Nedak Posted May 24, 2008 Share Posted May 24, 2008 I have not seen it yet, but by the reviews it looks like a let down. Why would they put an Alien ending in an Indy movie? Yet again, another failure by GL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HerbieZ Posted May 24, 2008 Share Posted May 24, 2008 I just got back from watching it. It was brilliant. loved every second of it and although it was a little over the top in some parts, it had enough charm to win me over. I loved the whole Atomic Bomb test situation he got in and the ark of the covenant that got a little airing at the warehouse was a great nod to that particular film. Spielberg was right though in saying how iconic Indy looked against the mushroom cloud. There was something really defining about that shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aash Li Posted May 25, 2008 Share Posted May 25, 2008 ... just lost everything I typed. >.< I just watched it. How can you guys be so down on the movie? It seemed more like it was a promotional for Young Indiana Jones 2, than it was hey! Harrison Ford is playing Indiana Jones again! It felt more like he was back seat than he was center stage... where he should have been. Why did they choose Labouf as his son? >.> Soviets arent that big of a stretch, it was cold war era in that movie. 50s. Nazis would have been better, but then they couldnt have foisted Labouf on us either since Nazism had been defeated for 10-12 years... The crystal skull, and the aliens theory isnt that big of a stretch either. Roswell happened around that time. Aliens were a big scifi subject because of the arms race and what not. Go use The Google to search the internets for info. I liked it alot... I think the only thing I didnt like alot was the bait and switch they did with Indiana and his son... I wanted him fighting the soviets and swinging from the trees... not Transformers kid. >.< I loved the nuclear test town scene, that was funny. Him standing before the mushroom cloud was just awesome... Everything in the movie seemed to be echoing Raiders of the Lost Ark... and I thought the nod to the Ark in Area 51 was pretty sweet too. If they offer it with the other three movies, Ill definitely buy it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ravnas Posted May 25, 2008 Share Posted May 25, 2008 Just saw it a few hours ago, it was good, but not as good as the first three. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnderWiggin Posted May 25, 2008 Share Posted May 25, 2008 I think this thread is more white from spoiler hiding than it is actual text. I'm going to have an aneurysm if I don't get to see it soon _EW_ EDIT:: Shem - Aliens? What the hell? I didn't know that was the topic. I'm kind of a bit disappointed though - Indy has always been about the ancient tales, with history and archeology. But I'll reserve judgement until I actually see how they pull it off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shem Posted May 25, 2008 Share Posted May 25, 2008 Just saw it a few hours ago, it was good, but not as good as the first three.I'm sorry, but I never really liked the Temple of Doom movie. That would was just too weird for me. I liked the movie a lot and the alien thing isn't a stretch because Indiana Jones has always been about mythological tales. Remember most of us were kids when the first three came out so we didn't have our adult perspectives. I remember some adults growing up thinking other Indiana Jones movies were a stretch with some of the storyline plots, but we were more open minded as children to not think of the stories like that. Anyway, good job George Lucas and Steven Spielberg. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aash Li Posted May 25, 2008 Share Posted May 25, 2008 Exactly! Too many people go to movies as a critic, they have their adult brain turned on. You take a kid to see a movie, they will have a completely different view of the movie than an adult will. Adults are jaded... the trick is to stop being analytical and just enjoy it for what it is. Entertainment. Its like those twits that ran around wailing that 300 wasnt the slightest bit historically accurate. No kidding! Its basically an eye-candy movie based on history... Shem and EW: The crystal skulls are real, actually. And they are Mayan/Aztec/Incan... theres a lot of people that believe that aliens were involved with the ancient civilizations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Sitherino Posted May 25, 2008 Share Posted May 25, 2008 Really? Other intelligent life is a stretch for you people? But not oh, I don't know, a gold box melting faces? The first 10 minutes or so were a bit lengthy, but necessary to place the movie. From there it divebombs straight into classic Indy action and adventure. I absolutely enjoyed the hell out of the film. I definitely cannot say it's the best Indy film made, but it's definitely not something that should be pushed aside because "Indy is old" or "there's aliens!". Indiana Jones is based on popular myth and idea. What big popular myths came from the 50's, other than the Red Scare terror and creatures from beyond our planet/dimension/etc.? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JCarter426 Posted May 25, 2008 Share Posted May 25, 2008 for some reason I was a lot more accepting when I found out they were from another dimension and not another planet. I think another planet would have been too sci-fi-ish but another dimension kind of keeps with the for lack of a better term "powers" of the other movies. Yeah, same here. It really wasn't any more out there than the supernatural elements from the other films, if you think about it. I really think the whole A-bomb sequence and the following FBI investigation were completely unnecessary. Well, not unnecessary...they just didn't fit. Yes, the set up the mood, showing that Indy doesn't know who to trust anymore...but that feeling isn't evident during the rest of the film, because we don't see any more of the FBI after that, and Mack is so obviously working for the Russians the whole time. It was an Indy movie, I can say that much. There are some parts I have issues with, but it's still enjoyable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pavlos Posted May 25, 2008 Share Posted May 25, 2008 For the most part I felt that it was identifiable as an Indiana Jones even if it didn't feel like one all of the time -- there were some bits which hearkened back to ye olden dayes* -- but the final fifteen minutes or so made me feel as though I'd just had my childhood raped. Indiana Jones is very colonialist in style; people who aren't from the States are often portrayed as either evil or lacking in personality -- a faceless mob of people. I like that (just as I like colonialist authors such as Greene or Orwell) even though I very much disagree, politically, with that sort of view of the world, but when Indy manages to become a war hero and a patriotic one at that I just feel like getting up and walking out of the cinema. I can't help but feel that Lucas and Spielberg tried to be too political in this one. Not to mention that certain sequences felt like they should have been followed up with "The University of Oxford -- teaching skills for life" or something, what with the huge rants about education. Although, that all seems to die out in the latter half of the film, giving way to the action; which is what Indiana Jones is all about! Anyway, it was enjoyable, I'll say that. It just didn't feel like Indiana Jones... it's difficult to explain why, though. Anyone else notice that Cate Blanchett's accent switched from Russian to her normal one every time she said, "Dr. Jones"? * The car chase where Indy and Mutt are racing away from the Russians springs to mind. I loved the way that one of them kept on getting slapped in the face with anti-Communist propaganda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeneralPloKoon Posted May 25, 2008 Share Posted May 25, 2008 I still haven't seen, arghhhhhh!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rachel_Ewok Posted May 25, 2008 Share Posted May 25, 2008 It was great!! Saw it Friday night, it took me a little while to get used to an "old" looking Indy... and then Marion... But I think it was great. And Shia LeBeouf was great. His acting, I think, is really amazing... did he do all his own stunts? I still think that aliens in a Indiana Jones movie was a little much... But overall I think Steven did well with the alien thing... It was nearly believeable.... I think I was a tad annoyed with the aliens at first... But someone said, that it wasn't so bad when we found out they were from another dimension... not another planet. I agree. I'm still thinkin' aliens in an Indy movie is a bit... cliche. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ctrl Alt Del Posted May 25, 2008 Share Posted May 25, 2008 As many others, I found the movie to be rather enjoyable, but not as good as Riders, for example. There were some pretty cheesy scenes here and there, but nothing unforgivable. Now, I think I've detected a gap - a continuity error - on it... By the time Jones, the other captives and the russians were crossing the Amazon river, they were most likely somewhere around here: Then, there's that car pursuit and, suddenly, they found themselves on Iguaçu Falls, that's located there: That's a bit too far for just a car run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nedak Posted May 26, 2008 Share Posted May 26, 2008 I just saw it. I generally enjoyed it. Lucas did however go overboard on the CGI like I predicted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General LiWar Posted May 26, 2008 Share Posted May 26, 2008 I'm posting again because I truly enjoyed it. It felt like the same old indy on a new adventure. I don't really see the stretch with the aliens. 1) the crystal skull stories do have alien explanations, it wasn't made up for the movie 2) i remember peoples hearts being pulled out of their chests and these same people still living 3)indiana jones isn't solely about christian artifacts (i.e. holy grail/ark of covenant) he's an archeologist 4) i remember playing a game where indy fights in an alternate dimension and fights ghosts etc. Lucas did however go overboard on the CGI like I predicted. I'm pretty sure Lucas wasn't in charge of CGI, and for the most part there wasn't much CGI, Speilberg stuck with old techniques to look/feel like the others Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Sitherino Posted May 26, 2008 Share Posted May 26, 2008 I just saw it. I generally enjoyed it. Lucas did however go overboard on the CGI like I predicted. I like how it's Lucas' fault. Because it's no Spielberg that directed, therefore makes the decisions on approach with special effects. Face it, it's as Indy as the others, you just can't stand a new addition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nedak Posted May 26, 2008 Share Posted May 26, 2008 I'm pretty sure Lucas wasn't in charge of CGI, and for the most part there wasn't much CGI, Speilberg stuck with old techniques to look/feel like the others Either way, there was quite a bit CGI used.... The bomb test, the end, and all the stupid goffers and monkeys they used, etc. It just seemed kind of cheesy. The fact he survived a nuclear blast, the whole three water fall thing, and when "Mud" swings from the branches with the CGI monkeys. All were kind of unnecessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Seeker Posted May 26, 2008 Share Posted May 26, 2008 Yes, too much CGI...absolutely right. Oh wait, that's right. I just remembered: YOU FAIL AT MOVIES! This was just as indy as any of the others. The indy movies have always been CGI platforms. Look at raiders with the evil spirit laden climax, Doom with the hearts and mine car chase, Crusade with the entire end inside the temple with the CGI saw blades and dropoffs and all that. They've all been full of death defying/impossible stunts. Remember the rubber raft scenario in temple of doom? I've always been in awe at the lack of imagination in movie's audiences, especially on a board full of fanboys, but this tops it. Sure Raiders and Crusade are better indy movies, but Temple of Doom is literally painful to watch. The kid (shortcake?) who makes Jake Lloyd look like Deniro, and that woman who is just horrendous? Criticize this one all you want, but take away the "OMG I'm 13 Temple of Doom is Awesome" nostalgia and you'll see that Crystal Skull won't take first by any means, but it does take a strong third. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q Posted May 26, 2008 Share Posted May 26, 2008 and that woman who is just horrendous?Heh. You mean Mrs. Steven Spielberg? Yeah, she was pretty ****ing terrible. I remember back in the day when some feminazi stated that her character was an affront to womanhood. Hell, she was an affront to humanity, IMO. The role ruined Kate Capshaw's career, if that's any consolation. Meh. Guess I'll be waiting until it comes out on DVD. I just have very low expectations of movies these days, so I'm rarely disappointed. Raiders just rocked. They'll never be able to top it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prime Posted May 26, 2008 Share Posted May 26, 2008 why would they want to be....its pretty cornball stuff for contemporary standards.Dude, sorry I dissed your boy, Vin Diesel XXX. why would they want to be....its pretty cornball stuff for contemporary standards. Nowdays, its mofos and machine guns, not nazis and snakes....and enough with the Nazis already Spielberg....ugh There are no nazis in Indy 4. How can you guys be so down on the movie?I think just about everyone here who is saying it is a terrible movie are the ones who haven't seen it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nedak Posted May 26, 2008 Share Posted May 26, 2008 Oh wait, that's right. I just remembered: YOU FAIL AT MOVIES! Alright Mr.MovieBuff, I loved the movie, I'm going to see it again, and not to mention I'm going to buy it when it comes out. BUT, there were a few things that bothered me. Not the CGI in general is what bothered me, but at times how they used it. Maybe I'm wrong, but I only recall there being major stunts (like the Waterfall) in The Temple of Doom, which was my least favorite of the three. I didn't really mind the waterfall scene that much, but things like, him surviving the nuclear explosion, and "Mud" swinging across the vines in the jungle kind of bothered me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*Don* Posted May 26, 2008 Share Posted May 26, 2008 ...The Temple of Doom, which was my least favorite of the three... Agreed. I never really understood how Lucas and Spielberg could have let so many inaccurate facts creep into one movie. I mean, when was the last time that you saw Indians eating bugs and beatles? Most of them are strict vegetarians. Regardless, Indy 4 was definitely good, but definitely not the best either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HerbieZ Posted May 26, 2008 Share Posted May 26, 2008 The fact that it's a fictional film probably had something to do with it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Sitherino Posted May 26, 2008 Share Posted May 26, 2008 Agreed. I never really understood how Lucas and Spielberg could have let so many inaccurate facts creep into one movie. I mean, when was the last time that you saw Indians eating bugs and beatles? Most of them are strict vegetarians. Maybe because the movies aren't about facts. As well they're based on the adventure serials from the 40's and 50's. Any "racial" content comes from this, if you have an issue with that then Indy is not the action-adventure series you're looking for. Perhaps Evil Dead or National Treasure(ugh). For those that misunderstand the purpose of particular styles of movies. Indiana Jones is a sit back, eat your popcorn, and take it with as much grain of salt as is in that popcorn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boba Rhett Posted May 26, 2008 Share Posted May 26, 2008 There's some things I don't remember. Could someone explain the following? Who removed the skull in the first place? The conquistador? And why did they do it? The alien was talking about giving Ox a gift for what he had done. Was the gift supposed to be the killing of the Russians holding them captive? How did the natives seemingly crawl out of the stone walls? Were the walls actually some sort of crumbly facade they could cover themselves in? Indy's double crossing friend at the end when he winked and said he'd be alright. What was that all about? It seemed out of place. Was he seriously fine with just giving up and being sucked to his death or was there something else behind it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.