Indiana Jones IV starts shooting schedule

[Casey Green]

Not sure if this was already posted, but if you haven't seen it, it is a quick video released by Steven Spielberg from behind the scenes of the first day of principle photography on Indy 4.

http://www.indianajones.com//community/news/mov/firstday.mov

This is gonna be good... keep an eye out to see if any RED betas are on location! (Hey, ya never know.)

[Sanjin Jukic]

The movie direct link
http://www.indianajones.com//community/news/mov/firstday.mov

[Jonathan L. Bowen]

You think Spielberg would ever really go digital? I expect him to die with a 35mm camera in his hands, 40 years from now, lol. ;)

[Sanjin Jukic]

Any idea about the camera Spielberg is shooting from this photo below?

Panavision?

Arri?

Also as I can see it EVF rules!

http://www.sanjinjukic.com/extras/Spielberg_1.jpg

[Jonathan L. Bowen]

I really never thought Indy IV would happen, for a long time, with all the script issues and disagreements, etc.

[Priyesh P.]

Any idea about the camera his is shooting from this photo below?

Panavision?

Arri?

Also as I can see it EVF rules!

http://www.sanjinjukic.com/extras/Spielberg_1.jpg

Panavision Millenium, I think. The body looks whitish, so no Arri.

[Finner]

Ya thats a panavision body alright with a pana lense and the whit block battery ratchet strapped down also gives away panavision gear. I have never understood why so much of panavisions stuff is white. It is consistantly hard to hide in reflections and causes more work. I am not sure if I can tell if it is a millenium by the picture, the millenium is a really bomber camera camera though.

[Keith Alan Morris]

wow, alot of people must be hitting that link:

"The connection has timed out. The server at www.indianajones.com is taking too long to respond."

I think in that pic of Indy sitting in a chair they released a few days ago...he looks OLD.

not that there's anything wrong with that! the talkbackers at AICN dont though. good marketing move!

[David Mullen ASC]

You can see an Arri-435 I think on the remote crane in another shot.

Yes, that's a Panaflex, probably a Millenium judging by the little cut in the body near the base. I can't tell if it's an anamorphic or spherical lens though, but it looks too small to be an anamorphic lenses, though there are a few that are that small. Probably means he's shooting in Super-35 though.

[Priyesh P.]

Yes, that's a Panaflex, probably a Millenium judging by the little cut in the body near the base.

That's why I thought of a Millenium, too.

[Priyesh P.]

Ya thats a panavision body alright with a pana lense and the whit block battery ratchet strapped down also gives away panavision gear. I have never understood why so much of panavisions stuff is white. It is consistantly hard to hide in reflections and causes more work. I am not sure if I can tell if it is a millenium by the picture, the millenium is a really bomber camera camera though.

There were a few early prototypes of the Arricams which were white. And the very first thought I had was exactely the same you stated.
Does anyone know if there are benefits to paint the cameras white? I mean quite all panas were white as long as I've ever seen them.

[David Mullen ASC]

Keeps the camera and film cooler outdoors...

I mean, why are Mole-Richardson lamps painted burgundy/magenta? So they don't look like LTM and Arri lights.

[Tom Lowe]

Wow, this was really great to watch. The two amigos, at it again!

[chuck colburn]

Keeps the camera and film cooler outdoors...

I mean, why are Mole-Richardson lamps painted burgundy/magenta? So they don't look like LTM and Arri lights.

Exactaly right about the cooling. Also why every Photosonics or Wilcam hi-speed cameras were white. Had to keepum cool out there on the Whitesands missle range. lol

[Casey Green]

You can see an Arri-435 I think on the remote crane in another shot.

Yes, that's a Panaflex, probably a Millenium judging by the little cut in the body near the base. I can't tell if it's an anamorphic or spherical lens though, but it looks too small to be an anamorphic lenses, though there are a few that are that small. Probably means he's shooting in Super-35 though.

I remember hearing that Douglas Slocombe never used a light meter on Raiders... everyone has their own unique traits and I can't wait to see what Janusz Kaminski brings to the production. I had the pleasure of working with him on "The Terminal" - man, what a crazy cat!

[Robert Sanders]

Yup, Slocombe used light meters very little. He used to say that a Cinematographer just moves the meter around until he gets the reading he wants anyway. Which always made me laugh. I'm sure a few DPs would disagree.

But Slocombe definitely understood how to read light levels to the naked eye.

However, am I the only one who noticed a distinct lighting change with Last Crusade? I wonder if Slocombe's problems with cataracts and the fact that he was starting to go blind effected his work on Crusade. Many, many scenes appear very over-exposed and way over-lit.

[Priyesh P.]

Respect in any ways for Slocombe's lifetime achievement, but this:


However, am I the only one who noticed a distinct lighting change with Last Crusade? I wonder if Slocombe's problems with cataracts and the fact that he was starting to go blind effected his work on Crusade. Many, many scenes appear very over-exposed and way over-lit.
is why me and my brother always stick to the meter. In hectic moments or generally during work you get distracted and produce a subjective way of observing your scene. The lightmeter, in my opinion and judgement, is somthing like a "calibration device" for your eyes, you get to know where you are standing and where you may end or like to end with the current lighting.

[David Mullen ASC]

I remember hearing that Douglas Slocombe never used a light meter on Raiders... everyone has their own unique traits and I can't wait to see what Janusz Kaminski brings to the production. I had the pleasure of working with him on "The Terminal" - man, what a crazy cat!

Isn't that Frank Marshall standing next to George Lucas in the picture? Hard to tell.

[Casey Green]

Isn't that Frank Marshall standing next to George Lucas in the picture? Hard to tell.

Yes, it's hard to tell with the hat and glasses, but I think you're right... I've updated the picture to a better one. :)

[Robert Sanders]

I'm somewhat concerned about Kaminski shooting this movie. I adore his past work (well, most of it). But I'm just not sure that today's Spielberg/Kaminski team is capable of what Spielberg/Slocombe did in the past. I'm afraid Kaminski will over think it...over analyze the "emotional content" of his lighting.

[CVB]

I remember hearing that Douglas Slocombe never used a light meter on Raiders... everyone has their own unique traits and I can't wait to see what Janusz Kaminski brings to the production. I had the pleasure of working with him on "The Terminal" - man, what a crazy cat!

Casey, I was working on a project for Cisco and Janusz was brought in to evaluate a lighting situation we had... he sat down at the table, lifted his shirt and kept patting his bare stomach while looking at himself in the monitor. Very odd and funny at the same time.

[Casey Green]

Casey, I was working on a project for Cisco and Janusz was brought in to evaluate a lighting situation we had... he sat down at the table, lifted his shirt and kept patting his bare stomach while looking at himself in the monitor. Very odd and funny at the same time.

hahah, Curt - yes, I remember him out in Palmdale, smoking a cigar while riding a golf cart around chasing his one-eyed dog "Larry" in circles on the set...

also, since we shot on Halloween, there was a Jack-o-lantern contest (pumpkin carving), and I believe it was the Camera Dept. who won, with an incredible likeness of Janusz's face, but the topper was that they put a looping audio track inside of it (secretly recorded during production) of him yelling out crazy things to his crew!

Now that was funny! Many great memories from that show.

[Adrian Correia]

I am worried that the film will be a big departure visually from the other films...I was worried that maybe Kaminski would take it really out there with the look and this film wouldn't fit in the series. He's brilliant though, and it is Indiana Jones....so who cares!

[EditMan1]

i can't wait for this. hopefully they match the look of the previous films. Also, I hope they do a lot for the DVD bonus features.

[kunal2]

is Harrison ford playing in this pic.

[Priyesh P.]

i can't wait for this. hopefully they match the look of the previous films.

I think a disappointment is guanteed. Look what they did with Die Hard 4.
Geldberg...sorry, Spielberg want's to have the youngster's cash, too, so I totally doubt he'll keep to oldskool filming.
These sequels of 80ies movies are just new attempts to milk a very old cow for the very last time.
They (the producers etc.) only reckon on the glimpses of nostalgia, which is my personal view on this progression.
Terminator 3, Die Hard 4, Indiana Jones 4, Rocky 6+Rambo 4 - don't those people get ashamed anytime?

[Mathieu Ghekiere]

I remember hearing that Douglas Slocombe never used a light meter on Raiders... everyone has their own unique traits and I can't wait to see what Janusz Kaminski brings to the production. I had the pleasure of working with him on "The Terminal" - man, what a crazy cat!

Could you elaborate on that?
I love Kaminski's lightening, and I'm a huge fan of Spielberg, and if you have some experience working with Kaminski, especially on a Spielberg movie (although I have to admit that there are 2 movies of Spielberg I never really liked, first being 1941, the other being The Terminal) it would be nice to hear something about the way they work, how fast, which workflow, etc...

On the Indy IV topic: I was doubtful of this fourth movie, and I also thought Ford could be too old. But the picture they released, was fantastic! Yes he's older but he still looks like Jones allright :biggrin:

Also, I trust Spielberg that he won't make a mess of it. I still kept thinking they would cancel it, and that the official anouncement would be cancelled again, but with the picture and this film, it looks like it's finally coming!
Go indy!

[Casey Green]

Could you elaborate on that?
I love Kaminski's lightening, and I'm a huge fan of Spielberg, and if you have some experience working with Kaminski, especially on a Spielberg movie (although I have to admit that there are 2 movies of Spielberg I never really liked, first being 1941, the other being The Terminal) it would be nice to hear something about the way they work, how fast, which workflow, etc...

On the Indy IV topic: I was doubtful of this fourth movie, and I also thought Ford could be too old. But the picture they released, was fantastic! Yes he's older but he still looks like Jones allright :biggrin:

Also, I trust Spielberg that he won't make a mess of it. I still kept thinking they would cancel it, and that the official anouncement would be cancelled again, but with the picture and this film, it looks like it's finally coming!
Go indy!

Hi Sidderke,


Well, let's see. First of all, yes, I agree with you, IMO, The Terminal was not one of Spielberg's best. In fact, when I saw the final screening, it came off to me more like a bunch of episodes of a sit-com than a feature. But nonetheless, it was a huge show, and amazing to work on.

The set was built in an airport hanger in Palmdale, CA. It was probably one of the biggest sets ever built, since they basically were re-creating the international wing of JFK airport. Remember, just about the entire movie takes place in an airport, so shooting at a real airport for that amount of work was just out of the question.

It was just spectacular. They built a 3 story set with working escalators, mall stores, waiting areas with TVs, flight arrival monitors, a working food court, etc.

As for shooting, it went along at a relatively fast pace, partly due to the fact that the main set was almost completely pre-lit. The lighting was set so that within an instant, they could change from morning to afternoon to evening. It was sort of a controlled environment. Of course other lights were needed for each setup, but in general, the airport set was kind of pre-lit.

I also remember people saying that the world's largest backdrop was built for this film, which was a gigantic rendering of a view looking out from the waiting areas onto the runways of JFK airport.

They were definitely having fun shooting this... but at times, I remember thinking that creativity was losing out to the sheer amount of money available. It seemed that anything they wanted, whether it be camera equipment, set requirements, lighting, power, VFX, etc... they had at their disposal. I'm a firm believer that limitations help you find creative ways to solve problems, and often times, those solutions end up being some of the best parts of film making.

Another memory I have is of Steven trying to see what a low angle tracking shot was going to look like in his finder... but he couldn't get low enough and move around like he wanted to, so he had 2 people wrap him up in a blanket and then fly him around by lowering him near the ground and holding the ends of the blanket...

It was definitely fun (and intense at times) to work on and I appreciate having the opportunity... I'm sure there will be many other great stories to come from the Indy sets... looking forward to hearing them.

http://www.reduser.net/forum/uploaded/971_1183369337.jpg

[Priyesh P.]

I'm a firm believer that limitations help you find creative ways to solve problems, and often times, those solutions end up being some of the best parts of film making.


Hi Casey,

I believe in that, too.
Strict financial, physical or technical limitations urge you to reevalute elements, scenes and details, so that you are forced to reduce things to the essentials. OK, that can be overstressed at times and you also need a strong and skilled director and sometimes producer - but films like aliens, terminator etc. are the best examples for this thesis.

[Mathieu Ghekiere]

Hi Casey,

thanks for the reply. However I think that you are right with the statement that limitations bring lots of creativity (look at the original Alien film), I don't think this was the cause of the very mediocre to bad quality of The Terminal.
I just think the script was too easy, too melodramatic.
Spielberg wanted to make a very light film, and where he succeeded with Catch me if you Can, The Terminal was a bit too light, to my tastes.
The reason why I'm sure that the lack of limitations weren't the cause is because a man like Spielberg can demand every budget he wants. I think he had all the resources he wanted on films like Minority Report, Munich, War of the Worlds, AI, Catch me if you Can, (I'm naming only the recent ones, because The Terminal is too) and they were all better movies (to MY opinion) than the Terminal.

Thanks again for the reply. I would like to know how long a DP like Kaminski (on a normal, not very pre-lit set) does to think of a setup and setting it up, although I realise he's involved in préproduction too.

[Casey Green]

Hi Casey,

thanks for the reply. However I think that you are right with the statement that limitations bring lots of creativity (look at the original Alien film), I don't think this was the cause of the very mediocre to bad quality of The Terminal.
I just think the script was too easy, too melodramatic...

Yes, the script didn't help matters either. :) (which I was reffering to with my comment re: the episodic feel). But I still do believe that they may have been so side-tracked by being able to do just about anything they wanted, technically, that this most likely indirectly had an impact on their ability to concentrate on the story. Another possibility that is spoken of often about big-budget pictures with famous Directors and DPs is the scenario of other crew members adopting the "yes-man" attitude in which certain ideas are not fully analyzed or critiqued properly before being implemented. This may or may not have been the case with The Terminal... most likely a combination of things, but possible contributors to the end result.



Thanks again for the reply. I would like to know how long a DP like Kaminski (on a normal, not very pre-lit set) does to think of a setup and setting it up, although I realise he's involved in préproduction too.

Thats a good question. There were, of course, other locations we shot at on Terminal, but I don't remember anything out of the ordinary as far as the time setups took to prepare. It's been a while, so I'd have to think about that one. Perhaps someone who has worked on other projects with him could chime in.

[Greg Voevodsky]

yes, but Sean Connery turned down the request to return. He was "having too much fun" in retirement.