Hollywood is OFFICIALLY Re-Damn-Diculous.

[Shane 'ProgZmax' Stevens]

And why?  Because they recently passed yet another whiny ass, weak-kneed safety regulation, this time against using real whips of any kind in films.  While this may not seem too bad at first glance, allow me to say:

Indiana Jones 4

and follow it with them trying to FORCE (haha, Lucas chortle) the film to use a CGI whip for all the action scenes.  I mean shit, let's just have a cgi Indy voiced over by that crappy voice actor from FoA while we're at it.

Meanwhile, at least old Harrison still has enough balls to say a big 'fuck you' to the movie industry and will not do the film unless they change the regulation.

There's a bit of a blurb about it here: http://www.inentertainment.co.uk/ford-wants-whip-or-no-indiana-jones/

but you can find more sources if you care to.  Frankly, this whole thing disgusts me.

[MrColossal]

I'm for the ban on the real whip... If it will stop a fourth indy movie from being made. I have little faith in movie makers when it comes to revisiting old franchises.

In my opinion!

[Shane 'ProgZmax' Stevens]

My point is more about the regulations and how ridiculous they've become, not really whether you think Indy 4 will be shit or not.  Personally, I feel pretty much as you do on that front, Eric.

[Vince Twelve]

I read about that a couple weeks ago on aintitcoolnews, which I'm embarrassed to admit, I occasionally peruse to kill time.  But since that site is like a tabloid for movie news and the article said to take the story with a grain of salt, I wrote it off as a silly rumor.  But if it is true, it's completely ridiculous.  Don't industry executives have better things to be doing than banning fairly harmless props from appearing in films?  Like accusing consumers of being pirates and annoying everyone with proprietary formats and annoyingly intrusive security measures?  Or making ridiculous amounts of money and pretending like they care about carpenters and screenwriters who make the movies possible?

[Blackthorne]

Guys, it's a freakin' rumor.

They can light people on fire, jump motorcycles over cars, crash large sets of cars and yet a man cannot weild a leather whip?

You people believe WAY too much of what you read.


Bt

[LGM]

Yea, 90% of what you read is false or misleading.

[TheYak]

I'm both dreading and anticipating Indy 4.  Despite a fear that it'll blow (the previous 3 weren't actually "Good" movies, but thoroughly enjoyable all the same (before getting slammed for the "Good" remark, know that I own the box set)) I'll watch it regardless.

That CGI whip thing scares me.  Once they do that, I get this feeling that we'll see a whip seemingly moving of its own accord, twining itself around people's necks and whipping them back and forth like a flail..  potentially into other adversaries.  *shudder*  It's just too easy to visualize this happening.

[Ali]

This regulation doesn't go far enough! I say bring back the Hays code. Ban double beds, toilets and the word "gawd" from hollywood films. Think of the children!

[Mr Flibble]

....I liked the voice actor from FoA..

[SSH]

Yea, 90% of what you read is false or misleading.

Including the above statement

[LimpingFish]

I wouldn't be surprised if this rumor had some basis in fact. If shotguns can mysteriously become walkie-talkies...

And we live in a world were certain factions of the German government want to ban all violence against human/human-type characters in video games.

I remember a funny memo from Warner Brothers to the producers of the Batman animated TV show in the nineties, which told them to find an alternative way for Catwoman to land face down after falling out of a window, and not land on her breasts. For her landing on her breasts was unacceptable.

To breasts, one presumes.

[m0ds]

I read that Ford refused to do Indy 4 if he wasn't allowed to control the whip again. That of course is probably just a rumour, but at least it's a good one CGI whips suck.

Oh well, if they do CGI whip it up - anticipate Indiana Jones and the Treasure of the Templars instead, cos we used a real whip!

Personally I think health & safety is going to far altogether, not just in the movie world but the entire world. For example, it snowed here in the UK about 2 weeks ago, and guess what - kids were NOT allowed to play in the snow at many schools and colleges for health & safety reasons. Like calling Christmas lights "winter lights", how sad is that?? What ARE kids supposed to do? iPods and Xbox's are all very good but it doesn't really give a person the experience in life they will need, does it.

I get the sad feeling that "being a kid" has had it's day. It wouldn't surprise me if 3 year olds will one day have to pay tax.

[Nikolas]

At least the nursery for my kids, got the kids out to play in the garden with the snow.

It is a two edged problem here, cause if actually kids get hurt while playing in school, someone could potentially come and blame the school for the injury! which is totally reidiculous but it could happen. so in order to avoid that, wherever you turn you head you see this tiny sign :"Cannot guarantee nut free enviroment" (Example), which means that nut alergic people will die no matter what they do (even if chances in getting a nut, while eathing a Ceazar salad is close to 0...). Of course mentioning that "pesto" is not nut free, is... well... ok, but anycase one may not know...

Rumour or not rumour, thing is that the best we can do is lock ourselves+family inside, just in case... Ford may very well better not act again, or walk again, or breathe, cause... who knows... something may happen to him!

[ManicMatt]

I tripped over whilst reading this thread. It was distracting! I'm gonna sue CJ for every penny he has! 

Seriously though, there is waaaaaaaaaay too much CGI in films these days. I couldn't even bare to watch the last Hulk film, and Spiderman looks like a man made of rubber when he swings. And don't get me started on King Kong...

[MrColossal]

I think what you mean, Matt, is that there's too much bad CGI in movies. There's tons that you never notice because it's either amazing or you're not looking for the CGI.

Usually when involving a human I find it's easiest to spot

[LimpingFish]

It's very hard not to notice CGI if it's portraying something fantastical (an orc, a dog with two and a half asses, a monkey president, etc). Just as we notice when something is obviously an animatronic puppet. Some people prefer animatronics, though, giving it more artistic credence. Which is rubbish, really.

The best thing CGI ever gave us was a level of compositing unattainable in the optical age.

When CGI became so cheap that, fiscally speaking, it became the logical choice for filmmakers, that's when things went sour. It's cheaper (and quicker) to produce a digital character rather than its physical equivalent, and less troublesome.

It's the number of people currently in the field that have little or no grasp of the basics of animation, and therefore rely on motion-capture data exclusively, that can account for a large percentage of horrendous CG monstrositys. It's usually when something simply isn't moving right that it becomes noticable. Which is why the dinosaurs in Jurassic Park stand up today. Even though we know they don't exist, they move how we imagine they would.

Which is probably down to the old school, classically-trained SFX supervisors working on the movie, rather than the bit-jockeys.

[Nikolas]

My problem with CGI goes as this:

In King Kong, everything seemed fine! I mean the film is filled with CGI, cratures, Kongs, Dinos, what you want and what you get. No problem there! I almost believed it, and wanted to go searching for lost worlds...

BUT:

The main actress, spend a full day in the jungle fighting giant spiders, dinos, and getting to be a yoyo for a giant kong, and never the less she didn't even lose here lipstick.. I mean, while everyone is spending tons of time/money to have better looking and more realistc CGI, nobody gives a damn anymore for actors and what happens.

[LimpingFish]

Realism is apparently too ugly.