AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Indiana Jones Trilogy
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Indiana Jones Trilogy - Page 4

post #91 of 1228
1/30/12 at 11:10am
I really liked, and still like Last Crusade....even more than the childhood letdown of TOD. Nothing beats Raiders, but I was 15 when Crusade came out, and then bought it on Laserdisc, then DVD, and hopefully the upcoming BLURAY....
Reply
Reply

Gear mentioned in this thread:

post #92 of 1228
1/30/12 at 11:33am
My favorite movie series of all time. Awesome, awesome news.
Reply
Reply
post #93 of 1228
1/30/12 at 11:50am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post

I rank them in quality by release date.

Raiders -- pure awesomeness! Spielberg/Kasdan/Lucas/Williams at their best

Temple -- except for a few grating moments provided by Willie and Short Round, it is a high spirited, fun romp from start to finish with wonderfully choreographed stunt sequences and film editing, and a magnificent Williams score. It continues the kind of "Tales from the Crypt" horror comic motif started in Raiders with macabre images and gruesome, otherworldly death scenes.

If you watch Gunga-Din with Cary Grant, you'll appreciate this movie even more since you'll see just how much that classic inspired Spielberg and Lucas.

Crusade -- It was a kind of lackluster, lazy outing similar to Jedi with the Holy Grail being chased by the Nazis instead of the Ark of the Covenant being chased by the same Nazis. The bad guy's death is also pretty much lifted from Raiders.

One thing that bugged me the most about Crusade... they had to try and "explain" Indiana Jones rather than keeping him enigmatic with a mysterious, "fill in the blanks yourself" background as in the first two films with a totally unnecessary young Indy adventure prologue.

Crystal Skull... what... wait... there was a fourth movie? Really?

Well said and I agree 100%.

Raiders is my favorite movie of all time. I can recite it line for line, much to my wife's chagrin.

Interestingly enough, Temple is my second favorite of the series. I find it way more enjoyable than Crusade. Crusade seems like a retread. And I hate what they did to the Sallah and Brody characters in that film.
Reply
Reply
post #94 of 1228
1/30/12 at 1:52pm
I guess this is turning out to be, 'I was this old when this movie came out' thread, but that's ok. Everyone has their tastes, and FWIW, I think that the TRILOGY was, AND STILL IS, a great ride and a great success. Crystal Skull was just an attempt to get the dollar signs from the people in their 30ies and 40ies, and has no love invested at all from the creators.
Reply
Reply
post #95 of 1228
1/30/12 at 2:34pm
Take away the fridge nuke, the vine swinging scene and falling off more than one waterfall... and how many of you would really have problems with Crystal Skull? I think those three short edits would leave most people with little to complain about, except for those who were upset that it was about aliens instead of Christan mythology.

And I can't help but roll my eyes so very, very hard when the people who complain about the things I listed above are those who love Temple of Doom.

Jumping out of a plane with an inflatable raft while landing with no injury and then sledding down the side of a mountain, or the water tower that can mystically fill a mine shaft with water up to the ceiling as if it were a breach in an underground river that magically crosses the pit of molten lava to keep chasing them down the other side of the tunnel is every single bit as bad as anything in Crystal Skull. But people ignore this about Temple of Doom because they grew up with it and go nuts about it in Crystal Skull because they were adults when they saw it for the first time.
Reply
Reply
post #96 of 1228
1/30/12 at 2:41pm
I really enjoyed Crystal Skull!
Reply
Reply
post #97 of 1228
1/30/12 at 3:06pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deviation View Post

Take away the fridge nuke, the vine swinging scene and falling off more than one waterfall... and how many of you would really have problems with Crystal Skull? I think those three short edits would leave most people with little to complain about, except for those who were upset that it was about aliens instead of Christan mythology.

And I can't help but roll my eyes so very, very hard when the people who complain about the things I listed above are those who love Temple of Doom.

Jumping out of a plane with an inflatable raft while landing with no injury and then sledding down the side of a mountain, or the water tower that can mystically fill a mine shaft with water up to the ceiling as if it were a breach in an underground river that magically crosses the pit of molten lava to keep chasing them down the other side of the tunnel is every single bit as bad as anything in Crystal Skull. But people ignore this about Temple of Doom because they grew up with it and go nuts about it in Crystal Skull because they were adults when they saw it for the first time.

Exactly, the over use of cgi was my issue.
Hell frying pan to the head in raiders with comedy noise was hardly sophisticated.
Reply
Reply
post #98 of 1228
1/30/12 at 3:22pm
Didn't know this was coming out - I actually want this more than the six Star Wars films (and yes, that includes 'Temple of Doom' - I love that movie!).
Reply
Reply
post #99 of 1228
1/30/12 at 3:28pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

Obviously not, otherwise he wouldn't have said what he did.

Obviously
Reply
Reply
post #100 of 1228
1/30/12 at 3:31pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by worth View Post

Have you seen the first film? There are impalings, exploding heads, melting faces, henchmen being chopped up by propellers, Indy casually murdering people, shooting guys in the head and running them over with a truck...

Yet none of that was done to innocent children.

There's a certain sadism with the violence in TOD that the other films don't have. If you can't see it then I don't know what to tell you.
Reply
Reply
post #101 of 1228
1/30/12 at 4:29pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterTHX View Post

Yet none of that was done to innocent children.

There's a certain sadism with the violence in TOD that the other films don't have. If you can't see it then I don't know what to tell you.

There's a gleeful sadism in both Raiders and Temple. That's why I mentioned the old 50's/60's "Tales From The Crypt" horror comic style. Ever flip through any of those? Pretty freakin' twisted. The Indy films are very tame by comparison.

What I find truly sadistic and what others find sadistic may be entirely different. I, for one, abhor most Quentin Tarantino, Robert Rodriguez, and Zack Snyder films.

The use of children in peril in Temple is in keeping with the type of villains being portrayed in the movie, and are the motivating factor for Indy to put the smack down on the Thugies.
Reply
Reply
post #102 of 1228
1/30/12 at 4:53pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterTHX View Post

Yet none of that was done to innocent children.

There's a certain sadism with the violence in TOD that the other films don't have. If you can't see it then I don't know what to tell you.

Most of Steven Spielberg's films have been excessively violent. And I think it's worth noting that TEMPLE OF DOOM is the film that caused the MPAA to create the PG-13 rating -- basically to accommodate the R rated level of violence in Spielberg films.
Reply
Reply
post #103 of 1228
1/30/12 at 4:57pm
The most important question in my mind: so Paramount is doing the BDs. How does that affect the chances of their being messed up in some way?
Reply
Reply
post #104 of 1228
1/30/12 at 5:01pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by reanimator View Post

Most of Steven Spielberg's films have been excessively violent. And I think it's worth noting that TEMPLE OF DOOM is the film that caused the MPAA to create the PG-13 rating -- basically to accommodate the R rated level of violence in Spielberg films.

Really? I was always under the impression that Gremlins was the cause for the creation of the PG-13 rating. I guess we learn new things every day.
Reply
Reply
post #105 of 1228
1/30/12 at 5:12pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill C. View Post

The most important question in my mind: so Paramount is doing the BDs. How does that affect the chances of their being messed up in some way?

I don't think so with as good as Saving Private Ryan came out
Reply
Reply
post #106 of 1228
1/30/12 at 5:50pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by EvlAsh View Post

Really? I was always under the impression that Gremlins was the cause for the creation of the PG-13 rating. I guess we learn new things every day.

Complaints about both led to the new rating, 'though at the time it was affectionately known as "The Temple of Doom rating".
Reply
Reply
post #107 of 1228
1/30/12 at 6:11pm
Temple of Doom is a great film and above any criticism, but it has a unnaturally sadistic bent. There's nothing wrong with that, but it's there it has gushes with sadism and un-ironic ghastliness.
Reply
Reply
post #108 of 1228
1/31/12 at 8:13am
Quote:
Originally Posted by reanimator View Post

Most of Steven Spielberg's films have been excessively violent. And I think it's worth noting that TEMPLE OF DOOM is the film that caused the MPAA to create the PG-13 rating -- basically to accommodate the R rated level of violence in Spielberg films.

I would say some of his movies have been excessively violent, but most have not been.

Edit: typo.
Reply
Reply
post #109 of 1228
1/31/12 at 9:02am
Spielberg has pushed ratings for a while. It's still somewhat shocking that Jaws was PG. It scarred me for life - you won't find me in anything but a swimming pool or hot tub. LOL
Reply
Reply
post #110 of 1228
1/31/12 at 11:20am
Quote:
Originally Posted by nick_danger View Post

Spielberg has pushed ratings for a while. It's still somewhat shocking that Jaws was PG. It scarred me for life - you won't find me in anything but a swimming pool or hot tub. LOL

The PG rating in that time period was very different than what it is today. Barbarella is rated PG! That would easily get an R today.
Reply
Reply
post #111 of 1228
1/31/12 at 8:28pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post

The PG rating in that time period was very different than what it is today. Barbarella is rated PG! That would easily get an R today.

From what I've read there was a US cut that was PG and a racier international cut, but when it was issued on home video Paramount (unknowingly?) used the international cut to make the transfer but kept the PG rating on the box.

Oddball things like that happen more often than you think. The current BD of Damnation Alley uses the TV dialog which substitutes non-swears for the cursing in the film. The cursing is intact on the old VHS version.
Reply
Reply
post #112 of 1228
2/1/12 at 5:03am
The ratings didn't change, people just treated them differently.

G = general audiences won't be offended.
PG = parental guidance is recommended because you should probably be involved in your child's life and care about what he sees and hears because kids are dumb and don't make good choices. But asking some parents to be responsible for their children is just too much trouble.
R = Your kids really want to see it.
Reply
Reply
post #113 of 1228
2/1/12 at 10:21am
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterTHX View Post

From what I've read there was a US cut that was PG and a racier international cut, but when it was issued on home video Paramount (unknowingly?) used the international cut to make the transfer but kept the PG rating on the box.

If you're talking about Barbarella, I find it hard to believe that any cut of the film would ever qualify for a modern PG. The entire movie is nothing but one extended sex joke.
Reply
Reply
post #114 of 1228
2/1/12 at 10:26am
Quote:
Originally Posted by reanimator View Post

Most of Steven Spielberg's films have been excessively violent. And I think it's worth noting that TEMPLE OF DOOM is the film that caused the MPAA to create the PG-13 rating -- basically to accommodate the R rated level of violence in Spielberg films.

The first film distributed with a PG-13 was RED DAWN ('84), correct? Temple started the talk for a new rating...
Reply
Reply
post #115 of 1228
2/1/12 at 11:07am
Quote:
Originally Posted by paul nyc View Post

The first film distributed with a PG-13 was RED DAWN ('84), correct? Temple started the talk for a new rating...

I thought it was 'DreamScape'.....
Reply
Reply
post #116 of 1228
2/1/12 at 12:12pm
According to wikipedia:

Quote:


Adoption of PG-13 rating

In 1984, explicit violence and gore in the films Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom and Gremlins caused an uproar among parents over their PG rating. Their complaints led Hollywood figure Steven Spielberg, director of Temple of Doom and producer of Gremlins, to suggest a new rating to MPAA president Jack Valenti for movies that have too much adult content to be rated PG, but not quite enough to be rated R. Spielberg's suggestion was for an intermediate rating of PG-13 or PG-14. On conferring with cinema owners, Valenti and the MPAA introduced the PG-13 rating on July 1, 1984, indicating that some material may be inappropriate for children under 13. The Spielberg films were never re-rated.

The first film distributed with a PG-13 rating was Red Dawn (1984). Dreamscape and The Woman in Red were released on the same day the following week. The Flamingo Kid (1984) was the first film to receive the rating, but was not released until December 1984.
Reply
Reply
post #117 of 1228
2/1/12 at 12:14pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by paul nyc View Post

The first film distributed with a PG-13 was RED DAWN ('84), correct? Temple started the talk for a new rating...

Quote:
Originally Posted by KBMAN View Post

I thought it was 'DreamScape'.....

Dreamscape was the first officially rated PG-13 by the MPAA but Red Dawn was the first released.

You see that all the time these days, some movies get rated months before they come out in the theaters and some movies are still advertised "This Film Is Not Yet Rated" a couple weeks until wide release!

EDIT: as far as Wikipedia goes I remember the hubbub about the new rating very well and newspaper articles at the time all cited Dreamscape as the first film, no mention of The Flamingo Kid...

And if you watch those films you'll see back then PG-13 was pretty hardcore, and it's been all but neutered now. Super 8 and The 6th Day are a couple of films I can think of within the last several years that were "really" PG-13.
Reply
Reply
post #118 of 1228
2/1/12 at 3:54pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post

The entire movie is nothing but one extended sex joke.

Am I the only one getting the pun?
Reply
Reply
post #119 of 1228
2/1/12 at 4:26pm
As far as ratings goes, my mom took my twin and I to see "ALIENS", a rated R movie that scared me a little as a 12 year old, but for some reason, I love the f_#$k out of this movie to this day.....go figure! I even saw Raiders, and I was only 6, and I didn't really remember to much except that the film broke during the showing....
Reply
Reply
post #120 of 1228
2/5/12 at 12:06pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by worth View Post

I saw the new 4K restoration a couple of weeks ago. The only change to the film is that the reflection of the cobra in the glass has been erased, as it was for the DVDs. The sound mix was new, as well.

Is 4k restoration the maximum, most thorough restoration that a regular movie can receive?

Is 8k restoration available also like the Blu ray Baraka received? According to reviews, Baraka is considered the pinnacle in Blu ray picture quality. Or is this process only available for movies shot originally with 70mm film like Baraka was? Raiders of the Lost Ark was probably filmed originally with 35mm.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Blu-ray Software

Gear mentioned in this thread:

AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Indiana Jones Trilogy