It is currently May 1st 2025 2:04 pm




  Page Previous  1, 2
Post Posted: May 27th 2008 11:40 pm
 
User avatar

Join: March 22nd 2005 11:53 pm
Posts: 1493
Location: Deep Space Nine
Whenever I go to get something out of the fridge now, a part of me wants to rip everything out and climb inside. What the fuck is wrong with me?


Post Posted: May 28th 2008 12:01 am
 
User avatar

Join: October 12th 2004 9:34 pm
Posts: 2577
Location: Toronto, Canada
I'm probably going to see it with my dad tomorrow. He was a big fan of the originals and I'm curious to see his reaction to this one.


Post Posted: May 28th 2008 7:08 am
 
User avatar

Join: July 1st 2005 10:27 am
Posts: 57
twice in theaters now, 2nd time was better, noticed more, plot seemed better. I still cringe at the 'Mutt of the Jungle' swings, and the 'Jawa George Prairie Dogs', however I can see why my kids loved those sequences.

All in all, I loved it.


Post Posted: May 28th 2008 3:47 pm
 

Join: March 22nd 2005 3:06 pm
Posts: 187
Location: Lexington, KY
darthpsychotic wrote:
Well I went to see this again tonight and the original issues I had with the first viewing have subsided.


Good to hear, I'm looking forward to my second viewing as well.


Post Posted: May 28th 2008 11:52 pm
 
User avatar

Join: October 12th 2004 9:34 pm
Posts: 2577
Location: Toronto, Canada
Saw it a third time tonight with my dad and got to see it through his critical and impatient eyes.

For me, the movie is feeling more and more like a companion to the originals and not a detachment. The first half is definately stronger and more 'Indy' feeling than the second, and the tarzaan scene is basically the worst part of the entire series but it is what it is. His first impression was that it was the worst of the four. I was stunned to see that he liked the ending, but his number one criticism? The film is too unrealistic because Ford, 65 (as well as my dad, who is born 3 days before Ford), should not have been physically able to perform those stunts and absorb the hits.

The man can accept 'interdimensional beings' as the creators of the pyramids but can't cut an aging actor in peak shape any sort of break. Pops then came to this realization on the drive home: "Well, I guess it's as unrealistic as the others, I enjoyed it." Touche.


Post Posted: May 29th 2008 5:59 am
 

Join: July 29th 2007 3:01 pm
Posts: 47
INDIANA JONES and the KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL

Whatever your personal opinion on popcorn movies during modern Cinema’s second golden era (that being the mid 1980’s through the late 1990’s), it’s a safe bet that some of your fondest film-going memories include the groundbreaking leaps in storytelling and often soul swelling emotive pallets of Steven Spielberg.

From Jaws to E.T. The Extra Terrestrial (speaking now of course of the purist, unmolested version of the latter) and on up through the first Jurassic Park endeavor, the Silver screen, where this type of fare is concerned, has never shone as brightly. It would seem, however, that the turn of the century has left that heyday pulverized limply in its wake, and we are now left with merely a thoughtless, sloppy and poorly executed caricature in the guise of a once iconic series of films that once upon a time were able to suspend disbelief, and take you on an episodic adventure like no other.

Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is so bad, so egregiously pitiful and on so many levels, I scarcely know even where to begin.

While I, yes, happen to be an ardent fan of the franchise ( I hated Last Crusade more or less, but now after KOTCS, I consider it on much higher ground) I’m not going to take the fan-boy approach one might expect. Because, as you may or may not know, I also happen to be a professional in the Entertainment Industry, and have a practical knowledge of how things work and why from concept to finished product, as it were. So, while not entirely objective, my review will be adhering to at least the rudimentary rules of thumb as to why this farce should be shit-canned as a truly sad attempt to produce an otherwise very possible worthy successor to and at the very least moderately adequate follow up for the 3 previous adventures of Indiana Jones…

First, I am not going to address any of the situational plot-points here. Not because I don’t want to spoil it for those who have yet to see it, but because it doesn’t matter. The plot was a workable one, though one of a couple of roads they could have taken better. Personally, a more direct ( and far less cornball, low-brow and obvious humoristic incursion) and sincere approach dealing with a begrudgingly set in his ways Older Indy, being pulled in to a last impossible adventure would be something that on the whole would have worked a lot better, and certainly in a more respectable fashion. I didn’t write it, however, so I am going to rely on what was given, not what could have BEEN given where the basic storyline is concerned. I will instead dwell on this travesty in an all around, technical and actual fashion. And let me state, I was fully prepared for this film to go either way. I thought however, that it would be at least as good if not better than The Last crusade. And no, I was never expecting it to come anywhere close to Raiders. That film stands alone as a cinematic masterpiece and seamless use of celluloid…

From the opening sequence of KOTCS, I knew there was going to be trouble. Crazy, hit-or-miss, fuzzy-creature obsessed George Lucas’s penchant for the obviously ridiculous is the first vomitous mass that belches forth from the screen and squarely into our concession-filled laps with his painfully, clearly usurped-over-Spielberg Directorial choice of cross-dissolving from the (classic, mind you) Paramount Logo, into, sigh, a Prairie Dog mound…complete with erupting Prairie dog. Wow. Well, at least it didn’t have Jar Jar Binks bursting forth screaming whatever the hell he screams ad nausium, given whatever situation he happens to be in. The fact remains, however, that these two numb skulls; one a former Directing and Producing great in the genre of the popcorn event flick (and sometimes even the heavier fare) and the other, a relatively lucky geek that thankfully hit just the right tone on what would become one of the most successful and endearing modern day myths of a generation, would choose for our first reaction to the re-visiting of the legendary world of Indiana Jones, a painfully amateur attempt at a cheap laugh, rather than something worthy of the opening shot.

This would be the running thematic afterbirth for the entirety of the film. Cheap, obvious attempts at wink-wink humor one might find on the first draft of a script by a wannabe film maker that should instead be seeking long-term employment in the fast food industry. When the collective forces put together for this film’s genesis weren’t being woefully inadequate, nay, insulting to the task at hand in terms of ideas for this 4th adventure, they were dropping the ball elsewhere well into the physical production. Technically, this film is just plain sloppy. The editing (nothing less than atrocious), scene focus and timing and overall technique are so excruciatingly amateurish; I couldn’t believe I was watching. And as for yet another now former Great (that being John Williams), a more slapdash, audacious collection of rip offs of his own work could not be imagined. Nor could be (until I actually experienced it first hand) his half-gutted attempts at “scoring” the film by simply recycling bits and pieces from his previous installments to sort of just “fill in the blanks”. But even here, at the very basic least of what one would come to expect as Johnny’s bottom line, this guy lost his chops, seemingly unaware that there were a whole lotta’ quiet spots that should have been filled with something besides silence, and a gigantic mound (pardon the call-back) of places and cues that absolutely screamed for it.

Let’s now examine the cringe worthiness that has substituted itself for what we consider in former incarnations of the “Indyverse”, that phenomenon known as “acting”. Watching THE (in my opinion) former leading man in a role ( I deem this only as to the unfortunate placement of Harrison Ford under the now lost-to-the-wind directorial capabilities of Steven Spielberg, and in this unfortunate choice of character arcs which they plastered onto his on-screen alter ego of Indiana Jones) I not to long ago believed he could handle with unbelievable gusto and moxy, now deteriorate before my eyes as he spat forth looks of confusion, bewilderment and borderline senility (as if Stevo was literally off screen shouting, “Harrison…HARRISON, look over here and make your eyes go real wide like your surprised!”) was something I was not expecting. Nor was I prepared for. It was like watching a train wreck of Titanic proportions.

Truly, sadly, how the mighty have fallen.

Aside from this apparent loss of his basic ability to perform in the way we have all been used to in every film he’s ever done ( that being the “Fordian” method), Harrison seems also, and I guess it’s a result of the aforementioned phenomenon, to have forgotten completely who Indiana Jones was. This is not the same character, older or not. And I won’t even get into the completely odd way his looped dialogue in the opening sequence sounded. Almost otherworldly, and from another Actor entirely.

Karen Allen. God, how does one describe this performance other than desperate? Aside from the poorly written schoolyard banter between Marion and Indy, Ms. Allen is lucky she has her knitting business to fall back on. Once a high caliber performer of the classic variety, she is now another sad shell of her former self, amidst a cacophony of similar egg-wrappings.

I could go on about the uselessness of the character of Mac ( who I wanted to shoot myself (with bullets, not a super 16) about the time he pulled his 3rd switcharoo, Cate Blanchet ( who I love in everything else she’s ever done) and her, in turn, under utilized character arc, abilities and place as a pseudo-Villain, the cheese-ball wedding, the disappearing characters that served no other purpose than exposition, and the survival of just about any enemy Ruskie thrown from a moving vehicle to show that he/she didn’t die. The more common agreed upon infractions that even most die hard Indy fans will tell you they hated, such as the Tarzan swinging, the fuzzy monkeys, the smiling while driving off a cliff, etc.

But I won’t. I am tired of writing this review. Indiana Jones (as a furthering adventure franchise with what's been established in the three films prior) is dead. This film has no place among its predecessors. The one saving grace of the entire debacle was Shia Labeouf. The kid was solid, and out-classed everyone he happened to be on screen with. Even with this sorry excuse for a script, he made his scenes work, and I believe was the only one, not only trying, but capable.

For me, the one true Indy rode off into the sunset with his pals 19 years ago.

And he will be sorely missed.


Post Posted: May 29th 2008 11:11 am
 

Join: May 3rd 2005 4:16 pm
Posts: 59
Location: Dublin, Ireland
THANK YOU NewYorkActor!

I am frankly AMAZED at the easy ride this movie is getting in here. I thought all you guys had taste???!!!???

Awful, awful film. One of Spielberg's worst. And not just a bad Indy movie, but a bad movie period.

I'm not going to go into any great detail as I can't be bothered and I'm running late as I type this. But if this is the best that they could come up with after 19 years then I give up!

All involved should be ashamed of themselves. Ford should retire - I actually felt sorry for him while I was watching him flounder around in this mess. Lucas has finally lost his mind and is obviously drifting more and more out of touch with what audiences really want. As for Spielberg, well, this is the same Spielberg who made Hook, The Lost World and The Terminal. Enough said.

I have been a HUGE Indy fan since I was a kid and I'm a huge Spielberg fan too. Heck, I even love the Star Wars prequels (flaws and all) and will defend them to my grave. But this was inexcusably bad.

The Indy movies will always be a trilogy to me.

Such a wasted opportunity. Shame.


Post Posted: May 29th 2008 1:37 pm
 
User avatar

Join: October 12th 2004 9:34 pm
Posts: 2577
Location: Toronto, Canada
NewYorkActor wrote:
INDIANA JONES and the KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL


Now, I've been here a while and we've had some real schmucks post on this website, but this was absolutely the worst post I've ever read. Your opinion isn't the issue but it's your elitism that's absolutely disgusting; especially for someone who is at best an amateur at his craft without a recognizable credit to his name. You remind me of the academics from law school who blabber on and on about logic and theory without having a clue about how the real world works.

Your vocabulary isn't impressive, it's obnoxious. You don't speak that way in real life, you're instead just trying to lend some sort of authority and credibility to your 'review' which is basically an exercise in douchebaggery. Recognize that there are people on these boards much more educated than you'll ever be, and have lost more money than you'll ever make, before you bring that bullshit here.


Post Posted: May 29th 2008 3:17 pm
 
I am Jack's bowel cancer

Join: May 2nd 2005 4:19 pm
Posts: 444
Location: NorCal
Wow, that may be the most stuck up, self loathing, my-little-sister-could-have-done-better review I have read in a reeeaaly long time. While trying to sound educated and an "expert" in not only film, but in Indiana Jones as well you have come off, again, like an ass. Everyone can have an opinion, but that doesn't mean it doesn't suck. I haven't seen the film yet but I am going with the intention of being entertained by a film that is not real. It's fucking Dr. Jones doll, not Schlinder's List II. Seriously, you have made yourself known on this board now in a very short time with your "expert" opinion on film/all things that suck. While I enjoy the character you play on the internets, this whole charade is getting really old.

That being said thanks for the review and I think the saying can be changed now to NewYorkActor raped my childhood. And CoGro, great post.


Post Posted: May 30th 2008 7:43 am
 

Join: July 29th 2007 3:01 pm
Posts: 47
Okay guys. Seriously, you all are really over the top with your anger. No problem. It's been fun lurking here over the years, but a little less fun being a member.

I'll leave you all to your web space.

Sorry for the intrusion.


Post Posted: June 1st 2008 2:06 am
 
User avatar

Title: Mortician
Join: May 26th 2005 1:23 am
Posts: 1923
Location: Progress City
I remained spoiler free for months on this one, and didn't get to the theatre to see it until tonight. I liked it. It wasn't the greatest movie I've seen all year or anything, but it was enjoyable and entertaining.

A lot has been posted about specific good/bad moments allready, so I'm not rehashing the whole thing here. I really dug the opening sequence, the chases/fights and the cemetary warrior guys. And the monkeys/Tarzan thing didn't bother me any more than Wookies giving the Tarzan yell all across the SW Galaxy does. Mildly absurd? Yes. Embarrasing to sit through as a moviegoer? Not at all. The nuke, the ants, and the ship launching at the end were probably the most impressive parts, visually. The story wasn't the most intruiging of the series, but it wasn't bad.

I have, since seeing this, read quite a few reviews (here too) that trash this movie in ways I find ridiculous. If you think this was bad, you people have never seen a really horrible movie. Try watching the remake of Diabolique with Sharon Stone from a few years ago. You will joyfully tear your eyeballs out and eat them before ever seeing it again. This film is not horrible. It was maybe less Earth shattering than you (the unhappy ones) might have hoped it would be, or wanted it to be, but it wasn't un-enjoyable. To me anyways.

As far as Mr Actors review and the subsequent responses are concerned, I'm confused. So some folks thought you had an elitist tone and a potentially unjustified sense of expertise sprinkled throughout your review? It's okay pal, you haven't really posted a lot of reviews here, right? There's going to be some trial and error in any endeavor, and sharing your opinion here is no different. Not everyone is going to agree with you, or like what you have to say or how you say it. You must have known that coming in, right? But fuck, maintain some composure man. Have some self respect. I don't feel bad enough about your life story to change my mind about what you wrote. And I doubt anyone else does either.

Theres no crying on the internet. Except in rape-porn and all the emo-kid shit. And sane folks don't look at either of those. Well, not much anyways.


Post Posted: June 3rd 2008 12:26 pm
 
User avatar

Join: December 1st 2004 9:42 pm
Posts: 433
I'll try to give my review. But maybe I'm just a simple peasant, so it might not be as important as the New York Actor's opinion, though I'd be happy to post my CV if he'd like.

I'll go scene by scene and give quick general impressions, I still haven't formed a coherent review in my mind, though after seeing it a second time, I'd give it about 4/5 if I were forced to grade it on some kind of scale:

I'll go as far as I can before I have to get back to working...

REVIEW PART 1:

STARTING OFF WITH A BANG
+ Love the opening Elvis music. Set the period.
+ Bad guys taking out the American soldiers in the opening, quickly establishes these villains as cold-blooded and evil, always a must for the B-movies.
+ Action in the warehouse was great, the cinematography and editing was quite fluid, and more dynamic than what we're used to in past Indy's.
+ "You don't know him, you don't know him!" Great line, Winstrone just has a great voice and was great in a pretty 2D role as Mac.
- Indy surviving the A-Bomb in the fridge: a little too over the top, but...
++++ Indy watching the A-Bomb blast: quite necessary. Gotta set the stakes - everybody knows the Nazis in 30s and 40s are the personification of evil, but the way we view Russians and the Cold War, they just are not iconic in the way Hitler and the Nazis are, the A-Bomb reminds people of what was at stake at this period in time, and why Indy has to stop the Russians from gaining any other-worldly powers.

SETTLING IN FOR SOME EXPOSITION
+ The Reds talk, again, setting the period and gave the film a little bit of substance, though it needn't include it, as this is just a B-movie at the end of the day.

THE INTRODUCTION OF MUTT AND THE CHASE
++++ Shia Lebouf as Mutt. I've been on this kid's bandwagon for a while. He has awesome comic timing and a great intensity. In fact, he is a lot like Harrison like that - he can make things seem really intense and real in seemingly unreal situations - perfect for action and adventure flicks.
+ The scene in the diner, great dialogue, succinct exposition
- As I said earlier, I'd have told Indy right then and there that it was MARION, and it would've ratcheted up the tension for him.
++++ The chase, one of the best scenes in the movie, despite being perhaps the simplest visually.


I'll move onto more later...


Post Posted: June 3rd 2008 2:25 pm
 
User avatar

Join: December 1st 2004 9:42 pm
Posts: 433
PART 2 of my thoughts...


FOLLOWING THE TRAIL TO THE SKULL
+++ Mutt and Indy's quick bit of character development, ending with Indy telling Mutt working on motorcycles is A-OK as long as its what he loves doing.
+++ To the use of "diegetic" sound (hey, I know them fancy film terms too, whatd'ya know?) and using the street music, nice touch.
+ To the scene inside Oxley's former cell
+++ To the entire sequence of finding the skull:
+ To Indy blowing the dart first, + To Mutt combing his hair, + To "part time teacher", + To finding the skull and "what is this"?

As you can tell, up to this part, I am really digging this movie. Really, so far, its on par with Raiders in terms of how efficient and tight the script is, how effective the dialogue is and how enjoyable the set pieces are. From the moment Indy and Mutt are captured outside the tomb, things get a little rockier, though its an enjoyable ride nonetheless. I will continue when I can...


Post Posted: June 3rd 2008 2:47 pm
 

Join: August 6th 2004 6:29 am
Posts: 857
I've seen this twice now, and it's possible my attention wandered both times -- but there really is no "it's not the mileage, it's the years" line, is there? It's in the comic book, so I assume it was in the screenplay at some point.


Post Posted: June 3rd 2008 3:33 pm
 
User avatar

Join: March 22nd 2005 11:53 pm
Posts: 1493
Location: Deep Space Nine
That line was seen in photos of the Monopoly game, but it definitely wasn't in the movie.


Post Posted: June 3rd 2008 8:09 pm
 
User avatar

Join: March 15th 2008 12:55 pm
Posts: 42
Location: Ontario
From what I've read, the "it's not the mileage, it's the years" line is from the Frank Darabont script. It was one of (apparently) many lame sheep things he threw in there (think the 'Saucer Men from Mars' script where during the wedding everyone from the previous movies show up and ShortRound drives the limo). This is also why his script wasn't used I believe. I enjoyed 'the Mist' alot and 'Shawshank' is okay, but I have no idea why Darabont is so pissy over the fact he was fired, he wrote what was probably a terrible/mediocre script - that's part of the job.

Also, check out the 'Complete Making of Indiana Jones' by J.W. Rinzler - awesome book, it's pretty surprising how much of Indy 4 was set in stone from the beginning. It seems that the employed writer's job is just to fill in the blanks between Point A & Point B of George Lucas' ideas (i.e. George says he wants to see Area 51 and a rocket sled, so Indy falls through the glass floor of Area 51 and finds a rocket sled). The most disappointing part of the book (besides lack of coverage for Johnny Williams) is the lack of Darabont drama. Spielberg states that he did a pass on the script that George wasn't happy with, and besides keeping the Marion returning idea, that's all she wrote. Bummer.


Off topic, I was thinking - wouldn't it be cool if they made another Indy film, but pulled a TOD and make a prequel to 'Crystal Skull'? Maybe a year prior to the events of the latest film (Harrison isn't that old that it would make a difference and maybe get Viggo Mortenson to play Indy in a teaser flashback). It could be darker (Henry Sr.'s death) and without Shia (not that I didn't like him). It would also give Sean Connery a chance to top off the Connery legacy with a better film then 'League of Extraordinary Gentlemen'. I was just thinking about this when reading the 'Making of' - apparently Indy's age was supposed to factor into the story more (a man who has met so many historic figures, but has yet to leave his own mark on history and dealing with that is kind of depressing) and Henry Sr. warning Indy that he will die alone like his mother.

And personally, I want to find out what happened to ShortRound, he's an annoying character but I feel guilty when he tells Indy that he loves him/he's his best friend, only to go missing by 'Raiders' - I want to find out that Indy did the honourable thing and gave him up for adoption so that he could live a life of privilage. and become a ninja.

LongWayRound!


Post Posted: June 3rd 2008 8:26 pm
 
User avatar

Title: Mortician
Join: May 26th 2005 1:23 am
Posts: 1923
Location: Progress City
Dude, Short Round moved to the Goondocks.


Post Posted: June 3rd 2008 10:03 pm
 
User avatar

Join: October 12th 2004 9:34 pm
Posts: 2577
Location: Toronto, Canada
Short Round is the best sidekick in cinema history.

Really though, I would LOVE to read Darabont's script. Koepp's was clearly a mish-mash of concepts. I want to know if there was a wittier way of executing the second half of the story (getting the skull back to Akator and integrating Marion) and/or making Indy's involvement in the adventure more significant.

I definitely want to pick up the Rinzler book. I love his stuff.


Post Posted: June 4th 2008 12:27 pm
 
User avatar

Join: December 1st 2004 9:42 pm
Posts: 433
CoGro wrote:
Short Round is the best sidekick in cinema history.

Really though, I would LOVE to read Darabont's script. Koepp's was clearly a mish-mash of concepts. I want to know if there was a wittier way of executing the second half of the story (getting the skull back to Akator and integrating Marion) and/or making Indy's involvement in the adventure more significant.

I definitely want to pick up the Rinzler book. I love his stuff.


I don't think there needs to be a more elegant way of getting the skull back - just look at Raiders, it was all Chase the MacGuffin type stuff, and there ain't nothing wrong with that. To me, where the second half of the film was lacking was the tone, which is part script/part directing/part acting/part music. Don't get me wrong, I found the final act of the film extremely entertaining, but it lacked intensity and went for humor too often.

In fact, one of my favorite lines of the movie was "What are you looking at Daddy O, she's getting away!" because it was one of the few times in the second half of the flick that a character didn't seem to take for granted the inevitable outcome: Indy wins, bad guys perish. As I mentioned earlier, Shia is great at that (intensity in action scenes), and the more Mutt, the better, IMO.

Raiders struck an amazing balance between comedy and intensity, with the balance landing heavily on the intensity side (as well it should for that film) and maybe it's not even worth trying to emulate what that film achieved by creating action-adventure perfection. So in the end, will I accept the lighter, more slapsticky, yet ultimately enjoyable, final act that they produced? Sure.


Post Posted: June 4th 2008 3:19 pm
 
User avatar

Join: March 15th 2008 12:55 pm
Posts: 42
Location: Ontario
For the record, Frank Darabont's Indy 4 was titled 'Indiana Jones And The City of the Gods' (long rumored title) which included a band of Nazis in hiding. After he was fired, George had a pass on the script and titled it---wait for this--- 'Indiana Jones And The Phantom City of the Gods' - this is no lie, I guess a plain ole 'City of the Gods' wasn't extreme enough. Following that, Jeff Nathanson (Catch Me If You Can) came up with 'Indiana Jones And The Atomic Ants' when he worked on the screenplay (which in my opinion is the worst title being that it's named after what would have been a 5min sequence in every version of the screenplay, with no real bearing on the plot and therefore very misleading to Atomic Ant fans). And the final working title (before 'Crystal Skull') was 'Indiana Jones And The Destroyer of Worlds' (David Koepp), which is interesting because at the point Koepp was brought in, the whole 'saucer v.s. military' battle scene would have been dropped like 5 scripts ago - makes you wonder what the title was referring to...

As for the end of the film we got, the way I understood it was Indy was returning the crystal skull to the temple "because it asked him to" in return for treasure, which was the knowledge they probably would have offered had it not gone to Spalko instead. Remember, though wise there is probably still a bit of Indy who craves fortune & glory, but at that point in the film he was probably more concerned for the well-being of his family and getting them out of the temple safely, which was the selfless thing to do - we saw what greed did to Mac. Also, when the skull made the link between their minds, there was probably alot of history that Indy knew (that we didn't) regarding the aliens being marooned on our planet and wanting to be reunited - essentially Indy is just a nice guy I guess (the "treasure" being extra incentive). I'd love to read the novelisation and hear the story in more detail - anyone remember the ROTS novelisation where Anakin had inner monologues with the "Snake" (Satan) that beckoned him which turned out to be the dark side/himself at the end (I loved that shit) - I would imagine the Indy book would have more of the same. Overall, this could have been explained more clearly in the film, but Spielberg is notorious for cutting scenes (even essential ones) if they disrupt the flow of the film.

Also, I'm going to throw another idea out there for a potential Indy sequel and suggest that George 'I want to put the word phantom in every title I write from now on' Lucas wait 10 years and make a sequel that takes place during the late 60's/early 70's, and take inspiration from exploitation/cheap horror films. Shia could be the lead and Pam Grier can play his love interest. I call it, 'Indiana Jones (& His Pal Mutt) And The Revenge Of Robo-Hitler Zombie Squad'. Wait for it!

Indy: "Hippies - I hate these guys."


Post Posted: June 4th 2008 11:25 pm
 
User avatar

Join: October 12th 2004 9:34 pm
Posts: 2577
Location: Toronto, Canada
Good post. I really enjoyed that and I definately want to pick up the Rinzler book now.

Re: my comment that the second half needed to be more witty - I think I agree with the criticism that KOTCS went into autopilot once Indy/Mutt are captured. Spielberg usually gives us something more interesting than an interrogation scene and a flat introduction of one of the series' most beloved characters. I just think that every plot point from the camp on arrived 'on cue' rather than being discovered organically. Oxley's autowriting ("I should have seen this!" pronounces Spalko) and his character in general seems to be the answer to every puzzle and predicament the heroes encounter. When a movie goes on autopilot, it loses its charm and heart and that's what I felt happened here.

It's been said a bunch of times already, but the diner scene/motorcycle chase is so perfect that I'm genuinely proud of the team for its execution. Johnny's score sends shivers for how 80s that scene feels - especially the playful notes cued by Indy's punches.


Post Posted: June 6th 2008 5:05 pm
 

Join: November 1st 2007 5:05 pm
Posts: 7
Location: Philip-Pines
MY review may sound stupid but I still call it a movie review
The should consider a kaminoan as ana alternative to the close encounter alien
hoped you'll like it!
[web]http://anjelo.wordpress.com/2008/05/24/indiana-jones-4-movie-review/[/web]
The theatres here in the Philippines weren't full for indy. I wonder why? Me and my whole family loved indy for decades.


Post Posted: June 6th 2008 7:46 pm
 
User avatar

Join: March 22nd 2005 11:53 pm
Posts: 1493
Location: Deep Space Nine
The movie made me love the character of Indiana Jones even more. I could never stand to think of that awful one-eyed crone from the Young Indiana Jones TV show as the last we see of Indy. For me now, KOTCS is the end. One of my favorite lines in the movie by Indy to Mutt, "If that's what you love doing, never let anyone tell you different."


Post Posted: June 8th 2008 3:29 pm
 
User avatar

Join: October 12th 2004 9:34 pm
Posts: 2577
Location: Toronto, Canada
MannyOrtez wrote:
To "part time teacher.


Does anyone but me think the read was better in the first trailer than it was in the final mix?

I agree with NYA's frustration about the obviously dubbed re-reads and this was one of a few examples that I didn't like. The opening sequence "You're not from around here, are you" is the most obvious - Indy sounds sort of like James Bond (which is actually one of two nods to James Bond in the film, the other being the Oxley line "Henry Jones. . . .Junior"). I guess you could argue it fits considering the sand castle story everyone knows about.


Post Posted: June 9th 2008 5:23 am
 
OBGYN
User avatar

Join: August 25th 2004 12:31 pm
Posts: 3644
I finally saw this over the weekend, and I have to say a LOVED it!

I definately put Crystal Skull above Temple of Doom and at about the same level as Last Crusade. The Star Wars references, including the Jawa-Gofers, were a hoot. I didn't have any more trouble with the unbelievable moments than I did with Raiders or the others.

I stayed 100% spoiler free, so the movie was a total surprise to me, and a hell of a lot of fun.

And there has been nothing, I mean nothing, as sexy on screen this year as Cate Blanchett popping a big damn ant between her knees.
:funky:


Oh, and...

NewYorkActor wrote:
INDIANA JONES and the KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL

Whatever your personal opinion on popcorn movies during modern Cinema’s second golden era (that being the mid 1980’s through the late 1990’s)...



If Cinema had a "second golden era," it sure as fuck didn't start in the mid 80's.
More like it ended then, unless you're a fan of Goonies and Batteries Not Included. :lol:


Post Posted: June 9th 2008 12:18 pm
 
User avatar

Join: December 1st 2004 9:42 pm
Posts: 433
MannyOrtez wrote:
To "part time teacher.

CoGro wrote:
Does anyone but me think the read was better in the first trailer than it was in the final mix?

I agree with NYA's frustration about the obviously dubbed re-reads and this was one of a few examples that I didn't like. The opening sequence "You're not from around here, are you" is the most obvious - Indy sounds sort of like James Bond (which is actually one of two nods to James Bond in the film, the other being the Oxley line "Henry Jones... Junior"). I guess you could argue it fits considering the sand castle story everyone knows about.


For part-time teacher, I actually liked the theater version better, I always thought the trailer version sounded odd (it sounded like they cut "you're a" and "teacher" from two different takes or something). I agree completely about the "you're not from around here?" line, Harrison sounded funny not just with that line, but in a couple places in that opening scene.


Post Posted: June 9th 2008 10:34 pm
 
Bush Pilot
User avatar

Join: March 23rd 2005 3:46 pm
Posts: 1483
Harrison's voice-over monologues made me think of his uninspired lines in Blade Runner! Am I the only one who thinks Ox's "Henry Jones... Junior!" is hilarious? Apparently, because I'm the only dork in the theater who laughs out loud.


Post Posted: June 12th 2008 3:09 pm
 
User avatar

Join: September 15th 2006 11:25 pm
Posts: 136
Finally saw this today.

Definitely a flawed movie but not the abomination that I feared.

I really don't get the bitching about Shia. I thought he did a great job.


Post Posted: June 13th 2008 10:01 pm
 
Fat Bastard

Join: September 27th 2005 8:01 pm
Posts: 1550
Location: In hell
I finally downloaded the film via demonoid since 'm not sure gonna be able to see it in theaters. My thoughts on it, it wasn't too bad definitely is CEOTK meets Indiana Jones. I enjoyed it for the most part but at the same time I felt it was rushed especially considering how much freaking time they had to work on the movie. I really hope they don't make any more.
I can see why though a lot of people didn't like it too much.


Post Posted: July 14th 2008 9:24 am
 
User avatar

Join: October 31st 2003 7:00 am
Posts: 956
I'm really late to this party but I finally saw Indy 4 yesterday.

My gf asked me what I thought about it after and I replied, "Big and dumb".

That about says it all.


Post Posted: July 28th 2008 3:20 pm
 
User avatar

Join: April 20th 2004 11:57 pm
Posts: 523
Location: Southern California
George Lucas wrote:
"Indiana Jones only becomes complicated when you have another two people saying ‘I want it this way’ and ‘I want it that way’, whereas, when I first did Jones, I just said, ‘We’ll do it this way’ — and that was much easier. But now I have to accommodate everybody, because they are all big, successful guys, too, so it’s a little hard on a practical level.

“If I can come up with another idea that they like, we’ll do another. Really, with the last one, Steven wasn’t that enthusiastic. I was trying to persuade him. But now Steve is more amenable to doing another one. Yet we still have the issues about the direction we’d like to take. I’m in the future; Steven’s in the past. He’s trying to drag it back to the way they were, I’m trying to push it to a whole different place. So, still we have a sort of tension. This recent one came out of that. It’s kind of a hybrid of our own two ideas, so we’ll see where we are able to take the next one.”


Not to rub it in, but I fucking called it way back when...

Joe1138 wrote:
Thinking back from last night, Indy IV feels more like a clash than a true collaboration between Lucas and Spielberg.


Read all about it here.


Post Posted: July 28th 2008 5:07 pm
 
User avatar

Join: October 12th 2004 9:34 pm
Posts: 2577
Location: Toronto, Canada
After reading that, I don't want Indy 5 to be made. But in the event that it is, Steve's got to be in control. The problem is that George holds all the cards: it's his franchise, his money that produces them and therefore he calls the shots when it comes to whether or not we're paying for out of control stunts or CGI. Hopefully Steven refuses to direct another film unless he's given the freedom to make his own film.

I hate to admit it, since I've almost always given George the benefit of the doubt, but he's become stubborn to the point where he does things in spite of people just to prove that he can. "No studio would let me make an Indiana Jones movie involving interdemensional aliens, so I will! Just to spite them!"

It's very disappointing to know that a potentially great Indiana Jones story was wasted.


Post Posted: July 28th 2008 5:55 pm
 
darthpsychotic@gmail.com
User avatar

Join: July 3rd 1971 6:59 pm
Posts: 4265
Earlier, I copy-pasted-formatted the Indiana 5 portion of the timesOnline.co.uk Lucas Interview in the MF Live-Action Series forum and should have pasted the Indiana Jones 5 portion here. So thanks Joe1138. :)

[hr]
INDIANA JONES V

Lucas is also considering what to do about the fifth instalment in the Indiana Jones franchise, which he has produced from the outset. The most recent film, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, has taken almost $750m (£375m) at the international box office, and the whip-snapping archeologist remains in high demand, even though his own days as a whippersnapper are behind him (Harrison Ford is two years older than Lucas).

“We were hoping for box-office figures like that, which is, ultimately, with inflation, what the others have done, within 10%,” Lucas explains. “So, we squeaked up there. Really, though, it was a challenge getting the story together and getting everybody to agree on it. Indiana Jones only becomes complicated when you have another two people saying ‘I want it this way’ and ‘I want it that way’, whereas, when I first did Jones, I just said, ‘We’ll do it this way’ — and that was much easier. But now I have to accommodate everybody, because they are all big, successful guys, too, so it’s a little hard on a practical level.

“If I can come up with another idea that they like, we’ll do another. Really, with the last one, Steven wasn’t that enthusiastic. I was trying to persuade him. But now Steve is more amenable to doing another one. Yet we still have the issues about the direction we’d like to take. I’m in the future; Steven’s in the past. He’s trying to drag it back to the way they were, I’m trying to push it to a whole different place. So, still we have a sort of tension. This recent one came out of that. It’s kind of a hybrid of our own two ideas, so we’ll see where we are able to take the next one.”


[hr]

The news from this interview here is Lucas coming out and saying that he wants a Indiana 5. So I guess the small personal movies Lucas wanted to make after Revenge of the Sith is a Indiana Jones sequel trilogy, one or more Clone Wars CGI series, and up to 400 Star Wars Live-Action Series episodes.

One issue with the potential sequels is the lack of artifacts, or "macguffins" to move the story along. There are cool potential villians that are prevalent in that time period, namely The Mafia or Vietnam. With the Mafia as villians, the artifact could be a Rome or Vatican based object - with Vietnam who the hell knows.

Another issue is that Crystal Skull blew it's load with references to the previous films. In Crystal Skull, there was a actual shot of the Ark. There were even Star Wars references and even quotes.

Regarding who has control, it's almost as if there was a give or take with Spielberg and Ford on one side and Lucas on the other. Spielberg wanted a no-digital, retro-film look in a shorter, tighter movie and it's obvious that Lucas is responsible for the CGI animals and slapstick, which could have been in exchange. Personally I didn't mind CGI animals or slapstick and would have liked a longer film. The retro-film look clashed with the CGI and I would have preferred digital.

As Ford gets on in age, Shia's recent DUI involving flipping a Ford truck, and mixed response, one or more sequels isn't looking too good. I like Crystal Skull if only for the new John Williams soundtrack, action figures, and for the potential DVD with Crystal Skull pack-in Topeka linked to, so I wouldn't mind more.

:furry:


Post Posted: July 28th 2008 6:45 pm
 
User avatar

Join: April 20th 2004 11:57 pm
Posts: 523
Location: Southern California
darthpsychotic wrote:
Earlier, I copy-pasted-formatted the Indiana 5 portion of the timesOnline.co.uk Lucas Interview in the MF Live-Action Series forum and should have pasted the Indiana Jones 5 portion here. So thanks Joe1138. :)


Just doing my job.

You know, if Lucas is that antsy to carry on the Jones franchise, I have to wonder if he ever considered doing an animated series. I mean I would love to see an animated Indy serial done in the tone and style of the Fleischer Studios "Superman" shorts and we know how much the guy loves animation.

Quote:
The news from this interview here is Lucas coming out and saying that he wants a Indiana 5. So I guess the small personal movies Lucas wanted to make after Revenge of the Sith is a Indiana Jones sequel trilogy, one or more Clone Wars CGI series, and up to 400 Star Wars Live-Action Series episodes.


See, this is what really frustrates me about Lucas at this point. As much as he talks about doing the personal projects (which I really want to see at some point) it seems like he can't let go of the big franchises he built, he can't leave home.

Following up on the image that Topeka posted, at the Sideshow collectibles booth in San Diego they had some cards advertising a Best Buy presell for the upcoming "Crystal Skull" release as well as "Iron Man" that featured the skull and Mark III helm as pack-ins for each respectively. Check both out here.


Post Posted: July 29th 2008 2:33 am
 

Join: August 6th 2004 6:29 am
Posts: 857
darthpsychotic wrote:
So I guess the small personal movies Lucas wanted to make after Revenge of the Sith is a Indiana Jones sequel trilogy, one or more Clone Wars CGI series, and up to 400 Star Wars Live-Action Series episodes.

Yeah, Lucas is full of shit, no news here. Unfortunately, Spielberg's previous entry in the genre film sweepstakes was that soulless piece of garbage WAR OF THE WORLDS, so if that's what he does when left to his own devices, I'm not sure which of these guys I'd like to see win the battle of wills.


Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
  Page Previous  1, 2



Jump to:  




millenniumfalcon.com©
phpBB©