Indiana Jones & The Kingdom of The Crystal Skull Discussion Thread (Spoilers)

[Deckard]

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="https://www.youtube.com/v/NFPI54fOWoo&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="https://www.youtube.com/v/NFPI54fOWoo&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

 

[IrishJedi]

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="https://www.youtube.com/v/NFPI54fOWoo&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="https://www.youtube.com/v/NFPI54fOWoo&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

 

[thenammagazine]

 

[Qrest Fourstar]

I get the "oldest story ever told" appeal. I do.

What I don't get (at all) is AVATAR setting all kinds of monumental box office records. Not even its technical achievements merit that. Not even close.

Even TITANIC as the Box Office Champ makes more sense to me, because I get the notion of millions or gob-smacked preteen girls wanting to see its cheesy bubblegum romance a gazillion times. But AVATAR? In 2010? Don't get it. And the box office phenomenon has to be the sole reason it even sniffed a Best Picture Oscar, much less was even nominated. And that's a pretty sad reflection, imho.

Look, it's a good, solid flick. But at the end of the day there is nothing truly unique or special about it at all. As I've said before, Cameron himself has made at least 2 better films that start with "A" in the title.

Total agreement. amen brother.

 

[Khev]

Khev, STAR WARS wasn't just a "global merchandising phenomenon". It instantly entrenched itself as a permanent piece of pop culture that has spanned 30+ years and multiple generations. It transcended beyond just being a movie/merchandise event in ways that AVATAR will never dream of approaching. It is and always will be immeasurably more iconic and recognizable.

Yes, but "Star Wars" has become a bit of a cinematic shorthand for any movie that takes you to another world and shows you things you really didn't think or even imagine were possible to see on film (or a digital projection.) Its an easy (if a bit lazy) reference point, especially for our generation since we grew up with it.

As I said I also consider JP and LOTR (and probably the original Toy Story now that I think of it) to be comparable to SW even if they aren't quite on the same level either. And I think that's where most people who make that claim are coming from.

Hell, I think Dr. Manhattan was just as good a CGI effect character, even though he's translucent and glowing, and also blue! . I'm not joking, though... I am 100% serious.

I've seen you mention Dr. Manhattan before. A completely pedestrian effect compared to the Na'vi, and far from an apples to apples comparison. Manhattan doesn't have hair, pupils, or solid skin. Three of the most difficult elements to pull off realistically with CGI (especially eyes, even Avatar struggled with that in a couple of scenes.) I can say the CG R2-D2 from ROTS was more photoreal than some scenes from Avatar but again its very easy to make something metal and inorganic.

I knew you'd say Na'vi Jake wasn't all that based on your previous posts but this is where I believe most of the world, inside and outside the effects industry, disagree with you. The Na'vi represent the latest efforts with the latest technology of the wizards at Weta Digital, the FX team responsibly for arguably the best visuals in cinema. When John Knoll and ILM were commissioned to help finish some of the scenes to make the release date I'm sure that the friendly professional/artistic competition lit a fire that much more for all parties to do produce their best work ever.

If you disagree then, eh, as you said, to each his own. I realize poor KOTCS has probably had enough of our Avatar talk but it was actually nice to have this sheltered little conversation without the drama of the official Avatar movie thread regulars.

 

[CelticPredator]

It wasnt about making the Na'Vi look realistic, it was making them FEEL realisitc. Which JC did.

 

[thenammagazine]

It wasnt about making the Na'Vi look realistic, it was making them FEEL realisitc. Which JC did.

I disagree. IMHO, It didn't feel "real," it felt "fantastic." There was never a time when I was watching the film and thought it could really "exist" per say. The CG was phenomenal, and the emotion played through the CG characters in a believable manner, but it still looked like CG.

 

[CelticPredator]

I thought they captured emotion entirely in the CG models. Thats what made the movie for me.

 

[IrishJedi]

I disagree. IMHO, It didn't feel "real," it felt "fantastic." There was never a time when I was watching the film and thought it could really "exist" per say. The CG was phenomenal, and the emotion played through the CG characters in a believable manner, but it still looked like CG.

That's my point. They never really look/feel truly organic or "photo-real" like other digital characters have.

Anyway, enough about AVATAR. I've already spent enough time discussing the film. It's really not worth it, especially in an INDY Forum.

Moving on...

 

[wofford29]

I think Jackson's Kong looked just as good as anything in Avatar. Showed just as much, if not more emotion in it's face as well. Without speaking.

 

[The Mike]

I liked Avatar for what it was, a good storyline abeit not original, great graphics and fairly good performances. I don't understand people seeing it 20x or threatening to kill children for one night with Neytiri. I get the wanting to ____ her, hell I wanted to ____ Aayla Secura and get freaky with those head tendrils but not really to the point of murder. I even think Amy Allen was better looking in paint than without.

It was a good movie, it isn't on par with Star Wars but then again to a non-Star Wars fan they probably don't understand the appeal of that franchise either. I'm interested to see what the sequel delivers.

 

[CelticPredator]

I loved it. I saw it more then once mainly because It was such a cool way to make a movie. The 3D was outstanding. Story? Ehh....but oh well. It's a fun movie that unfortuantly got overblown.

 

[wofford29]

You can never be overblown. Just sayin'.

 

[thenammagazine]

You can never be overblown. Just sayin'.

That's not true, unless you like foot cramps and bucking like a bull at the rodeo.