DVD Review HTF DVD REVIEW: Indiana Jones: The Adventure Collection (1 Viewer)

[TravisR]

I think I said it in one of the HD threads but LFL has about dozen titles that they own (Paramount has no say in a Blu Ray release of Indiana Jones) but Warners owns thousands so they don't have to 'worry' about maximizing their money as much as LFL does.

Whether I or you or anyone else likes it and whether it's right or wrong, waiting for more players to sell is almost definitely the reason that they're waiting. What other reason could there possibly be?

 

[mike kaminski]

On an unrelated note, I just saw a TV commercial for this. No mention of the box set, it just said the films were now available as special editions, with a shot of the three individual cases.

 

[Patrick H.]

Good info, Doug...I'll have to hunt that book down at some point. I've previously only read Joseph McBride's Spielberg bio, which I think pulled a lot of speculative info from 'Outrageous Conduct' regarding that specific incident. Even then, the impression I got was that his involvement was practically nil.

Very interesting info on 'Poltergeist' as well. It amazes me how there is always new info still coming to light about that production.

 

[Ron Reda]

Last night, I realized that my Indy collection from '03 was on my "pending" shelf i.e. I hadn't watched them yet! So, I broke out "Raiders" and figured I watch them all again. These DVDs held up pretty well for being 5 years old. There were several occasions in the beginning (one I recall being when Indy discovers the snake "Reggie" in the sea plane) when the film gets blurry almost like it was shimmy-ing back & forth. Those few occurrences aside, they look pretty good. That being said, I see not reason to double dip on this new set...well, not until the BR version comes out. The sound was pretty good as well, with some of the explosions sounding quite good.

 

[Douglas Monce]

The blurring you are talking about in the "reggie" scene was actually visible in the theater as well. It is a result of the vibration from the airplane itself that the camera was mounted to, not any problem with the transfer of the film.

There is another shot in The Last Crusade where Indy, Sallah and Marcus are driving in a car just before the tank scene that has the same kind of vibration. I remember seeing the film in the theater and thinking there was something wrong with the projection, until I realized it was vibration coming from the camera mount.

Doug

 

[Ron Reda]

Thanks, Doug, that's good to know!

 

[Jay Pennington]

I've always noticed that focus issue in the car scene as well, although I don't think it was caused by vibration, but was rather a depth of field problem. I believe the lens being used could not keep all of the characters in focus at one time, and they had to rack during the shot to focus upon whomever was talking.

 

[Douglas Monce]

It does look a little like a rack focus shot on video, but in the theater you could see that the whole image was going in and out of focus rather than focus shifting. It might have been more than just vibration from the camera mount, it might have been a badly mounted aperture plate holding the film in place in the camera.

Doug

 

[Lord Dalek]

Interesting to see that LFL has dropped the THX Optimizers from this release. Wonder how they're expecting us to callibrate our systems to stablize Indy's fleshtones now?

 

[mike kaminski]

Possibly it could be the flange depth minutely shifting if the film is actually vibrating as it goes through the gate of the camera but most of Raiders was shot with Panaflex's, which should not have this issue. On the other hand, vehicle mounts in the Amazon might use smaller, less stable gear like Arris. It might be a mixture of both. But if its vibration from the plane/car/vehicel it would be a constant softness because the vibration is so extreme, it shouldn't be phasing in and out. I don't recall the shot itself but it sounds more like a depth of field than a focal flange issue.

EDIT

Taking a look at the shots, the plane shot in Raiders is just vibration from the plane blurring the image. The car shot in Crusade has the same problem but there is also focus racking. The focus is on Salah for most of the shot, which causes a bit of sotfness on Indy and Henry Jones sr., and then when Henry Jones speaks the focus racks back to him, making Salah slightly soft and Indy softer, and then when he leans forward the focus racks with him and all three become reasonably sharp. But there is a phasing bluring throughout from the vibrating engine/terrain.

 

[David_Blackwell]

I bought the bonus material disc for $3. I'm watching the extras on the new set now. not too impressive. did enjoy watching Raiders again though.

 

[Douglas Monce]

I looked at it again and clearly there is a rack focus going on in the car shot in Crusade, however there is also a weird vibration going on. You can see it clearly on Sallah's test pattern tie regardless of his being in focus or not. I think it maybe an intermittent vibration coming from a vintage car, and ether a bad aperture plate, badly mounted camera, or badly mounted lens. Maybe some combination of all three.

You are probably right that the car mount cameras are probably Arri's or Moviecams, however they aren't particularly known for low quality movements or lens mounts. I think particularly the shot in Crusade is likely the result of a malfunction that was not discovered until they watched the dailies. By that time its likely they couldn't go back to the location and had to live with the shot as it was.

Doug

 

[Douglas Monce]

Lucas no longer owns THX so I don't know if their association has been cut as well or not. I notice fewer and fewer THX discs in general.

Doug

 

[Matt Hough]

These new Indy releases feature a new THX logo before the main feature begins.

 

[mike kaminski]

Oh I agree there is the vibration on top of the racking, but its just caused by the car itself. The intermitten and random nature of it shows its just variations in the engine/terrain--you can see the same thing in the "Reggie" scene. An improperly seated lens would be shook right off the camera body, and in either case improper mounts look different from the phenomenon you see here--its the same as when, if you hold a powerful hand drill and close one eye you get the same "blurring" effect.

 

[Douglas Monce]

Oh I see they just took off the optimizer?

Doug

 

[Douglas Monce]

True. Actually I was thinking of a vibrating lens element rather than the lens mount.

The fact that the vibration effect is more pronounced in the side shot than on the front on and the POV makes me think there was some issue with the camera or mount on that particular setup. There is virtually no vibration in the other two shots.

Doug

 

[mike kaminski]

Yeah, thats true. Possibly that side shot is mounted via an arm of some kind attached to the wing, which would transfer more vibration. I'm not sure how else you could have a mounted shot from that kind of profile angle.

 

[Douglas Monce]

A car of that age probably has a running board. It maybe attached to that or even bolted to the frame from underneath.

Doug

 

[mike kaminski]

I meant the plane in Raiders.