pretty sure Spielberg knows which was the best way to shoot it.

Hunter Rider

02-14-2008, 11:33 AM

Then my opnion is simply don't do it, at least not in an Indy film. To me trying the impossible is a slippery slope and we're heading into major Lucas territory here..!!
But it looked cool to a lot of us and obviously Spielberg wanted the shot.

The_Vision

02-14-2008, 11:34 AM

I know ive already said this before, but i'll say it again, this looks fkin awesome!!!!
:D:D:D

danoyse

02-14-2008, 11:35 AM

Then my opnion is simply don't do it, at least not in an Indy film. To me trying the impossible is a slippery slope and we're heading into major Lucas territory here..!!

Again, we've seen less than 90 seconds of the movie...how exactly do we know how much CG is actually being used compared to the effects used in the original?

I don't think anyone needs to start jumping conclusions from a teaser trailer (although that usually happens anyway).

krisl

02-14-2008, 11:35 AM

You're not in Lucas territory till you have several CG, mildly racist characters crawling about :o

Ha! Well, there's certainly several CG characters in that trailer..!!

CaptainClown

02-14-2008, 11:36 AM

Backdrops always look much faker, like the plane sequence in the old movie. Michael Bay uses CGI better than anyone in the business so i don't see your point, why not use the tools available to you ? i am pretty sure Spielberg knows which was the best way to shoot it.
No Michael Bay relies on CGi, that is his crutch and it looks like Spielberg is beginning to also. CGI is like the cheat sheet to a puzzle. You get really creative answers when you solve it on your own, when you use the cheat sheet you get what you wanted but it isn't as creative.

Just cause you have the tools doesn't mean you should use them. Sometimes its necessary and as for the backdrop, the backdrop vs cg is a given hands down. Unfortunately not everything in cinema is a backdrop.

krisl

02-14-2008, 11:37 AM

danoyse

02-14-2008, 11:38 AM

But it looked cool to a lot of us and obviously Spielberg wanted the shot.

Agreed. I saw the cliff and I wasn't thinking "CGI BAD!!", it just reminded me of the truck chase in Raiders--which I happen to think is still one of the top 5 greatest action sequences of all time--and thought it was great.

I have an old ILM book from the 80s that showed all of the old matte work on the first 2 Indy films, and it's so obvious when I watch the movies now what's matte and what's not...even with the touchups on DVD. It's the same thing now, just new technology.

Plus the trailer had plenty of flat-out action. I honestly don't see what the fuss is about.

Hunter Rider

02-14-2008, 11:38 AM

No Michael Bay relies on CGi, that is his crutch and it looks like Spielberg is beginning to also. CGI is like the cheat sheet to a puzzle. You get really creative answers when you solve it on your own, when you use the cheat sheet you get what you wanted but it isn't as creative.

Just cause you have the tools doesn't mean you should use them. Sometimes its necessary and as for the backdrop, the backdrop vs cg is a given hands down. Unfortunately not everything in cinema is a backdrop.

I disagree entirely, Bay and Spielberg use it where it fits best and makes the sequences better instead of doing some retarded rig job that takes forever and risks ppls lives.

The freeway chase in Bad Boys II is prime example of how awesome Bay is with cGI, take a look at how that was done, only one element was CGI.

terry78

02-14-2008, 11:39 AM

DocHoliday

02-14-2008, 11:39 AM

Agreed. I saw the cliff and I wasn't thinking "CGI BAD!!", it just reminded me of the truck chase in Raiders--which I happen to think is still one of the top 5 greatest action sequences of all time--and thought it was great.

I have an old ILM book from the 80s that showed all of the old matte work on the first 2 Indy films, and it's so obvious when I watch the movies now what's matte and what's not...even with the touchups on DVD. It's the same thing now, just new technology.

Plus the trailer had plenty of flat-out action. I honestly don't see what the fuss is about.

My thoughts exactly. In temple especially there are alotof obvious matte shots.

Excel

02-14-2008, 11:40 AM

This looks great, I loved it.

Why Paramount, WHY didnt you put this with National Treasure 2??? Now nobody is going to see it!

The Chris

02-14-2008, 11:40 AM

I must have been blinded by something, but I didn't see much cgi in this awesome trailer.

Hunter Rider

02-14-2008, 11:40 AM

Agreed. I saw the cliff and I wasn't thinking "CGI BAD!!", it just reminded me of the truck chase in Raiders--which I happen to think is still one of the top 5 greatest action sequences of all time--and thought it was great.

Exactly what i though, it seems nitpicking is a sport here at SHH.

I have an old ILM book from the 80s that showed all of the old matte work on the first 2 Indy films, and it's so obvious when I watch the movies now what's matte and what's not...even with the touchups on DVD. It's the same thing now, just new technology

Exactly, times change but some thing remain the same.

Plus the trailer had plenty of flat-out action. I honestly don't see what the fuss is about.

It's SHH and a big movies trailer, that always equals fuss. :csad:

danoyse

02-14-2008, 11:41 AM

Exactly. Did anyone really think they wouldn't be using CGI in this one? They would have used it in the originals if they had the technology back then.

DocHoliday

02-14-2008, 11:41 AM

The trailer is indeed awesome.

JohnRico

02-14-2008, 11:41 AM

Am I the only one that misses the old days where it was you see something & you like it & then you go see it. Sure people would still complain & stuff but now it is all technical :o

krisl

02-14-2008, 11:42 AM

I must have been blinded by something, but I didn't see much cgi in this awesome trailer.

Regardless of my worries about CGI I still thought it kinda awesome too.

terry78

02-14-2008, 11:43 AM

This looks great, I loved it.

Why Paramount, WHY didnt you put this with National Treasure 2??? Now nobody is going to see it!

Because they will get people to fork over money for Spiderwick, duh.

CaptainClown

02-14-2008, 11:43 AM

I disagree entirely, Bay and Spielberg use it where it fits best and makes the sequences better instead of doing some retarded rig job that takes forever and risks ppls lives.

The freeway chase in Bad Boys II is prime example of how awesome Bay is with cGI, take a look at how that was done, only one element was CGI.

well since this argument is going no where I will just say I am better then you.

From that statement it seems like you have a set pov as do I. Arguing it would just further spam up the site.

Also just to show I am not completely backed into a corner. That is their job to do insane stunts like that. They love to do it and it creates a better product. Look at TDK with the giant rig they flipped. That looked spectacular. It is a matter of opinion that has no end in sight. Also I am sorry Bay has become terrible and abuses that cgi power way too much.

danoyse

02-14-2008, 11:43 AM

Am I the only one that misses the old days where it was you see something & you like it & then you go see it. Sure people would still complain & stuff but now it is all technical :o

Seriously...I remember seeing the Last Crusade trailer for the first and only time in a movie theater in 1989 about a month before it was released. The audience went beserk, everyone loved it...and that was all we had until we saw the movie.

I miss those days sometimes. :csad:

DocHoliday

02-14-2008, 11:44 AM

I wonder how a Russian army gets into the govt. warehouse, lol... I guess we'll see.

CaptainClown

02-14-2008, 11:44 AM

CGI is not a crutch, it is a tool. What do you think they used before the wheel was invented? You can't make every movie like it was in the 1980's if it's the 21st century. If you had your way, video games would still look like Gorf.
People become reliant on tools. The calculator is a tool, now we have a whole generation reliant on it.

I am not saying you shouldn't use cgi I am saying you should use it in moderation with stuff you know how to do already.

also whast wrong with Gorf

echostation

02-14-2008, 11:45 AM

LOL it's not KAHLIMA... it's KAALI MA... the black mother...

danoyse

02-14-2008, 11:46 AM

People become reliant on tools. The calculator is a tool, now we have a whole generation reliant on it.

I am not saying you shouldn't use cgi I am saying you should use it in moderation with stuff you know how to do already.

And who says they didn't? We've seen less than 2 minutes of the movie.

It's favorite sport of SHH...jumping to conclusions.

echostation

02-14-2008, 11:46 AM

will Cate Blanchette get into a massive throw down/fist fight with Indy or Shia??? I wonder...

Hunter Rider

02-14-2008, 11:46 AM

well since this argument is going no where I will just say I am better then you.

Why are you lying ? :huh:

From that statement it seems like you have a set pov as do I. Arguing it would just further spam up the site.

i guess so.

Also just to show I am not completely backed into a corner. That is their job to do insane stunts like that. They love to do it and it creates a better product. Look at TDK with the giant rig they flipped.
That looked spectacular.

Yeah a guy died on TDK to get you that. :up: and the truck flip was piss easy, it was in the middle of a closed down Chicago street.

It is a matter of opinion that has no end in sight. Also I am sorry Bay has become terrible and abuses that cgi power way too much.

No need to be sorry, you're wrong and would know that if you had watched the making ofs on Bad Boys II and Transformers.

CaptainClown

02-14-2008, 11:48 AM

And who says they didn't? We've seen less than 2 minutes of the movie.

It's favorite sport of SHH...jumping to conclusions.

but isn't that the point of a trailer. to give the audience a taste of the movie. If that law applied then nobody could say anything about this movie since we have seen less then 2 minutes. We would be restricted to talks about the trailer.

DocHoliday

02-14-2008, 11:48 AM

will Cate Blanchette get into a massive throw down/fist fight with Indy or Shia??? I wonder...

I know from the lego set and other leaks that she gets into a sword fight with Shia.

Noir

02-14-2008, 11:50 AM

a Shasqua fight :cmad:

danoyse

02-14-2008, 11:52 AM

but isn't that the point of a trailer. to give the audience a taste of the movie. If that law applied then nobody could say anything about this movie since we have seen less then 2 minutes. We would be restricted to talks about the trailer.

But I did get a great feel for the movie. I was happy when I saw Indy's silhouette in the Jeep. And hearing the John Williams score. Or seeing an action sequence it what looks like the warehouse where the ark was stored. And when he flew backwards into the windshield. It was all there. That was Indy.

So they're using some CGI. Who cares? If they had it in 1980, they would have used it then, too.

Tempest19

02-14-2008, 11:52 AM

but isn't that the point of a trailer. to give the audience a taste of the movie. If that law applied then nobody could say anything about this movie since we have seen less then 2 minutes. We would be restricted to talks about the trailer.

What I saw was an expansive sprawling action adventure film that takes place in cool remote locations that I've never seen on screen before. That classic Indiana Jones is back. That it involves similar bad guys and similar, yet different locations. Too me it seemed old school Indy, action adventure. Like it's always been. If it was an action movie- you'd get a Die Hard vibe. Did you get the Die Hard vibe or adventure vibe?

CaptainClown

02-14-2008, 11:54 AM

Yeah a guy died on TDK to get you that. :up: and the truck flip was piss easy, it was in the middle of a closed down Chicago street.
No need to be sorry, you're wrong and would know that if you had watched the making ofs on Bad Boys II and Transformers.
I lie because its a habit. A bad habit, I got a patch.. its not working.. sorry I was lying I didn't get a patch.

Brandon Lee died because he was shot with a bullet. We should have it that all scenes with guns be cg'd... When will it end? There is a huge fatality with car accidents, should we stop everybody from driving? Thats the risks of life. People die and accidents happen. If we didn't do anything because of accidents we would have stopped after our first attempt for space travel.

Transformers ugh.alright you go ahead and enjoy that commercial.

Dr. Watson

02-14-2008, 11:55 AM

I know from the lego set and other leaks that she gets into a sword fight with Shia.

Awesome. Shia looks good in this :O

[/fangirl]

ruhanv

02-14-2008, 11:55 AM

That was simply freaking incredible.

Much more than I expected!

Did the scene in the jungle and the caves also remind anyone of the Uncharted: Drakes Fortune and Far Cry games?

kedrell

02-14-2008, 11:56 AM

This looks great, I loved it.

Why Paramount, WHY didnt you put this with National Treasure 2??? Now nobody is going to see it!

That's just nuts. It's still the year's most anticipated film. People will see this even if WWIII breaks out.

Figs

02-14-2008, 11:56 AM

well since this argument is going no where I will just say I am better then you.

From that statement it seems like you have a set pov as do I. Arguing it would just further spam up the site.

Also just to show I am not completely backed into a corner. That is their job to do insane stunts like that. They love to do it and it creates a better product. Look at TDK with the giant rig they flipped. That looked spectacular. It is a matter of opinion that has no end in sight. Also I am sorry Bay has become terrible and abuses that cgi power way too much.

Not to add more fuel to the fire or anything but unless you hated the movie watch the behind the scenes extras on the making of Transformers.

I've never watched many of those especially for Bay's movies but I watched it for Transformers...wow! Aside from the Transformers being CGI obviously, the rest of the special effects were all done in real time.

I'm not sure where you get that opinion from Cpt. Clown, if it's from Bad Boys 2 maybe he did go overboard on that film. I only saw that one once in the theatre so I can't remember all the effects done.

Tempest19

02-14-2008, 11:56 AM

Hunter Rider was talking about the fact that A LOT of Transformers was practical and they just added in the Transformers themselves. Those explosions, everything- all REAL. That's why he asked if you had seen the 'behind the scenes'.

Many things you obviously think are CG- aren't. New stunt technology has been developed that allows people to do crazy things now. Spielberg, I believe, even mentioned this in a recent interview.

danoyse

02-14-2008, 11:56 AM

CaptainClown

02-14-2008, 11:57 AM

But I did get a great feel for the movie. I was happy when I saw Indy's silhouette in the Jeep. And hearing the John Williams score. Or seeing an action sequence it what looks like the warehouse where the ark was stored. And when he flew backwards into the windshield. It was all there. That was Indy.

So they're using some CGI. Who cares? If they had it in 1980, they would have used it then, too.
My gripe is only with the amount that they used when they could have used reality.
What I saw was an expansive sprawling action adventure film that takes place in cool remote locations that I've never seen on screen before. That classic Indiana Jones is back. That it involves similar bad guys and similar, yet different locations. Too me it seemed old school Indy, action adventure. Like it's always been. If it was an action movie- you'd get a Die Hard vibe. Did you get the Die Hard vibe or adventure vibe?

I got a die hard vibe, it seemed like this if there was a monster truck announcer talking during the trailer he would say that

"You remember those indiana jones movies when you were little?! Well he is back! He is up to the same adventures as always but now with EXPLOSIONS and CGI! and INSANE STUNTS! WOW you have never seen an indiana Jones like this before! BOOM WOOOSH!"

thats what it seemed like to me. In the beginning sounding promising but literally blowing me away

Tempest19

02-14-2008, 11:57 AM

That was simply freaking incredible.

Much more than I expected!

Did the scene in the jungle and the caves also remind anyone of the Uncharted: Drakes Fortune and Far Cry games?

Now that you mentioned it, yeah I did see a little bit of Uncharted. :up:

CaptainClown

02-14-2008, 11:59 AM

And people have been hurt on the Indiana Jones movies too. Doesn't mean they stop doing stunts, it means if they can find a more careful way of doing them, they're going to do it.

Exactly, you can't condemn one act because of a few fatalities. Relying on CG is just neglecting a craft that the person who died tried to improve on or whatever, I am tired..

Hunter Rider

02-14-2008, 11:59 AM

Brandon Lee died because he was shot with a bullet. We should have it that all scenes with guns be cg'd... When will it end? There is a huge fatality with car accidents, should we stop everybody from driving? Thats the risks of life. People die and accidents happen. If we didn't do anything because of accidents we would have stopped after our first attempt for space travel.

Why have a guy do some ridiculously large stunt when it can be done safely with CGI and elements ? :huh: We have to drive to get around, the gun scene was a tragedy and an accident, they were unavoidable, the stunt guy need never be in that position to die to begin with so there is no comparison

Transformers ugh.alright you go ahead and enjoy that commercial.

The CGI usage mixed with all the practical they did was amazing, the CGI amount had to be massive for a film about giant robots and they looked astounding.

I did enjoy that film and i also enjoyed Juno and No Country for old men, look Ma! Variety!!! :wow: :cwink:

Figs

02-14-2008, 12:00 PM

http://img337.imageshack.us/img337/8248/area51maybtgp4.jpg

I wonder if that guy he is whooping is my gf's cousin. He does stuntwork and was telling us that he got to film a fight scene with Harrison Ford in the new Indiana Jones.

danoyse

02-14-2008, 12:01 PM

"You remember those indiana jones movies when you were little?! Well he is back! He is up to the same adventures as always but now with EXPLOSIONS and CGI! and INSANE STUNTS! WOW you have never seen an indiana Jones like this before! BOOM WOOOSH!"

There were plenty of those in the first 3 movies too. :cwink:

DocHoliday

02-14-2008, 12:02 PM

I really liked Cate Balnchett yelling "Cut him off" on a Russian accent.

Hunter Rider

02-14-2008, 12:02 PM

I'm not sure where you get that opinion from Cpt. Clown, if it's from Bad Boys 2 maybe he did go overboard on that film. I only saw that one once in the theatre so I can't remember all the effects done.

Bad Boys II had very few effects, that is why i mentioned the bts for it.

And people have been hurt on the Indiana Jones movies too. Doesn't mean they stop doing stunts, it means if they can find a more careful way of doing them, they're going to do it.

Stunts yes but they don't have guys doing ridiculously stupid ones now b/c they can use CGI elements to protect them and gain the same result.

Octoberist

02-14-2008, 12:02 PM

people are comparing this to "Live Free or Die Hard" right?

Think about this: Indy 4 is made by Spielberg and almost the same team from the previous movies. Spielberg, the most iconic modern director ever.

Die Hard 4 was made by Len Wiseman, a Michael Bay lite, with a script that wasn't even intitally a Die Hard script to begin with.

So...have I just pretty much destroy the two comparisons?

CaptainClown

02-14-2008, 12:03 PM

[QUOTE]Why have a guy do some ridiculously large stunt when it can be done safely with CGI and elements ? :huh: We have to drive to get around, the gun scene was a tragedy and an accident, they were unavoidable, the stunt guy need never be in that position to die to begin with so there is no comparison
There wouldn't be a stunt guy if there was no stunt to perform. He is called a stunt guy for a reason, to perform a stunt that a person not trained was able to perform. You perform large stunt because its better and doesn't look like a ps3 game

The CGI usage mixed with all the practical they did was amazing, the CGI amount had to be massive for a film about giant robots and they looked astounding.

I did enjoy that film and i also enjoyed Juno and No Country for old men, look Ma! Variety!!! :wow: :cwink:

oh I don't think you have that bad a taste of movies, but transformers...come on... come on...

danoyse

02-14-2008, 12:04 PM

Exactly, you can't condemn one act because of a few fatalities. Relying on CG is just neglecting a craft that the person who died tried to improve on or whatever, I am tired..

And if they decide to use CG instead of putting any of my favorite actors (or anyone else, for that matter)into a potentially life-threatening stunt for the sake a of movie, I'd be totally fine if they did the CGI, as long as it looked good.

Neglect would be not taking the safer route.

Hunter Rider

02-14-2008, 12:05 PM

people are comparing this to "Live Free or Die Hard" right?

No.

[
There wouldn't be a stunt guy if there was no stunt to perform. He is called a stunt guy for a reason, to perform a stunt that a person not trained was able to perform. You perform large stunt because its better and doesn't look like a ps3 game

There are plenty of stunts to perform but to realize the vision of many directors on these movies, certain stunts are much safer to do using CGI and the PS3 thing is old hat man, things have moved way beyond that.

oh I don't think you have that bad a taste of movies, but transformers...come on... come on...

i loved it.

Dr. Watson

02-14-2008, 12:06 PM

[quote=Hunter Rider;14063223]
oh I don't think you have that bad a taste of movies, but transformers...come on... come on...

I actually really enjoyed Transformers for what it was...a summer action adventure flick. I think that is what Indy will be providing us as well.

danoyse

02-14-2008, 12:07 PM

Stunts yes but they don't have guys doing ridiculously stupid ones now b/c they can use CGI elements to protect them and gain the same result.

Exactly (I was agreeing with you on that point, btw)...like I said before, CGI stunts are fine if they look just as good and keep someone from getting hurt.

I've seen bad CGI stunts (Van Helsing immediately comes to mind), so they can get carried away with it. But I didn't see anything in this teaser to be even remotely worried about.

Noir

02-14-2008, 12:07 PM

The thing thats really starting to get to me is wondering how indy's got way the ****ing away from the car when he was in the trunk..

thegameq

02-14-2008, 12:08 PM

I became a kid again when I saw the trailer; complete with ear to ear grin!

I simply love these types of films.

Dark Donnie

02-14-2008, 12:08 PM

The CGI usage mixed with all the practical they did was amazing, the CGI amount had to be massive for a film about giant robots and they looked astounding.

they could have gone live action:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v232/12398/00megsbumble.jpg
:cwink:

Hunter Rider

02-14-2008, 12:09 PM

Exactly (I was agreeing with you on that point, btw)...like I said before, CGI stunts are fine if they look just as good and keep someone from getting hurt.

I've seen bad CGI stunts (Van Helsing immediately comes to mind), so they can get carried away with it. But I didn't see anything in this teaser to be even remotely worried about.

Agreed, it was just a couple of shots that we know are CGI b/c that is the only way it could be shot that close to the edge. there are some terrible examples of overkill, Next is one and even some parts of the Spidey movies, but here it felt like it fit fine and the whole warehouse sequence was very much oldschool stunt action Indy.

Tempest19

02-14-2008, 12:09 PM

Transformers was awesome. :up:

Rezzo

02-14-2008, 12:09 PM

I became a kid again when I saw the trailer; complete with ear to ear grin!

I think a majority of us were like that. :woot:

Hunter Rider

02-14-2008, 12:10 PM

they could have gone live action:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v232/12398/00megsbumble.jpg
:cwink:

:lmao:

danoyse

02-14-2008, 12:10 PM

I had no desire to see Transformers, but I saw it anyway and I loved it. :woot:

Figs

02-14-2008, 12:11 PM

One question, is this a teaser or the actual trailer?

dark_b

02-14-2008, 12:12 PM

with spielberg i really dont care hat he does with CGI.
every time it looked good. it blended always very good with real sets and actors.

thegameq

02-14-2008, 12:12 PM

I think a majority of us were like that. :woot:

:woot: :woot: :woot:

Jick09

02-14-2008, 12:12 PM

just saw the trailer.
ehh...ok.
looks like it's going to be a good movie.

danoyse

02-14-2008, 12:13 PM

One question, is this a teaser or the actual trailer?

Teaser.

Dark Donnie

02-14-2008, 12:13 PM

:lmao:

haha, it would have saved on the budget

YJ1

02-14-2008, 12:13 PM

That trailer is just damn cool. May is going to be the best movie month in ages!

"Damn, I thought that was closer."

Hunter Rider

02-14-2008, 12:15 PM

haha, it would have saved on the budget

Are sure those aren't early shots from the sequel ? :wow: :hehe:

블라스

02-14-2008, 12:17 PM

I hope he says "It's not the mileage, it's the years" to Marion :D

danoyse

02-14-2008, 12:18 PM

Are sure those aren't early shots from the sequel ? :wow: :hehe:

If the writers strike had continued, it may have been. :wow:

Jspider13

02-14-2008, 12:24 PM

Cool trailer.

Solidus

02-14-2008, 12:25 PM

CaptainClown

02-14-2008, 12:27 PM

There are plenty of stunts to perform but to realize the vision of many directors on these movies, certain stunts are much safer to do using CGI and the PS3 thing is old hat man, things have moved way beyond that.

And how many people have died in those insane stunts? TDK a special effects man got killed in an accident that wasn't related to filming. They were practicing. It was a car manuver; should all car manuevers be banned because of this accident?

I'll give you your answer... its no

Hunter Rider

02-14-2008, 12:27 PM

Looks incredible. Another fun adventure movie with one of my favorite heroes. What more could I ask for?

"Damn that looked a lot closer" I laughed hard. Is it anywhere for download yet? So I can have it on my hard drive?

HD 480P Yahoo (http://playlist.yahoo.com/makeplaylist.dll?sid=58002461&sdm=web&pt=rd) ** http://www.drfoster.f2s.com/images/qtlogo.jpg (36Mb) / Studio (http://downloads.paramount.com//mp/indianajones/trlr1/IJ_KOTCS_trailer1_480p.mov) http://www.drfoster.f2s.com/images/qtlogo.jpg (42.5Mb)
HD 720P Yahoo (http://playlist.yahoo.com/makeplaylist.dll?sid=58002462&sdm=web&pt=rd) ** http://www.drfoster.f2s.com/images/qtlogo.jpg (91.2Mb) / Studio (http://downloads.paramount.com//mp/indianajones/trlr1/IJ_KOTCS_trailer1_720p.mov) http://www.drfoster.f2s.com/images/qtlogo.jpg (161Mb)
HD 1080P Yahoo (http://playlist.yahoo.com/makeplaylist.dll?sid=58002465&sdm=web&pt=rd) ** http://www.drfoster.f2s.com/images/qtlogo.jpg (133Mb) / Studio (http://downloads.paramount.com//mp/indianajones/trlr1/IJ_KOTCS_trailer1_1080p.mov) http://www.drfoster.f2s.com/images/qtlogo.jpg (282Mb)

Rezzo

02-14-2008, 12:28 PM

Is it anywhere for download yet? So I can have it on my hard drive?

Just change the file extension to .mov once you´ve downloaded it.

480p (http://playlist.yahoo.com/makeplaylist.dll?sdm=web&pt=rd&sid=58002461)

720p (http://playlist.yahoo.com/makeplaylist.dll?sdm=web&pt=rd&sid=58002462)

1080p (http://playlist.yahoo.com/makeplaylist.dll?sdm=web&pt=rd&sid=58002465)

Hunter Rider

02-14-2008, 12:28 PM

And how many people have died in those insane stunts? TDK a special effects man got killed in an accident that wasn't related to filming. They were practicing. It was a car manuver; should all car manuevers be banned because of this accident?

I'll give you your answer... its no

He was practicing the car maneuver for a chase right ? So it's acceptable that he died so it could look real ? :huh: I'll give you the answer..it's no.

Dark Donnie

02-14-2008, 12:29 PM

Are sure those aren't early shots from the sequel ? :wow: :hehe:

If the writers strike had continued, it may have been. :wow:

It might have been early designs, they do seem a bit dated:cwink:

Someone said that the date on the crate is before the Roswell crash...so does that mean no aliens?

DocHoliday

02-14-2008, 12:31 PM

Hey it's gotta be better than Firewall.

SuperBatman

02-14-2008, 12:31 PM

Snakes I hate Snakes but I sure loved that Trailer. INDY IS BACK BOYS AND GIRLS

DocHoliday

02-14-2008, 12:32 PM

It might have been early designs, they do seem a bit dated:cwink:

Someone said that the date on the crate is before the Roswell crash...so does that mean no aliens?

I actually think that the opening portion of the film takes place years before the rest of the film. There are pics where harrison seems younger in the hate and clothes than other pics. Could be nothing though.

CaptainClown

02-14-2008, 12:33 PM

He was practicing the car maneuver for a chase right ? So it's acceptable that he died so it could look real ? :huh: I'll give you the answer..it's no.
An accident is never acceptable. I never said it was

but how are you going to hinder all activities because there is a safe alternative. Why visit the grand canyon? You could fall..Lets just look at it in a picture. It is safer.

Death is inevitable but because of one accident doesn't mean you should change the whole system that is pretty good.

Now if stuntmen were dying left and right, then yes there is time for a change. This isn't the case though. You shouldn't stop doing something because you fear the consequences.

Superfreak

02-14-2008, 12:34 PM

Trailer was Awesome: Car Chase, in the endless Warehouse from Raiders, AWESOME

danoyse

02-14-2008, 12:34 PM

And how many people have died in those insane stunts? TDK a special effects man got killed in an accident that wasn't related to filming. They were practicing. It was a car manuver; should all car manuevers be banned because of this accident?

I'll give you your answer... its no

He's not saying they should be banned. He's just saying it's perfectly acceptable to replace a possibly dangerous stunt with a CGI stunt. If it's done well, there's no problem. It's not neglect of a craft, it's just good sense.

scifiwolf

02-14-2008, 12:36 PM

I've been out for a few hours, and can't believe some of the griping. I think some people are quick to forget a Mr. Harrison Ford being involved in a $1 million stunt going over the edge of a waterfall in Hawaii. If the production did that for the whole movie, Paramount would be broke.

DocHoliday

02-14-2008, 12:36 PM

Trailer was Awesome: Car Chase, in the endless Warehouse from Raiders, AWESOME

I agree. That's gonna be an awesome scene. I wonder if it involves the Ark, I hope not.

Hunter Rider

02-14-2008, 12:36 PM

An accident is never acceptable. I never said it was

but how are you going to hinder all activities because there is a safe alternative. Why visit the grand canyon? You could fall..Lets just look at it in a picture. It is safer.

Death is inevitable but because of one accident doesn't mean you should change the whole system that is pretty good.

Now if stuntmen were dying left and right, then yes there is time for a change. This isn't the case though. You shouldn't stop doing something because you fear the consequences.

The point i am making is that there are perfectly good alternatives to get just as good shots without risking a mans life, it's irresponsible and pointless, like sending a man to war for petty gain.

CaptainClown

02-14-2008, 12:37 PM

He's not saying they should be banned. He's just saying it's perfectly acceptable to replace a possibly dangerous stunt with a CGI stunt. If it's done well, there's no problem. It's not neglect of a craft, it's just good sense.

but how often are those stunts really that dangerous. There are many precautions taken. How often are they doing crazy stunts using people anyway?

danoyse

02-14-2008, 12:37 PM

I've been out for a few hours, and can't believe some of the griping. I think some people are quick to forget a Mr. Harrison Ford being involved in a $1 million stunt going over the edge of a waterfall in Hawaii.

Imagine how much they'd have to pay Cate Blanchett to drive at the edge of a cliff like that?

Again, another reason for CGI. :cwink:

CaptainClown

02-14-2008, 12:38 PM

The point i am making is that there are perfectly good alternatives to get just as good shots without risking a mans life, it's irresponsible and pointless, like sending a man to war for petty gain.
They aren't as good shots thought, that is subject to debate though.
If the quality was the same then we wouldn't argue that, but that isn't the case. CGI isn't up to par with realistic stunts.

Superfreak

02-14-2008, 12:39 PM

I agree. That's gonna be an awesome scene. I wonder if it involves the Ark, I hope not.

it could be the introductory adventure (if this movie sticks to formula). Indy wants to go find out what happened to all those goodies he has liberated from history and/or evil

prolly has to find something hidden in the warehouse

Hunter Rider

02-14-2008, 12:40 PM

They aren't as good shots thought, that is subject to debate though.
If the quality was the same then we wouldn't argue that, but that isn't the case. CGI isn't up to par with realistic stunts.

It's pretty close these days IMO and I'll take that over a guy driving a car in some insane smash. The shot we are talking about here requires close ups of the leads, hence it had to be CGI.

DoctorJones

02-14-2008, 12:41 PM

Awesome! I really look forward to seeing how all the Mayans get involved in this. Maybe Indy and co. are sent back in time?

Harrison looked so cool, and it was just wicked when he punched those two soldiers. Now there's a word I haven't since... when I was of the age to see the other movies.

danoyse

02-14-2008, 12:43 PM

They aren't as good shots thought, that is subject to debate though.
If the quality was the same then we wouldn't argue that, but that isn't the case. CGI isn't up to par with realistic stunts.

And again, there were plenty of un-realistic looking shots in the original Indiana Jones movies too.

CaptainClown

02-14-2008, 12:43 PM

It's pretty close these days IMO and I'll take that over a guy driving a car in some insane smash. The shot we are talking about here requires close ups of the leads, hence it had to be CGI.
Close up of the leads would not require cgi, as for the insane shot of a giant bird eyes view zooming in panning out spinning. Why are you doing all that when you could do the same without making the whole moment seem exaggerated. That goes back to my thought that they are abusing CG and relying on it and using it as an excuse to try over the top camera angles

DocHoliday

02-14-2008, 12:44 PM

And again, there were plenty of un-realistic looking shots in the original Indiana Jones movies too.

Agreed. It's no big deal and alot of the temple shots actuallymatchthe style of the original films to a tee.

Hunter Rider

02-14-2008, 12:45 PM

Close up of the leads would not require cgi, as for the insane shot of a giant bird eyes view zooming in panning out spinning. Why are you doing all that when you could do the same without making the whole moment seem exaggerated. That goes back to my thought that they are abusing CG and relying on it and using it as an excuse to try over the top camera angles

Of course it would, they couldn't just use some crappy painted backdrop for them to drive along next to. Why not do that ? i for one prefer camera work that is inventive and fun rather than the whole point and shoot approach Nolan has used until the TDK trailer.

CaptainClown

02-14-2008, 12:46 PM

And again, there were plenty of un-realistic looking shots in the original Indiana Jones movies too.
Course there were, but in Indiana Jones they didn't have all this CG, so they relied on camera tricks and different things. It created a better product which brings this argument back to which is better
old fashion camera tricks or cg.

CaptainClown

02-14-2008, 12:47 PM

Of course it would, they couldn't just use some crappy painted backdrop for them to drive along next to. Why not do that ? i for one prefer camera work that is inventive and fun rather than the whole point and shoot approach Nolan has used until the TDK trailer.

They wouldn't need a backdrop all they would have to do is shoot up and show their close ups in the air, then have Indy look over the side of his car and then you switch to a shot of looking down a cliff, then you could even look up to an even larger canyon.

DocHoliday

02-14-2008, 12:48 PM

Course there were, but in Indiana Jones they didn't have all this CG, so they relied on camera tricks and different things. It created a better product which brings this argument back to which is better
old fashion camera tricks or cg.

They relied upon matte paintings. Does anyone remember the shot of Mola Ram falling down the cliff and into the water?

Hunter Rider

02-14-2008, 12:49 PM

They wouldn't need a backdrop all they would have to do is shoot up and show their close ups in the air, then have Indy look over the side of his car and then you switch to a shot of looking down a cliff, then you could even look up to an even larger canyon.

That wouldn't create the scale and sense of danger, it would look lame and cheap and we'd lose out on the cool shots we got with the "close up b/c there's nothing there" approach, why would a director sacrifice his vision and spectacular shots to do that.

Apollo

02-14-2008, 12:49 PM

That trialer was great! it got me all excited! can't wait for may!

CaptainClown

02-14-2008, 12:51 PM

[QUOTE]That wouldn't create the scale and sense of danger, it would look lame and cheap and we'd lose out on the cool shots we got with the "close up b/c there's nothing there" approach,
Now the same could be said about the CG, when I see all that I see a green screen. It is coming down all down to preference.
why would a director sacrifice his vision and spectacular shots to do that.Then why can't a director like Nolan use realistic special effects and stunt men if thats his vision.

Hunter Rider

02-14-2008, 12:52 PM

Now the same could be said about the CG, when I see all that I see a green screen. It is coming down all down to preference.

I just think you have a massive hatred of CGI. in certain movies i don't like it but in a movie of this nature i see no issue

Then why can't a director like Nolan use realistic special effects and stunt men if thats his vision.

i didn't say he couldn't but no one died on Indy 4.

CaptainClown

02-14-2008, 12:55 PM

I just think you have a massive hatred of CGI. in certain movies i don't like it but in a movie of this nature i see no issue

Oh you have no idea

i didn't say he couldn't but no one died on Indy 4.
nope they certainly didn't but TDK has a better product. The deaths are regrettable but accidents happen. It is not like they were filming a stunt and someone died while filming.

Hunter Rider

02-14-2008, 12:57 PM

nope they certainly didn't but TDK has a better product. The deaths are regrettable but accidents happen. It is not like they were filming a stunt and someone died while filming.

TDK doesn't have a better product at all, the deaths were preventable and that is more than regrettable.

CaptainClown

02-14-2008, 01:01 PM

TDK doesn't have a better product at all, the deaths were preventable and that is more than regrettable.
It was an accident with the car, an accident isn't preventable. If accidents were preventable they wouldn't be accidents they would be people with the set mind to do harm.

If you mean by preventable they cgi'd an entire car just to do a scene then yes it was preventable but as you said if you have the tools why not use them. That was the directors vision, if he is capable of doing it why not?

If deaths were preventable by your standards, we should all stay at home.

Golgo-13

02-14-2008, 01:04 PM

I got one tiny nitpick..sorry, but is the classic punching sound off to anyone else? Off, as in, not the same sounding as the other movies....

Hunter Rider

02-14-2008, 01:05 PM

It was an accident with the car, an accident isn't preventable. If accidents were preventable they wouldn't be accidents they would be people with the set mind to do harm.

If you mean by preventable they cgi'd an entire car just to do a scene then yes it was preventable but as you said if you have the tools why not use them. That was the directors vision, if he is capable of doing it why not?

If deaths were preventable by your standards, we should all stay at home.

Well i am glad Nolan got his vision and that's all that matters, it's really easy to do these things safely, they could hollow out a car, put it on a rig and CGI in the background and that man would be alive, you make it sound like doing a stunt on a movie is some sort of acceptable way to die, i wonder if his fatherless kids agree.

DocHoliday

02-14-2008, 01:06 PM

Noir

02-14-2008, 01:07 PM

Can we make a CGI Hater thread?

DocHoliday

02-14-2008, 01:09 PM

Did anyone spot marion in the trailer?

CaptainClown

02-14-2008, 01:10 PM

Well i am glad Nolan got his vision and that's all that matters, it's really easy to do these things safely, they could hollow out a car, put it on a rig and CGI in the background and that man would be alive, you make it sound like doing a stunt on a movie is some sort of acceptable way to die, i wonder if his fatherless kids agree.

That was his job though, he knew the risks involved.

Should a policeman no longer do their job because there is a risk of death? No of course not. If someone testing medication for a pharmaceutical company died because he took an experimental treatment that might cure him, should he not do it because he will die. No.

Many skiers die each year skiing.. Should we not have them ski all together? I mean it is a useless activity. We have video games you can play which are safer with the same result.

Stunt men, special effects and stunt drivers all know the risks involved with what they do, should they not do it because they have a risk that they are going to die? Thats a job they commited and they have to take the good with the bad. Deaths happen, accidents happen.

danoyse

02-14-2008, 01:10 PM

They relied upon matte paintings. Does anyone remember the shot of Mola Ram falling down the cliff and into the water?

This ILM book that I still have from the 80s had a bunch of comparison shots of what was used as matte in the Indy films. The palace in India was a matte shot, the villiage Indy, Willie, and Short Round came back to at the end of Temple was a parking lot from where they were standing on the hill.

DocHoliday

02-14-2008, 01:12 PM

This ILM book that I still have from the 80s had a bunch of comparison shots of what was used as matte in the Indy films. The palace in India was a matte shot, the villiage Indy, Willie, and Short Round came back to at the end of Temple was a parking lot from where they were standing on the hill.

I wish I had that book!

Rezzo

02-14-2008, 01:12 PM

Did anyone spot marion in the trailer?

Towards the end of it you´ll see her quickly.

DocHoliday

02-14-2008, 01:12 PM

Towards the end of it you´ll see her quickly.

Groovy...I will check.

블라스

02-14-2008, 01:12 PM

Can we make a CGI Hater thread?

That'd be great! :eek:
Send them over there please! The less I read their comments, the better! :D

Hunter Rider

02-14-2008, 01:13 PM

That was his job though, he knew the risks involved.

Should a policeman no longer do their job because there is a risk of death? No of course not. If someone testing medication for a pharmaceutical company died because he took an experimental treatment that might cure him, should he not do it because he will die. No.

Many skiers die each year skiing.. Should we not have them ski all together? I mean it is a useless activity. We have video games you can play which are safer with the same result.

Stunt men, special effects and stunt drivers all know the risks involved with what they do, should they not do it because they have a risk that they are going to die? Thats a job they commited and they have to take the good with the bad. Deaths happen, accidents happen.

None of those are comparable, a Cop is doing a job that protects ppl and gets criminals off the streets, the skier is competing in a sport, stunt men can do plenty of stunts still but why do a retarded car stunt when it can be done safely ? the others have no options, stunt teams do.

CaptainClown

02-14-2008, 01:13 PM

That'd be great! :eek:
Send them over there please! The less I read their comments, the better! :D
oh you like reading my comments

terry78

02-14-2008, 01:16 PM

LOL, did you just compare being a stunt man in a movie to being a police officer?

Lord Valumart

02-14-2008, 01:16 PM

i just saw the trailer and i'm sooooohyped for this movie

that was freakin awesome:indy:

블라스

02-14-2008, 01:16 PM

oh you like reading my comments

Sorry, I wasn't paying attention to you or reading your comments :huh:
There's a lot of brainless "the CGI sucks" posts and they were annoying from the get-go :(

CaptainClown

02-14-2008, 01:17 PM

None of those are comparable, a Cop is doing a job that protects ppl and gets criminals off the streets, the skier is competing in a sport, stunt men can do plenty of stunts still but why do a retarded car stunt when it can be done safely ? the others have no options, stunt teams do.

Alright then how about trapeze artists, they provide the same function as a stunt team. They entertain the audience by performing elaborate stunts at the audiences amusement. Why perform a deadly stunt? There is a risk of death. Lets video tape it and just play it back for the audience.

That is not the same. If a trapeze artist dies while performing a stunt, should they not be allowed to perform that trick? The trapeze artist might have slipped and it was one out of thirty chance of it happening? He died doing what he loved to do. If he didn't he would just abandon it all together.

CaptainClown

02-14-2008, 01:19 PM

LOL, did you just compare being a stunt man in a movie to being a police officer?

Yes I did compare the two. I said that a police man and a stunt man is someone doing their job and they know the risks involved.

Dr. Watson

02-14-2008, 01:19 PM

A lot of popular gossip blogs and sites are picking up news of the trailer (these are places where normally they only discuss celebtrash). The hype grows...I think my favourite post has to be this guy's

http://www.wwtdd.com/post.phtml?pk=3536

CaptainClown

02-14-2008, 01:19 PM

Sorry, I wasn't paying attention to you or reading your comments :huh:
There's a lot of brainless "the CGI sucks" posts and they were annoying from the get-go :(

I don't think the cgi sucks though, I just don't like their seemingly excessive use of it.

Figs

02-14-2008, 01:20 PM

Alright then how about trapeze artists, they provide the same function as a stunt team. They entertain the audience by performing elaborate stunts at the audiences amusement. Why perform a deadly stunt? There is a risk of death. Lets video tape it and just play it back for the audience.

That is not the same. If a trapeze artist dies while performing a stunt, should they not be allowed to perform that trick? The trapeze artist might have slipped and it was one out of thirty chance of it happening? He died doing what he loved to do. If he didn't he would just abandon it all together.

Although the trapeze artist is a much better example than the cop, sad to say your never going to win this argument with them CaptainClown.

They do have a point that using CGI is a safer way of doing stunts that could be extremely dangerous...even if the CGI isn't that great.

Over time I've gotten used to CGI in most movies so it doesn't bother me like it bothers others. I just want to see Indy kick some ass and find some relics!!

Golgo-13

02-14-2008, 01:21 PM

http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s42/indirav1/ok.jpg
http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s42/indirav1/ok3.jpg
http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s42/indirav1/ok3.jpg

Hunter Rider

02-14-2008, 01:21 PM

Alright then how about trapeze artists, they provide the same function as a stunt team. They entertain the audience by performing elaborate stunts at the audiences amusement. Why perform a deadly stunt? There is a risk of death. Lets video tape it and just play it back for the audience.

That is not the same. If a trapeze artist dies while performing a stunt, should they not be allowed to perform that trick? The trapeze artist might have slipped and it was one out of thirty chance of it happening? He died doing what he loved to do. If he didn't he would just abandon it all together.
Again not comparable, a trapeze artist HAS to do his trick, it's can only be done one way, a stunt man is employed to do many stunts, he doesn't NEED to do a retarded car stunt just so some director can satiate his hard on for realism when they can get the same result with a different approach, one has options, the other doesn't.

danoyse

02-14-2008, 01:21 PM

None of those are comparable, a Cop is doing a job that protects ppl and gets criminals off the streets, the skier is competing in a sport, stunt men can do plenty of stunts still but why do a retarded car stunt when it can be done safely ? the others have no options, stunt teams do.

Exactly. None of them are working with a studio paying millions to maintain a movie franchise. Even a professional skier doesn't have other options than to do the skiing himself. Cops can't be replaced by CGI.

And there are plenty of working stuntmen (and women) in Hollywood. But the technology exists today that lets them do crazier stunts, and the CGI lessens the risk of someone getting seriously hurt. And a studio isn't going to go through the legal and insurance problems of making someone do it. That's something to consider too.

CaptainClown

02-14-2008, 01:21 PM

Although the trapeze artist is a much better example than the cop, sad to say your never going to win this argument with them CaptainClown.

They do have a point that using CGI is a safer way of doing stunts that could be extremely dangerous...even if the CGI isn't that great.

Over time I've gotten used to CGI in most movies so it doesn't bother me like it bothers others. I just want to see Indy kick some ass and find some relics!!

I know I won't win..but I'mma die tryin

Rezzo

02-14-2008, 01:23 PM

Anyone else think the person between Mac and Marion is perhaps Abner?

http://i28.tinypic.com/25zjxwh.jpg

블라스

02-14-2008, 01:24 PM

I don't think the cgi sucks though, I just don't like their seemingly excessive use of it.

Which is why my comment was not directed at you, but at the countless braindead posters previously mentioned ;)

I didn't mind the CGI one bit. I thought everything looked fantastic.

CaptainClown

02-14-2008, 01:24 PM

Again not comparable, a trapeze artist HAS to do his trick, it's can only be done one way, a stunt man is employed to do many stunts, he doesn't NEED to do a retarded car stunt just so some director can satiate his hard on for realism when they can get the same result with a different approach, one has options, the other doesn't.

stunt men have their own specialty. The accident in TDK was caused by a stunt driver, not the man who died.

You could do your stunt, but accidents happen. Who is to say this was an insane stunt anyways. It could have been a mild stunt and been touched up by cg. Accidents happen.

블라스

02-14-2008, 01:25 PM

Anyone else think the person between Mac and Marion is perhaps Abner?

http://i28.tinypic.com/25zjxwh.jpg

Abner's a hippie? :huh:

I think he (or she :huh: ) might be like a Native guide wearing some kind of poncho?

CaptainClown

02-14-2008, 01:25 PM

Which is why my comment was not directed at you, but at the countless braindead posters previously mentioned ;)

I didn't mind the CGI one bit. I thought everything looked fantastic.

It doesn't look right to me. CG works best when its blended with realism. this looks like a greenscreen though.:csad: