The rise of digital effects has led to a visual revolution that would have stunned audiences in the ’80s and led to heart attacks for those of the ’30s. So, why is it so common for critics and audiences today to dismiss the effects of this revolution as fake? (a rare double pun, successfully executed)

I still remember the hype surrounding the debut of the Jurassic Park dinosaurs. All the details of how the effects were achieved with state of the art animatronics and magic computers were exuberantly (Ultimate Fighter reference!) shared by Spielberg and the ILM crew, and the audience (myself included) ate it up like raptors feasting on Samuel L. Jackson. A decade and a half later, Jurassic Park level CGI is being rendered on laptops in the time it takes to watch the T-Rex take over Isla Nublar. Also during that time, though, we’ve seen the rise of DVD special features that detail every step of the filmmaking process, from storyboarding and shooting to costume design and extras herding. This has led to audiences feeling more and more like they’re ‘in the know.’ To quote Edward Norton (pictured here, calmly explaining his position):

It has always been my firm conviction that films should speak for themselves and that knowing too much about how they are made diminishes the magic of watching them.

Imagine a magician performing to and audience of magicians. That seems to be the boat that the modern director is finding itself (gender neutral!) in.

What’s interesting, though, is that directors, if they’re like most artists, are less concerned with how real an effect looks as they are its contribution to the overall story being told and in turn, how that story makes the audience feel. After all, that seems to
be the point of artistic expression.

But wait (you say) how can you (me) worry about the use of CGI in IJKCS (I thought it would save space and reading time to use an acronym instead of typing out ‘Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.’ I think it worked out well.), yet lecture us for not being impressed by the aftermath of the digital effects revolution? The simple answer is because I’m your father, and I said so. The complex answer is that certain films and genres have their own baggage and suspension of disbelief requirements. The Indy movies, for example, are a throwback to the early Saturday morning serials. The acting, story, characterizations and effects all served as an homage to another era, and the filmmakers took pride in their use of practical special effects techniques that were in some case intentionally behind the times. To suddenly (if 19 years can be considered sudden) take this known and loved character out of his vintage environment and drop him into a decidedly digital world is ‘kind of a big deal.’

Although the cat may already be out of Pandora’s bag (that’s the saying, right?), it might be time for directors to close the set again or at least reseal the cave where they keep the effects programmers locked up for weeks at a time while their brilliant but
nerdish hive mind slaves away over the dust code for the wood panel that’s in frame for approximately 2 seconds. It has to be just right, or it’s back to the mines.

As for the nitpickers in the audience, instead of analyzing the fractal patterns of an individual tree, maybe it would be better to let ourselves enjoy the forest in the context of the story being told, especially if that forest is totally owning Eisengard.

I grew up on the Indiana Jones trilogy and was old enough (according to my parents) to see and remember Last Crusade in theaters. While I wouldn’t go so far as to accuse Lucas, Spielberg, and Ford of raping my childhood if the fourth adventure fails, I do have more baggage going in than say, the kids who are buying the Dr. Jones spoon. Then again, I do have significantly less than say, the adults who are buying the Dr. Jones spoon.

Let’s start with the concerns…

Bringing Shia LeBoeuf (I should probably look up that spelling) in as the side kick who may or not be the son of Indy (<--highlight only if you really want to know) will certainly help with the teenagers, but it could potentially hurt the legacy. LeBibliotech's been great in everything I've seen him in, so it has less to do with him and more with what they do with the character.

As if to counter balance the potential loss of adult ticket sales Shia Lebiff (warmer?) represents, Marion (not to be confused with Robin Hood's housekeeper) is back after a two film absence. The narrative probably has a better reason for her return, but still, it's covered ground as for as the Indiana Jones story goes. Is it worth going back after two films and 19 years?

Also, just how is that Fedora going to look on green screen? Judging by the trailer, the world of Indiana Jones has gone heavily computer generated. This one really scares me, because one of the things that made the first trilogy so great was the way practical stunts and effects were utilized. Not only did it keep a connection to the old serials that inspired them, it made the danger seem more real. Granted, times have changed, but it might not be for the better in this case. I have found hope in a recent Times interview with Spielberg:

The idea is, there’s no illusion; what you see is what you get. My movies have never been frenetically cut, the way a lot of action is done today. That’s not a put-down; some of that quick cutting, like in ‘The Bourne Ultimatum,’ is fantastic, just takes my breath away. But to get the comedy I want in the Indy films, you have to be old-fashioned. I’ve studied a lot of the old movies that made me laugh, and you’ve got to stage things in full shots and let the audience be the editor. It’s like every shot is a circus act.

But wait, there’s more (and it’s slightly less cynical!)…

Before seeing the trailer, Harrison Ford’s age was a big concern for me, but not only did the hat still fit, it looks like the grandpa jokes might actually be funny. If you think about it, though, the draw of the character has always been that he’s in over his head. We rooted for Indy because he didn’t have all the answers or even an outline of a plan. He just knew what needed to be done (“It belongs in a museum!!!”) and didn’t quit until it was. Age is a challenge that fits in well along those lines.

Another thing I’m excited to see, is how Dr. Jones handles the transition from battling the Third Reich to wrestling the Red Army, although I can’t deny I’m a little disappointed to see the Indy/Nazi dynamic go the way of, well the Nazis. Cate Blanchett is rumored to have an interesting take on her role as the leader of the Russian amabassadorship to Indiana, but hopefully, the characters won’t be too fleshed out. After all, the Indy franchise is still a throwback to the old serials, right?

Oh, and John Williams is back! Mr. Williams has undergone a serious stylistic change since the early ’90s. The Prequel trilogy (if you don’t know that that refers to Star Wars, please leave) is really the only time in recent memory that he’s returned to the melodic style that made him famous. Let’s see what he’s come up with for the return of Dr. Jones.

I’m really looking forward to this one, but I’m keeping my expectations in check alongside my emotional baggage.

Now, with the benefit of having actually seen the movie; I am going to talk about it.

The acting was solid, with the brand name cast taking their work seriously. There’s always a risk with A-list actors in genre movies feeling the need to wink at the audience, letting them know that this was more about the paycheck than the material. There’s none of that here, despite the quarter dozen oscar nominated performers in the film. I was excited to see the director, John Favreau (Vince Vaughn’s buddy!), show up in the movie. He had more than a cameo but he didn’t pull a Lady in the Water. If M. Night Shyamalan directed Iron Man, I imagine he’d be behind the armor more than the camera (cheap shots aside, The Happening looks to have potential).

The story was strong, with good to great characterizations for almost everyone involved. Tony Stark’s reason for becoming Iron Man not only made sense but felt inevitable. His skill set was presented in a way that made even his early design work in an Afghani cave seem plausible, which was probably the hardest part of the story to swallow. The take your interval side of me was glad to see them raise the issue of ‘legitimate’ arms dealing, although they didn’t take it beyond the actions of individual businessmen. They defanged the Afghani tribesman, too, turning them into an odd coalition of Arab, Soviet, and Mongolian warlords, rather than making them an Osama Bin Laden and Al Queda clone. I suppose he was one cave over.

Another interesting aspect of the story is Iron Man’s moral code. He has no qualms about killing those that are asking for it, and he does it with style. That, along with early Tony Stark’s liberal moral code (the man has lady skills, period), made me wonder if it took an edit or two to get the MPAA to hold back on the market altering R.

Finally, you can’t review this movie without talking about the humor. It is incredibly funny, with Robert Downey Jr.’s quick witted delivery put into overdrive. Who knows what was improvised or what was written, but there looked to be a lot of both, and every bit of it worked. I won’t ruin any of it here, other than the gold-palladium alloy line I opened with (I’m as bad as Carlos Mencia! [explicit]).

Speaking of special effects (play along), they were more than impressive; I imagine you would have to either be in the effects business or obsessed with it to know how each effect shot was done or more importantly, whether or not it was even an effects shot. I really liked how they weren’t afraid to ‘damage’ Iron Man’s armor. It really sold the idea that this was real.

The music wasn’t bad, but it felt like a video game score, functioning more as ambience rather than a work that stands on its own as the musical story of Iron Man. That seems to be a long term trend for movies for the most part, though. Spider-man, Batman Begins, and the Hulk all had great scores, but unless you’re a music nut like myself, you don’t come away with a clear theme to hum like you do with say, William’s Superman or Elfman’s Batman . Of course, the newer comic book movies have more conflicted heroes, filled with self-doubt and moral struggle, so it makes sense that the music reflects that with more subtlety and ambiguity. With Iron Man, though, it was clear that Stark knew who he was once he made the decision to go metal, so I would have liked a more heroic melody, rather than just the rhythmic chug of a distorted guitar.

The final fight was a bit anti-climactic, but only relative to how exciting everything else was. Speaking of endings, be sure to stay through the credits to see what the future holds for Iron Man. I’ll give you a hint, it may involve saving airline passengers from an army of snakes, but let’s hope not.

Iron Man is a great launch pad for the summer movie season, and if the previews of The Dark Knight and The Incredible Hulk that came before the movie are any indication, comic book movies aren’t going anywhere anytime soon (that’s a good thing).

Quint: I think the hardcore fanbase was really excited to see the smoke monster return and I think the idea that Ben has some sort of control over it is really fascinating. I think that that has really piqued the interest of a lot of people, especially what is coming up in the next few weeks. I know you can’t say much, but can you talk about, based on what you know, do you think the fans will be satisfied with the promise of last weeks episode? Do you think that will be fulfilled?

Michael Emerson: Oh yeah, I think they are going in to some mind bending new surprising directions. I am liking the evolving idea. Let’s say that Ben was able to manipulate the smoke monster, but on the show everything is a binary system, everything is in balance, morally balanced or economically balanced, so for Ben to make a thing happen like that, there is also a price, I think, that he had to pay. We don’t know what Ben paid yet to make the smoke monster come. We don’t know that he… “Is he allowed to do that?” and everyone who has power also pays a price. John Locke is going to pay a price. Ben has paid a price… Nothing is for free in terms of power or morality on the island and I’m beginning to see that the writers are more interested in that pattern, too, of this living ledger book system.

It’s a great interview, and here it is.

It will be interesting to see if there’s a backlash over time, because unlike employees, the manipulated faithful aren’t financially compensated. ‘Fan boys’ already tend to think that the producers of the product owe them creative input due to their loyalty. I can only imagine what actual involvement in the machine of promotion will lead to.

Now, on to the trailer itself…

The new preview makes me want to call a movie I haven’t seen unbelievably amazing. Nolan seems to be living up to his word, having described the movie as a crime drama in the style of Michael Mann’s ‘Heat.’ There is an unprecedented amount of daylight for a Batman movie, which is interesting, considering just how dark the tone of this movie looks to be (I mean, it’s ‘The Dark Knight,’ not ‘The Bright Son’, after all).

This is pure speculation, but I’m guessing that the amount of daylight follows the rise and fall of Harvey Dent. Batman and the Joker’s world is dark and cynical. Dent’s is bright and optimistic. As he rises to power as attorney general, he’ll pull Gotham out of the darkness and make Batman less necessary. As he gets pulled toward the darkness and eventually falls, night will fall on Gotham all over again, making Batman a necessity. Or not.

After early reports of plans to shift promotional focus away from the Joker, due to Ledger’s death, WB said they were going to continue marketing the film as originally planned. I think this is for the best, because it will allow people to get a better idea of whether or not they want or are able to sit through a movie where an apparently unparalleled villian is portrayed by someone who’s died so recently. From the new Joker footage in the trailer, Ledger really does seem to disappear into the role (and behind the makeup). I honestly didn’t think of Ledger’s death until sometime after watching the trailer, and I have to give credit to his performance in the clips for that.

Wow, July 18 is a bit too far away. Oh well, at least Iron Man’s out on Friday.

If you haven’t heard, NBC has officially cancelled Scrubs, which has resulted in untold carnage throughout the world. That second part may be made up, but it’s still pretty bad news.

All hope is not lost, though, since it’s being reported that ABC has decided to take another network’s hilarious but ratings challenged show after cancelling its own (Carpoolers died much too young).

NBC will air six more new episodes of Scrubs this season, beginning this Thursday, April 10. (Woo!) The cast finished shooting episode “712″ (the 12th episode of season seven) on Monday, which is the last episode that will be shown on NBC. However! The production train keeps on chugging.

According to sources on set, Scrubs began shooting an episode on Tuesday that is being numbered as “713/800.” (Meaning, it is the 13th episode in production this season but is scheduled to air in season eight.) The cast and crew will shoot through August and are expected to end on episode 816.

Those episodes—yes, 16 of them by my count—are slated to air on ABC.

Source: E!

While we’re on the subject of Scrubs, there’s some related casting news for Oliver Stone’s movie about President Bush the second. Elizabeth Banks, who plays the accidental mother of JD’s child on the show, has been cast as Laura Bush. From what I hear, Josh Brolin (playing the President) isn’t complaining.

Thanks to mmamania for linking to the video and proelite.com for producing it.

If you’re not already planning to, be sure to watch Shamrock Vs. Cung Le on Showtime tonight. It should be an exciting style fight:

Clips, not full episodes, can be embedded like so:

Entire episodes can be linked.

The site is still in beta, and I’ve already come across a bug in the video overlay functionality, but the videos themselves play fine and look decent. Also, they’re following the commercial break revenue model, so no free rides here.

I’ve been watching South Park for years, but have had entire episode runs go by unseen. These new fangled internets may come in handy after all.