Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull

[Schlosser85]

I liked the sword fight, could easily have done without the swinging scene.

[DarknessOfDeath]

Only problem I really had with it that sequence was the sword fight that eventually leads to the swinging scene, but I absolutely loved how it started of with Indy.

Indy with the rocket launcher :o

[Neto Magnus]

oh man. :( They're like the only two people Indy trusted during the adventure. If it weren't for Short Round bringing Indy back to the light side, he, along with Willie would have been dead for all eternity in hell. I felt Temple of Doom was dark and it was interesting that Harrison Ford was capable to explore Indy's dark side. That was very different and I thought he did a great job. Theres no denying the darkness within yourself especially when you were out seeking fortune and glory but in the end, it gave a totally different perspective on Indy as a whole...once he realized and understood the "stone's" power at the end after he returned the one stone back to the tribe. "Yes...I understand its power." but in the other two, he's not seeking 'fortune' and 'glory.

Plus Willie was meant to be annoying which I found always enjoyable everytime I watch TOD. I like the friendship between Indy and Short Round especially since how much shorty looks up to Indy. I :heart: the scene when they hug and Indy apologizes to him for hitting him even though he didn't mean to hurt him.

Plus Short round tried to stop the gaurd from pouring the blood down Indy's throat.

like I said, he tried even though he failed in attempt to save the one man he looked up to as a father figure and that one man alone, is Indiana Jones.

wow...ok. I never realized how much I love Indiana Jones until now. :indy:
Clearly you do.

btw, I love that scene in your avvie.

[DarknessOfDeath]

Clearly you do.

btw, I love that scene in your avvie.


But thats besides the point... I just think now, and I mean thinking about it now - the Indiana Jones films have always appealed to me more than Star Wars ever had. I mean I still like SW but not as much as I used to back then.

I dunno. Maybe its b/c IJ takes place on earth which kinda makes the films a bit more realistic than SW since SW takes place in space :o

oh thanks for the comment on my avvie.

Mmm Marion...

[Neto Magnus]

But thats besides the point... I just think now, and I mean thinking about it now - the Indiana Jones films have always appealed to me more than Star Wars ever had. I mean I still like SW but not as much as I used to back then.

I dunno. Maybe its b/c IJ takes place on earth which kinda makes the films a bit more realistic than SW since SW takes place in space :o

oh thanks for the comment on my avvie.

Mmm Marion...

Yea I know what you mean. Raiders will always be a classic in my book but Star Wars, eh. But the thing about the Indy sequels was that they never really brought anything new to the story. It was just a retread of Raiders. Yea it had some good moments but as a whole, it just didnt grab me like the first.

Yea marion was great in Raiders. But she kinda aged terribly and she's got like teh soccer mom thing going now. :(

[DarknessOfDeath]

Yea I know what you mean. Raiders will always be a classic in my book but Star Wars, eh. But the thing about the Indy sequels was that they never really brought anything new to the story. It was just a retread of Raiders. Yea it had some good moments but as a whole, it just didnt grab me like the first.

Yea marion was great in Raiders. But she kinda aged terribly and she's got like teh soccer mom thing going now. :(


Hey.. she didn't look so bad to me. i mean sure she's aged since Raiders but Raiders was done over 20 years ago... that was then, this is now. I was so glad she came back. I loved her in Raiders and b/c she came back in Skull, she has grown on me ever since. I love her :o

[SFII]

Oh I guess I missed that.

I dunno maybe had I seen Temple of Doom when I was a kid then things might be different. I'm half Asian so kids used to call me short round back in the 80s. I never knew what they meant til now. :( But that kid and the white lady completely ruined the movie. Oh and the cheap production design.

"He's not nuts, he's crazy!"

one of the cool things in KOTCS was how Indy says to Mutt "go get our stuff". that's what Indy says in TOD to ShortRound.

[Majik1387]

No offense to Marion, but she was never quite a stunner.

She's pretty yes, and I love her, but her aging over the 20 years hasn't made her look soccer-mom like.

[DACrowe]

...or maybe Spider-man 3 just wasn't that great. Especially after the phenomenal S-M 2.

I don't care if it was bad or not. People typing that Raimi should die, he never got Spidey, Tobey Maguire shouldn't be allowed to make movies ever again, they raped my childhood, etc.

IT IS AN OVERREACTION. The fact a year later people still ***** about it like Raimi personally kicked them in the balls while ****ing their mom in front of them is pathetic.

And for the record however bad you may think SM3 is, IMO it wasn't a souless boring movie that was more shallow than the kiddie pool (complete with the chunk of crap floating in it) named X3. But I only mention this because someone else brought it up, I don't spend my time at the X-boards *****ing about X3 or bringing that movie up every time I'm disappointed.

People here get psyched by Hollywood marketing campaigns that overblow their movies as life-altering experiences and when it isn't that there is ALWAYS a sense of disappointment on the boards. And when it isn't that good (like SM3) or downright sucks (SR or X3) there is blood running in the streets and fans act like these filmmakers and actors deserve a painful death because they feel personally slighted.

It is idiocy. And now that I'm reading "Speilberg doesn't get Indiana Jones" and the over-obsessive nitpicking it is happened here. And I PROMISE you the same will happen to Nolan if not with TDK, then the next movie that isn't as good as TDK.

[DarknessOfDeath]

No offense to Marion, but she was never quite a stunner.

She's pretty yes, and I love her, but her aging over the 20 years hasn't made her look soccer-mom like.

Thats what I thought to myself...I mean back then as I was growing up, I didn't think Marion wasn't all that..you know. She's average in my book, nothing too special but when she's just getting herself into trouble...thats when I like her more and more. hehe.

I laugh when she screams at the dead mummies in Raiders. Everywhere she turns, theres a mummy or two and she screams...similiar to Willie except Willie...was way over the top when it came to ... just about every animal that was in sight (except the snake that was slithering its way down her neck...in the jungle camp scene and Indy tries to tell her something hehe.) she'd scream right in front of them. "The problem with her is the noise." Willie, willie...

:grin:

[That'ssuper!]

The Russians really served as weak villains for this film. It would have been better to have some crazy Indian descendants go the city instead.

[DACrowe]

oh man. :( They're like the only two people Indy trusted during the adventure. If it weren't for Short Round bringing Indy back to the light side, he, along with Willie would have been dead for all eternity in hell. I felt Temple of Doom was dark and it was interesting that Harrison Ford was capable to explore Indy's dark side. That was very different and I thought he did a great job. Theres no denying the darkness within yourself especially when you were out seeking fortune and glory but in the end, it gave a totally different perspective on Indy as a whole...once he realized and understood the "stone's" power at the end after he returned the one stone back to the tribe. "Yes...I understand its power." but in the other two, he's not seeking 'fortune' and 'glory.

Plus Willie was meant to be annoying which I found always enjoyable everytime I watch TOD. I like the friendship between Indy and Short Round especially since how much shorty looks up to Indy. I :heart: the scene when they hug and Indy apologizes to him for hitting him even though he didn't mean to hurt him.

Plus Short round tried to stop the gaurd from pouring the blood down Indy's throat.

like I said, he tried even though he failed in attempt to save the one man he looked up to as a father figure and that one man alone, is Indiana Jones.

wow...ok. I never realized how much I love Indiana Jones until now. :indy:

I agree with what you said and enjoyed TOD a lot, but what do you mean that Willie would be in hell for eternity if Jones had sacrificed her. What are the details about that ritual, as I don't know and is it based on anyhthing historical?

[Untilteld]

Willie was annoying as hell, it should have been just Indy and Short Round in TOD.

[Majik1387]

I liked Willie.:o

[DarknessOfDeath]

I agree with what you said and enjoyed TOD a lot, but what do you mean that Willie would be in hell for eternity if Jones had sacrificed her. What are the details about that ritual, as I don't know and is it based on anyhthing historical?

I mean, if it weren't for Short Round helping Indy come back to his old self, him and Willie would have been...toasted in that cage thingy. Remember the scene after Indy, SR and Willie enter the temple and they watch the ritual where the guy's heart gets ripped out alive and he's still living and breathing?, then he gets lowered down this pit of what looks to be molten lava and he gets sacrificed and dies. That could have happened to SR and Willie and Indy wouldn't be the Indy we have grown to love. :(

I don't know too much about the ritual as a whole but I could look it up for you if you want me to.

I liked Willie too :o

[BloodyWolverine]

Um do we know what its made its second friday KOTCS.

[Rezzo]

Willie was annoying as hell, it should have been just Indy and Short Round in TOD.

I've never found her annoying to the point of hating her and not wanting her in Temple of Doom.

[Rezzo]

Um do we know what its made its second friday KOTCS.

It made an estimated $12,250,000.

[That'ssuper!]

I liked Willie, she wasn't annoying as much as she was funny.

[BloodyWolverine]

is that good bad or expected. My guess was a second weekend of 40 million.

[SFII]

I liked Willie.:o
me too.
i liked her better than Marion, actually. Willie had more personality. and she had some great scenes in TOD. ie, when Indy busts open Willie's bedroom door, and she's like "be gentle with me!".
and then Indy puts his hands on the boobs of that statue, and she's like "I'm right here!".
and during the scene when Indy and Shorty are trapped in the cave, she was afraid to put her hand in the slot, and Indy was like "just do it!". and she's like "You do it!".

she was cute. Spielberg married her after that. :)

[Majik1387]

I liked all of Indy's girls in different ways.:up:

For a fave it would be between Marion and Willie though.

[The Chris]

I think my slight problem with Willie was that compared to Marion and even Elsa, she was way too "stereotypically" girly. Broken nails and all the whining and complaining. Marion is tough, cool, Indy's perfect girl. I don't hate Willie. In fact I dislike her less and less the more I see Temple of Doom (especially in the scene with the monkey brains and stuff), but she ain't Marion. Not even close.

[That'ssuper!]

It would be interesting if he dated Elsa after TLC, especially since she died.

[DarknessOfDeath]

I liked all of Indy's girls in different ways.:up:

For a fave it would be between Marion and Willie though.

Same here... :up:

I like the scene in Raiders when Marion is about to tend Indy's wound... and he's looking in the mirror while Marion is looking through the other side of the mirror (I think) and she flips the mirror causing ito hit Indy in the jaw...and then cut to a shot of the ship and you can hear Indy howl in pain. Whats funnier about the scene is that Marion wasn't really that attentive to why Indy cried out in pain. haha.

[Majik1387]

I think my slight problem with Willie was that compared to Marion and even Elsa, she was way too "stereotypically" girly. Broken nails and all the whining and complaining. Marion is tough, cool, Indy's perfect girl. I don't hate Willie. In fact I dislike her less and less the more I see Temple of Doom (especially in the scene with the monkey brains and stuff), but she ain't Marion. Not even close.
For the time frame of Willie, stereotypical girls were the big thing, not tomboys.

[The Chris]

For the time frame of Willie, stereotypical girls were the big thing, not tomboys.

Oh yeah I definately believe that, I probably like Marion even more for that.

[DarknessOfDeath]

Whereas TOD is a prequel ...

[Majik1387]

Of course. But I also look at it at the lives they were pretty much leading. Of course they were gonna act the way they acted.

[SFII]

It would be interesting if he dated Elsa after TLC, especially since she died.
i think her name was Nelsa. with an N.
i could be wrong. because i've always thought it was Elsa too. until, recently i was watching it on tv, and it sounded like he distinctly said Nelsa, with an N. a couple times.

[DarknessOfDeath]

Of course. But I also look at it at the lives they were pretty much leading. Of course they were gonna act the way they acted.

oh yeah. for sure. Its funny really...Indy becomes involved with all three women but in the end, he chooses Marion cause he loved her even though he had his doubts about staying around... ya know. Im glad he chose her cause Marion in a lot of ways has always been perfect for Indy.

k all of this is making me...tingly... :o

[Majik1387]

Well if it was between Willie and Marion, of course it's the right choice.


And I'm pretty sure the Nazi girl's name is Elsa.

[DarknessOfDeath]

Elsa was alright... but she b**** stabbed Indy alright :(

[The Chris]

oh yeah. for sure. Its funny really...Indy becomes involved with all three women but in the end, he chooses Marion cause he loved her even though he had his doubts about staying around... ya know. Im glad he chose her cause Marion in a lot of ways has always been perfect for Indy.

k all of this is making me...tingly... :o

That's why one of my favorite lines of the movie were "They all had the same problem" "yeah, what's that" "They weren't you honey" It was like the words of a lot of fans (at least the ones I know) just came out of Indy's mouth.

[DarknessOfDeath]

Ah. I feel like going to see Indy4 again ...

[Episode29]

I don't care if it was bad or not. People typing that Raimi should die, he never got Spidey, Tobey Maguire shouldn't be allowed to make movies ever again, they raped my childhood, etc.

IT IS AN OVERREACTION. The fact a year later people still ***** about it like Raimi personally kicked them in the balls while ****ing their mom in front of them is pathetic.

And for the record however bad you may think SM3 is, IMO it wasn't a souless boring movie that was more shallow than the kiddie pool (complete with the chunk of crap floating in it) named X3. But I only mention this because someone else brought it up, I don't spend my time at the X-boards *****ing about X3 or bringing that movie up every time I'm disappointed.

People here get psyched by Hollywood marketing campaigns that overblow their movies as life-altering experiences and when it isn't that there is ALWAYS a sense of disappointment on the boards. And when it isn't that good (like SM3) or downright sucks (SR or X3) there is blood running in the streets and fans act like these filmmakers and actors deserve a painful death because they feel personally slighted.

It is idiocy. And now that I'm reading "Speilberg doesn't get Indiana Jones" and the over-obsessive nitpicking it is happened here. And I PROMISE you the same will happen to Nolan if not with TDK, then the next movie that isn't as good as TDK.

I'd argue that, as I said earlier, is accurate. Spielberg has developed so much as an artist in the ninteen years following Last Crusade that I don't think he is able to think in that same headspace. I don't mean that to be insulting. It just seems evident from what's on screen. I honestly don't think he is fired up over the material anymore. There was far less inspiration and gusto in KOTCS than almost any film he has ever made, and I suspect it is because he honestly wasn't totally psyched to be doing it. It was an audience pleaser to thank the people for supporting him for all these years. Unlike Stallone, who hasn't really developed and is able to embrace his signature characters, Spielberg is more interested in looking forward. I'll bet Lincoln will be far less sloppy and impersonal than Indy is.

While I agree that nitpicking can get out of hand, David Koepp's script deserves a fair share.

[DarknessOfDeath]

Okay... I was deeply touched when I read this from Zombie's post off of the JCForums...

Crystal Skull is about a man with nobody--his dad is dead, his old friend (Brody) is dead and his new friend (Ray Winston) betrays him and leaves him for dead--finding family again. Its about him unwittingly becoming a mentor figure to a lost, angry young man without focus in his life, being reunited with the only major love of his life and then finding out that he has a son and that the boy he has been mentoring is in fact that very son. The film is about a fractured family finding itself after being split apart for twenty years and finally coming back together--ending with the wedding scene that caps this point. At the beginning of the movie Indy has nobody and at the end of it he has found a family. Thats a pretty poignant touch.

--

*sniffles*


That pretty much sums up Indiana Jones ... *sighs* I felt a bit emo while reading it. No body could sum it up any better than that.

[DACrowe]

I mean, if it weren't for Short Round helping Indy come back to his old self, him and Willie would have been...toasted in that cage thingy. Remember the scene after Indy, SR and Willie enter the temple and they watch the ritual where the guy's heart gets ripped out alive and he's still living and breathing?, then he gets lowered down this pit of what looks to be molten lava and he gets sacrificed and dies. That could have happened to SR and Willie and Indy wouldn't be the Indy we have grown to love. :(

I don't know too much about the ritual as a whole but I could look it up for you if you want me to.

I liked Willie too :o

Oh I got that, but you said she'd be in hell for eternity and I was wondering if this sacrifice was to Kali's collection or something.

But yeah, Willie is annoying in some scenes here and there, but that is the point and it is for humor's sake. She is still likable at the end, but she is no Marion Ravenwood, that's for sure.

[DarknessOfDeath]

Oh I got that, but you said she'd be in hell for eternity and I was wondering if this sacrifice was to Kali's collection or something.

But yeah, Willie is annoying in some scenes here and there, but that is the point and it is for humor's sake. She is still likable at the end, but she is no Marion Ravenwood, that's for sure.

Well...a goner. :(

[DACrowe]

I'd argue that, as I said earlier, is accurate. Spielberg has developed so much as an artist in the ninteen years following Last Crusade that I don't think he is able to think in that same headspace. I don't mean that to be insulting. It just seems evident from what's on screen. I honestly don't think he is fired up over the material anymore. There was far less inspiration and gusto in KOTCS than almost any film he has ever made, and I suspect it is because he honestly wasn't totally psyched to be doing it. It was an audience pleaser to thank the people for supporting him for all these years. Unlike Stallone, who hasn't really developed and is able to embrace his signature characters, Spielberg is more interested in looking forward. I'll bet Lincoln will be far less sloppy and impersonal than Indy is.

While I agree that nitpicking can get out of hand, David Koepp's script deserves a fair share.

I see where you're coming from and agree partially, but I still think Speilberg gets the essence of the character. However, I also agree he struggles more handling something so "friendly," because doing Schindler's List really changed his sensibilities as a director and he has never been the same since. But I still think he understands the character, but he made this movie for his audiences, but he hasn't made this kind of movie since Jurassic Park and it shows a little bit.

And I don't think Koepp's screenplay has been nearly as good as the previous three and that is where many of the flaws with the movie lays. But the problems are picked to the point where they are bigger than the film itself by the fans and this type of reaction is what I've been going on about today. For example I was disappointed and disliked X3 and Transformers, but I don't go on and on and rip every thing I disliked about that movie wider and wider until it explodes. I feel that is what we are seeing here and what we saw somewhat unjustly with SM3, SR, even SW prequels, which I don't like but are seen as an assault on children of the '80s and '90s childhoods. I really hated Ep. I and II and thought ROTS was okay, but the level of venom those movies muster for simply existing is surreal.

[DACrowe]

Well...a goner. :(

Oh. :( ;)

[DarknessOfDeath]

^^ *sniff sniff* well enough about Willie...

*power naps for 10.0 seconds*

Mmm

[BloodyWolverine]

Marion may not be like a bond girl or plastical surgery bomb shell but Marion is the perefct girl for Indy out of every other girl for she knows Indy best and can deal with his adventuress life style.
Willie was a passing ship but for Indy it was always gonna be Marion. If anyone remembers raiders they should know thats the women destined to be his bride.

[DarknessOfDeath]

She's my kind of gal. :up:

[LostSon88]

That pretty much sums up Indiana Jones ... *sighs* I felt a bit emo while reading it. No body could sum it up any better than that.

Did you just quote yourself? :huh:

[DarknessOfDeath]

Did you just quote yourself? :huh:

That big paragraph isn't mine - just something i wanted to share again in case anyone missed it... so yeah. I did it on purpose. Others do it...

[The Man of Steel]

do you make all your awesome avvys your self Junior?

[DarknessOfDeath]

do you make all your awesome avvys your self Junior?

I sure do, Dad.

Hell, I could do requests if anyone is interested but be patient. I am a busy man. ;)

[TLH]

Just saw it. Loved it despite a few flaws. 8/10

[C. Lee]

Got to see it this afternoon. Fantastic. Damn good movie. It was great seeing Karen Allen back as Marion.

[The Man of Steel]

agreed, When I First heard they were doing this i was scared that they'd bring another new chick :O

[DarknessOfDeath]

Me too.

Glad it was Marion

[The Man of Steel]

I Was also hoping Short Round and maybe Sallah would get a cameo at the wedding

[Spider-Vader]

I saw it Friday & I liked. I liked Mutt, though I thought Mac was pointless. The only parts I didn't like were the kids racing at the beginning, the monkeys & the alien, why'd it have to live?.

Besides those it was pretty damn good.

My rankings:

1. Last Crusade- 10
2. Raiders of the Lost Ark- 9.5
3. Kingdom of the Crystal Skull- 9
4. Temple of Doom- 8.5

[turtlefocker]

Why is it that people don't like the opening race? I thought it was a fun way to open the movie and establish the 50's setting.

[Majik1387]

I thought the race was fine.

[The Man of Steel]

me too :up:

[BloodyWolverine]

I think Indy 4 is enough even if it makes enough Money. I like to see Indy again but i feel that Indy has come full circle and has the family and can some what retire. He is not alone anymore and thats a good end for me.

[TLH]

My rankings:

1. Last Crusade- 10
2. Raiders of the Lost Ark- 9.5
3. Kingdom of the Crystal Skull- 9
4. Temple of Doom- 8.5

You read my mind. I agree with every rating. Perfect! Last Crusade is the best IMO. :yay:

[C. Lee]

I Was also hoping Short Round and maybe Sallah would get a cameo at the wedding

Or at least mentioned....like Dr. Brody was.

[Rezzo]

I thought the race was fine.

Likewise. :up:

[DACrowe]

Oh I wouldn't mind one more and in fact would love to see it. But I'm starting to realize (besides what is going to be an enormously large drop this weekend and well over 60%) that a detriment to another installment is Speilberg made this mostly for fans of his movies and the franchise as he hasn't done a movie like this since 1993 and an Indiana Jones movie since 1989. I think while it was good it is obviously lacking that extra oomph and sense of wonder the other three had (we all argue what that was. For me it was a lack of menace in the skull and an over abundance of CGI and stage shooting as opposed to more location shooting and practical effects).

Something tells me this was Speilberg's bow to this series and this type of film, at least for a while in the latter's case. And we all know Speilberg wouldn't let anyone else direct another Indiana Jones movie, nor do I think Ford would want that (something tells me that Lucas wouldn't mind). But Speilberg has hinted he wants to do more and Lucas has been blunt about it, but they are both talking more about Shia Lebouf.

My fear is Lucas will hand the franchise over to someone else and produce it as now the "Adventures of Mutt Williams," with Indiana Jones being supporting for now on. Which reeks of this going in the JPIII direction. If that is the case, please don't.

[DACrowe]

P.S. I liked the drag race at the beginning, it was one of my favorite moments of the movie. It was a simple way of setting this franchise in the 1950s and was very funny and in tune with the series. Then you find out that they are Soviets and that is why they are so enamored/estranged by the practice and it just makes it funnier and fit the series well. IMO of course.

[cerealkiller182]

If they go on with Mutt (which I am completely on the fence about) then Indy shouldnt show up. It'll just leave fans wanting more. I can see Mutt in a Die Hard situation more than an Indy situation, in other words being in the wrong place at the wrong time rather than racing bad guys to some artifact.

[SFII]

i wouldn't mind seeing 1 more installment. hopefully, they'll give Marion better scenes. also, i think they should bring back Sallah, Willie, and Shortround. make it one big incredible final movie.

speaking of Sallah, i thought he was gonna be in Crystal Skull because i had been seeing him on interview shows last week. i never watched his interviews in fear of him giving away too much info. but i guess he's actually in some other movie.

and i was watching the Bonus Disc of my Indiana Jones trilogy dvd set, and it was really cool.

[turtlefocker]

I have no desire to see Willie Return, she's just one of Indy's old girlfriends nothing special. By bringing her back ti would make Marion seem less important.

Short-round should come back though, he's the last loose-end of the franchise.

[Episode29]

I see where you're coming from and agree partially, but I still think Speilberg gets the essence of the character. However, I also agree he struggles more handling something so "friendly," because doing Schindler's List really changed his sensibilities as a director and he has never been the same since. But I still think he understands the character, but he made this movie for his audiences, but he hasn't made this kind of movie since Jurassic Park and it shows a little bit.

And I don't think Koepp's screenplay has been nearly as good as the previous three and that is where many of the flaws with the movie lays. But the problems are picked to the point where they are bigger than the film itself by the fans and this type of reaction is what I've been going on about today. For example I was disappointed and disliked X3 and Transformers, but I don't go on and on and rip every thing I disliked about that movie wider and wider until it explodes. I feel that is what we are seeing here and what we saw somewhat unjustly with SM3, SR, even SW prequels, which I don't like but are seen as an assault on children of the '80s and '90s childhoods. I really hated Ep. I and II and thought ROTS was okay, but the level of venom those movies muster for simply existing is surreal.

Even with War Of The Worlds he tied in serious political ideas and themes. I myself, at this point, am more interested in Spielberg's profression as that is where the real wealth of fulfillment will be. I wish that he had been able to tap into that earlier Spielberg better, but (in my opinion) the results were pretty underwhelming and a sign that its time to move on. He may come back to go out with a proper bang at some time, but he has be hungrier when he does it. I think he understands the basics of Indiana, such as how to give him the quips and what not to do with him, but he's lost the joy in using the character. It seems he's said all there is to say with him and was content to go with a more watered down version. I'm not saying it wasn't enjoyable, but it had so much less passion than the previous three.

I will say, though, that I totally agree that the opening racing scene was fantastic. Spielberg seemed engaged and entertained. But compare that scene with the grave-robbing scene, or the alien stuff.

Oh, and I agree with the whip-lash hatred of "okay-to-decent" movies. SM3 and Indy IV were average films with serious problems, but also a lot to love (Not so much for Transformers). As for the prequels and Superman Returns, I thought they were very interesting and entertaining films. But I understand the hatred (to a certain degree). There is a difference, however, between critically analyzing a film's faults and pros and just plain ol' whining. Too many people just go with the latter because they can't hide the irrational anger that goes with disappointment.

[Omega Wizard]

I demand a Mutt and Short Round team up.

[OctaviusINC]

I demand a Mutt and Short Round team up.

Hell, I second that.

[Wolfwood]

I'm soooo glad Mutt didn't get to put on the hat. Nothing against his character or Shia, but that's Indy's hat man, no one else could or should wear it.

As for the movie, it was okay, not my favorite one in the series, but it at least lived up to the others. I'm just glad I can finally say I saw Indiana Jones in the theater (the others were before my time).

[DACrowe]

Even with War Of The Worlds he tied in serious political ideas and themes. I myself, at this point, am more interested in Spielberg's profression as that is where the real wealth of fulfillment will be. I wish that he had been able to tap into that earlier Spielberg better, but (in my opinion) the results were pretty underwhelming and a sign that its time to move on. He may come back to go out with a proper bang at some time, but he has be hungrier when he does it. I think he understands the basics of Indiana, such as how to give him the quips and what not to do with him, but he's lost the joy in using the character. It seems he's said all there is to say with him and was content to go with a more watered down version. I'm not saying it wasn't enjoyable, but it had so much less passion than the previous three.

I will say, though, that I totally agree that the opening racing scene was fantastic. Spielberg seemed engaged and entertained. But compare that scene with the grave-robbing scene, or the alien stuff.

Oh, and I agree with the whip-lash hatred of "okay-to-decent" movies. SM3 and Indy IV were average films with serious problems, but also a lot to love (Not so much for Transformers). As for the prequels and Superman Returns, I thought they were very interesting and entertaining films. But I understand the hatred (to a certain degree). There is a difference, however, between critically analyzing a film's faults and pros and just plain ol' whining. Too many people just go with the latter because they can't hide the irrational anger that goes with disappointment.

I can agree with the bulk of that, albeit I'd say that KOTCS is better than SM3. Oh I also agree there is not much of merit...or anything else in Transformers.

[DACrowe]

I'd like to see Short Round and Sallah back if there is a fifth installment, but not Willie. I mean I actually like her, unlike quite a few people -- but Indy is married to Marion and there is no reason to bring her back.

[turtlefocker]

I'd like to see Short Round and Sallah back if there is a fifth installment, but not Willie. I mean I actually like her, unlike quite a few people -- but Indy is married to Marion and there is no reason to bring her back.

Exactly, I'd rather they give Mutt a love-interest type.

Short Round should be pure pimp by the way...

[RockSP]

Spielberg mailed this one in ro Lucas had too much control. This is officallty the first BAD film Spielberg has made.

:wow: :lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao:

You must not have seen many Spielberg films if you think he's never made bad films...

[The Englishman]

Loved the fact that Professor Oxley came from Leeds.... Like me!!:woot:

[nocomics]

I haven't seen this movie yet. W/O spoiling it I heard it was bad from a few different ppl? Is it even worth seeing? I still have'nt seen speed racer,heard that was bad too...

[spideyboy_1111]

Why is it that people don't like the opening race? I thought it was a fun way to open the movie and establish the 50's setting.

i think it's mostly because the original 3 all start off with a different archaeological mission indy is on, RoTA had the idol, TOD had the diamond, TLC had the Cross

[BloodyWolverine]

I liked the film but think 4 is enough really. Sure a 5th might be cool but Indy 4 ends it right for me. Speilberg should do JP4 himself.

[spideyboy_1111]

I haven't seen this movie yet. W/O spoiling it I heard it was bad from a few different ppl? Is it even worth seeing? I still have'nt seen speed racer,heard that was bad too...

i think it all depends on what your expecting.

speedracer seemed only good to anime fans and Indy is on the fence people like it.. but alot don't too. so go in biased, try not to think to hard, and i'd recommend watching the trilogy first as a nice refresh (you might get a better feel?)

[DarknessOfDeath]

i think it's mostly because the original 3 all start off with a different archaeological mission indy is on, RoTA had the idol, TOD had the diamond, TLC had the Cross


TLC wasn't about the cross, it was mostly about the Holy Grail.

[The Chris]

Nothing wrong with slightly shaking things up. Plus, Temple's first scene was a sing and dance number, so the car thing in Kingdom was more Indy than that.

[TLH]

Nothing wrong with slightly shaking things up. Plus, Temple's first scene was a sing and dance number, so the car thing in Kingdom was more Indy than that.

I also liked how the beginning of Kingdom used the same text for the titles as Raiders/Last Crusade did. Man, they should really reformat the text for the beginning of Temple to match the other three.

[flash13]

i just saw it for the third time, I love this movie!

[Rezzo]

Man, they should really reformat the text for the beginning of Temple to match the other three.

Not really needed and nothing wrong with the text in Temple of Doom, IMO.

[spideyboy_1111]

TLC wasn't about the cross, it was mostly about the Holy Grail.

umm you do realize none of the opening scenes from the original trilogies had nothing really to do with the plot, just character and story establishments. the Idol had nothing to do with the story, nor did the diamond, the cross did a little but still not the main artifact of the movie. you essentially start at the end of one of indy's previous missions

[DarknessOfDeath]

psst...Prequel

[spideyboy_1111]

Nothing wrong with slightly shaking things up. Plus, Temple's first scene was a sing and dance number, so the car thing in Kingdom was more Indy than that.

true, but the first part of the movie is about the diamond, is what my point was. It was Indy on a mission with that not strait into the plot of the movie

[DarknessOfDeath]

umm you do realize none of the opening scenes from the original trilogies had nothing really to do with the plot, just character and story establishments. the Idol had nothing to do with the story, nor did the diamond, the cross did a little but still not the main artifact of the movie. you essentially start at the end of one of indy's previous missions


... Yes I do realize that but I was only saying that the majority of the movie itself was about the search of the Holy Grail.

geez. :oldrazz::whatever:

[spideyboy_1111]

... Yes I do realize that but I was only saying that the majority of the movie itself was about the search of the Holy Grail.

geez. :oldrazz::whatever:

which is obvious..... :huh: so not really sure why you stated it...

[DarknessOfDeath]

Unless you were only talking about the opening sequences from all the films specifically, not the actual plot itself, then my bad.

[spideyboy_1111]

Unless you were only talking about the opening sequences from all the films, not the actual plot itself, then my bad.

ya, i was talking about pretty much the whole opening scenes (not just credits since TOD doom had the dancing number, but its first scene is still club Obi Wan.

i was just talking about how KOTCS differed in that the first 3 films all started with Indy on a previous mission going after an artifact that really didn't have much to do with the plot of the film. I think this is why there was a scene in deleted scene categories that fit better with this theme. Personally i think it would have been a better opener.. then save the credits for the cars still, but play the opener of him on another mission first.

[TLH]

Not really needed and nothing wrong with the text in Temple of Doom, IMO.

I never said there was anything wrong with it, but considering that three of the films employ the same font/text style for their opening titles, it would make more sense to have remained consistent. Obviously it won't happen, but it doesn't change that I would prefer that it did.

[DarknessOfDeath]

hmm. Maybe there was supposed to be one but it got cut due to time. *shrugs*

Did you know the diamond in TOD is called the Peacock's Eye...?

[spideyboy_1111]

I never said there was anything wrong with it, but considering that three of the films employ the same font/text style for their opening titles, it would make more sense to have remained consistent. Obviously it won't happen, but it doesn't change that I would prefer that it did.

i just watched TOD last night... i didn't notice much of a text dif. if there is it's just subtle

[spideyboy_1111]

hmm. Maybe there was supposed to be one but it got cut due to time. *shrugs*

Did you know the diamond in TOD is called the Peacock's Eye...?

ya i just didn't wanna type it and be wrong and people hound me... haha so just took the easy route and said diamond :-P

[spideyboy_1111]

Yucatan Pennisula 1957
Indy is crawling beneath a Mayan city, while Mac is outside warning him that a tropical storm is fast approaching. Indy crawls toward the statue of a serpent, and ultimately falls down its mouth into an underground river. He's washed out through the side of a cliff, and uses his bullwhip to swing to safety. Meanwhile, the Russians invade Indy's campsite. When Indy finally returns, he finds everyone dead except Mac. The two are taken prisoner.

this was a deleted opener... i think it would have worked.. have him after an artifact though... and it'd be what the russians break when he gets out of the trunk

[DarknessOfDeath]

But why 'Peacock' ? ... its so dirty :(

[Rezzo]

Yucatan Pennisula 1957
Indy is crawling beneath a Mayan city, while Mac is outside warning him that a tropical storm is fast approaching. Indy crawls toward the statue of a serpent, and ultimately falls down its mouth into an underground river. He's washed out through the side of a cliff, and uses his bullwhip to swing to safety. Meanwhile, the Russians invade Indy's campsite. When Indy finally returns, he finds everyone dead except Mac. The two are taken prisoner.

this was a deleted opener... i think it would have worked.. have him after an artifact though... and it'd be what the russians break when he gets out of the trunk

I think I would have preferred this over the whole racing opening.

[The Man of Steel]

who thinks they should have had a scene set in 1947 to fill in the 20 year gap?

[Bunker]

Same here the opening was rather pointless and only served to present the titles and take up screentime...

[The Man of Steel]

I Think it was good for seting the feel of the 50's, but I Think it should have started in 1947

[spideyboy_1111]

But why 'Peacock' ? ... its so dirty :(

umm because a peacock's feather has an eye pattern to it.. and is actually quite pretty ;)

[spideyboy_1111]

I Think it was good for seting the feel of the 50's, but I Think it should have started in 1947

not to mention theres plenty of other ways to establish the 50's

[The Man of Steel]

not to mention theres plenty of other ways to establish the 50's
such as?

[TLH]

i just watched TOD last night... i didn't notice much of a text dif. if there is it's just subtle

The actual title itself is what I am referring to.

Indy takes in $46 million on the weekend, only dropped 54%, which is impressive considering it's huge opening and two extra days of big business (Thur/holiday Monday). Total domestic at $216 million.

[DarknessOfDeath]

who thinks they should have had a scene set in 1947 to fill in the 20 year gap?


Well it'll take a lot of make-up to takes 10 years off of Ford's face. lol

er...lols

[RockSP]

who thinks they should have had a scene set in 1947 to fill in the 20 year gap?

:huh: Why?

[spideyboy_1111]

such as?

say he returns to civilization from an adventure.. and the camera shows a 50's car drive by, then a bunch more, girls with poodle skirts... etc... its not hard. after all the 50's imo was one of the first decades where you could visually see generation gaps between teens/young adults and adults. before then, youth was just being trained to be little grown up. (look at the clothing style for instance of the college kids in Raiders, compared to KOTCS. There were several scenes in KOTCS that kept establishing the 50's theme.. its just a matter of ways to draw one out to establish this new "world" he's in.

[The Man of Steel]

:huh: Why?

cuz they hardly even talk about what happend in thos 20 years

Well it'll take a lot of make-up to takes 10 years off of Ford's face. lol

er...lols

they have millions of ways to do that

[spideyboy_1111]

Well it'll take a lot of make-up to takes 10 years off of Ford's face. lol

er...lols

or X3 technology to de-age him :o

and for those who say it's bad tech and looks weird.. did anyone not see the Benjamin button trailer? the last shots of Pitt at his youngest, definately used that tech.. .he looked like he did when he was in his first movies.

[The Man of Steel]

say he returns to civilization from an adventure.. and the camera shows a 50's car drive by, then a bunch more, girls with poodle skirts... etc... its not hard. after all the 50's imo was one of the first decades where you could visually see generation gaps between teens/young adults and adults. before then, youth was just being trained to be little grown up. (look at the clothing style for instance of the college kids in Raiders, compared to KOTCS. There were several scenes in KOTCS that kept establishing the 50's theme.. its just a matter of ways to draw one out to establish this new "world" he's in.

that would have worked :up:

[RockSP]

cuz they hardly even talk about what happend in thos 20 years

Unless it would have added something to the "story", I don't see the point.

[DarknessOfDeath]

cuz they hardly even talk about what happend in thos 20 years



they have millions of ways to do that

true...

geez this is the 4th or 5th time I'm watching TOD within the past two weeks. lols

By the way, has anyone seen that trailer with Cate Blanchett and Brad Pitt? Looks weird but interesting at the same time. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0421715/)

[spideyboy_1111]

Unless it would have added something to the "story", I don't see the point.

agrees.. would have been kinda cool to see the area 51 crash landing thing too though, needed no, but cool to see yup

[The Man of Steel]

Unless it would have added something to the "story", I don't see the point.

of course it could effect the plot

true...

geez this is the 4th or 5th time I'm watching TOD within the past two weeks. lols

Curious Case of Benjamin Button (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0421715/)


I've watched the Indy films about 10 time each after the release of KOTCS

[spideyboy_1111]

true...

geez this is the 4th or 5th time I'm watching TOD within the past two weeks. lols

By the way, has anyone seen that trailer with Cate Blanchett and Brad Pitt? Looks weird but interesting at the same time. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0421715/)

lol why'd u hide the title? but ya.. thats the movie i was just talking about. it played with all indy movies i believe

[The Man of Steel]

By the way, has anyone seen that trailer with Cate Blanchett and Brad Pitt? Looks weird but interesting at the same time. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0421715/)

that looks really strange, but I think it could be good

[DarknessOfDeath]

lol why'd u hide the title? but ya.. thats the movie i was just talking about. it played with all indy movies i believe

I couldn't remember the exact title of the film so I went to IMDB - Cate Blanchett's profile...copied and pasted ...

I have a different hype layout...thats probably why you think its hiding ;)

As for the de-aging part...I dunno. If Ford is cool with it, and if they can do it right...cool beans.

[DarknessOfDeath]

Something I noticed... In Temple of doom, the open sequence leads right into the story line (not including the diamond artifact) but when Indy leaves Shanghi on the plane - the plane crashes into India, thus the title of Temple of Doom comes into play within the context of the story-line.

I see the same pattern here with KOTCS... sort of.

ah who am I kidding.

Im just over analyzing. :o

[spideyboy_1111]

Something I noticed... In Temple of doom, the open sequence leads right into the story line (not including the diamond artifact) but when Indy leaves Shanghi on the plane - the plane crashes into India, thus the title of Temple of Doom comes into play within the context of the story-line.

I see the same pattern here with KOTCS... sort of.

ah who am I kidding.

Im just over analyzing. :o

i think your over analyzing... all the movies have a nice flow of point A to point B in them.

[DarknessOfDeath]

i think your over analyzing... all the movies have a nice flow of point A to point B in them.


Thats what makes the films so much fun, short stuff. ;)

oh and yeah, I was trying to establish that theres a point A to point B in them...

[bullets]

I'm heading to the theatre to watch this again , itll be my second time .

[arachnid-guy]

Really, who cares if the text is different? Honestly...it's just font.

****! It's just stupid to talk about it.

[DarknessOfDeath]

I don't really care...

[Rezzo]

Really, who cares if the text is different?

The internet cares. :cwink:

[DarknessOfDeath]

text is text...

so who else has seen it a lot? me, I've only seen it twice.

[Rezzo]

so who else has seen it a lot? me, I've only seen it twice.

I've seen it three times already and I'm considering seeing it another two times within the month.

[DarknessOfDeath]

I've seen it three times already and I'm considering seeing it another two times within the month.


... okay. you've got to join The Realm of Sci-fi.

Others are welcome to join if they choose. The link is in my sig.

What I like about TOD is the score. Especially the one that you hear little by little and then boom! you hear it in full when Indy frees the children from slavery. :up:

[Starbird]

I think most of you (no affence) have watched to much Indy..

[RockSP]

I think most of you (no affence) have watched to much Indy..

Heh. Indeed.

Can't understand seeing a flick so many times...

[Rezzo]

I think most of you (no affence) have watched to much Indy..

Would it make any difference if it was The Dark Knight, it probably would. :oldrazz:

[DarknessOfDeath]

Would it make any difference if it was The Dark Knight, it probably would. :oldrazz:

heh. I was gonna say the same thing but you beat me to it. :oldrazz:

[spideyboy_1111]

Heh. Indeed.

Can't understand seeing a flick so many times...

me either actually... i have a pretty god film memory.. so when i watch movies more then once i just kinda dont pay as much attention...

[Lord Valumart]

Would it make any difference if it was The Dark Knight, it probably would. :oldrazz:

strange...saying you've seen tdk over 25 times would probably earn you some form of medal for endurance. but saying you;ve seen KotCS over 3 times gets you a strange look and vomit on your shoes...

[Starbird]

I've never seen one film over 15 times...I highly doubt I'll see TDK more than atleast 3 times, besides that irrelevant. I'm just saying that about 2 or 3 people here have said that they have watched the original Indys over 10 times this week, and one has watched TOD for the past like...3 weeks.

[Starbird]

Also, I won't see TDK in theatres 3 times..I like seeing a movie in theatres once..then waiting for DVD.

[Rezzo]

Also, I won't see TDK in theatres 3 times..I like seeing a movie in theatres once..then waiting for DVD.

Well not everyone thinks like that and there's nothing wrong with thinking and acting differently.

[Rezzo]

strange...saying you've seen tdk over 25 times would probably earn you some form of medal for endurance. but saying you;ve seen KotCS over 3 times gets you a strange look and vomit on your shoes...

Gotta clean my shoes. :csad:

[SFII]

say he returns to civilization from an adventure.. and the camera shows a 50's car drive by, then a bunch more, girls with poodle skirts... etc... its not hard. after all the 50's imo was one of the first decades where you could visually see generation gaps between teens/young adults and adults. before then, youth was just being trained to be little grown up. (look at the clothing style for instance of the college kids in Raiders, compared to KOTCS. There were several scenes in KOTCS that kept establishing the 50's theme.. its just a matter of ways to draw one out to establish this new "world" he's in.
no need for that when Spielberg and Lucas put the year in the movie anyway. :whatever:

the beginning drag race scene was merely a nod to Lucas' early movie American Graffiti. it was a nice touch. he loves car racing(or pod racing, if you will).

[jimslimbo]

Since ben burtt returned to do the sound for the film. Could someone explain to be how was the sound. How creative was it? How was the surround usage? How much did the theater shake with subwoffer acton?

thanks

[spideyboy_1111]

I've never seen one film over 15 times...I highly doubt I'll see TDK more than atleast 3 times, besides that irrelevant. I'm just saying that about 2 or 3 people here have said that they have watched the original Indys over 10 times this week, and one has watched TOD for the past like...3 weeks.

on DVD doesn't count... and if you've seriously seen a movie in theaters 15times.... i think you have a problem

[Lord Valumart]

I've never seen one film over 15 times...I highly doubt I'll see TDK more than atleast 3 times, besides that irrelevant. I'm just saying that about 2 or 3 people here have said that they have watched the original Indys over 10 times this week, and one has watched TOD for the past like...3 weeks.

yeh...thats a bit much...

i've been watching the young indy's since they came out but i've been taking breaks and watching other things like BSG and other movies...like da vinci code, i forgot how good that flim was untili watched it the other week...

[Starbird]

Very true Rezzo.

[DarknessOfDeath]

Going to see a movie in theaters, is one thing - I mean I don't usually go see a movie more than once but only if its worth seeing it again. I only saw Iron Man once and glad I only saw it once. It was a great movie, but I'd rather wait til it comes out on dvd so I can watch it again.

Watching it on dvd is different cause your not throwing your money away for each number of showings (no matter what movie it is) when you go to the theater. By buying the DVD, it doesn't matter how many times you watch it, cause you already have the movie in your hands.

[Rezzo]

on DVD doesn't count... and if you've seriously seen a movie in theaters 15times.... i think you have a problem

Seeing a movie at the theater fifteen times would be a bit excessive. :oldrazz:

[Lord Valumart]

Gotta clean my shoes. :csad:

it's bad isn;t it? i mean i could deal with the vomit but the strange looks burn into my soul:csad:

[DACrowe]

Well I'm not going to argue about the drag car race, except that I thought it was very well paced/edited and had a nice breezy fun-ness (I know that is not a word) to the beginning and set the tone well for 1957. I mean it is no more out there than the very self-deprecating beginning (which I love) of TOD, with Kate Capshaw singing and dancing to "Anything Goes" in Mandarin Chinese.

Anyway as for the rest of the teaser (or pre-titles, really) I see nothing wrong with it being closely connected with the movie''s plot. They are still after the "artifact" of alien remains which serve no point in the movie other than two more shots an hour later as a bit of exposition. You may dislike that, but Indy talks about the Idol in the following scene in Raiders and the Cross makes a reappearence as well in TLC.

As for being closely related to the plot, I have no problem with a movie bbreaking a wee bit of formula, but each of the previous three, especially TOD, hinted at the main themes or plot of the movie. Raiders introduced Belloq as the corrupt rival, TLC showed Indy's estranged father researching the Holy Grail and TOD directly affected the plot. It is because of the events in the teaser that forces Willie Scott to be on this adventure with INdy and Short Round and it is because of the bad blood between him and the Chinese gangster that causes the pilots after the teaser to crash the plane, leading Indy and co. surviving by landing ultimately in India -- where the rest of the movie takes place.

So I do find it a bit hypocritical to criticize KOTCS for doing something all previous three did to some extent and I'd argue TOD was more directly related to the plot than KOTCS. Even if the teaser had not happened, other than finding out Mac was a traitor later, the events in KOTCS would have mostly proceeded the same (maybe without being black listed by the Feds as well). If Indy hadn't angered the gangster or grabbed Willie while leaving in Doom's teaser, they never would have ended up in India (or have the girl there) and there wouldn't have been a movie.

[RockSP]

I mean it is no more out there than the very self-deprecating beginning (which I love) of TOD, with Kate Capshaw singing and dancing to "Anything Goes" in Mandarin Chinese.

:huh: What was self-depricating about it?

[BloodyWolverine]

I can only afford to see a movie once . I'll save the multpial viewing for the dvd. So is anyone upset about the box office race

[DACrowe]

Oh I saw KOTCS twice in theaters last weekend. That is enough but I thoroughly enjoyed it each time, especially the second, and intend to buy it on DVD to complete my collection of the series -- and note I only do that if I like the latest installment (ex. I don't own X3, POTC3 or Ep. I and II on DVD).

I don't mind people seeing movies multiple times, but after 4 or 5 viewings it gets a little much (I saw BB in theaters 3 times as my most viewed). But I always find it funny when one internet geek shows disdain to another for seeing a movie they didn't particularly care for multiple times, and then will see their most hyped movie (say TDK or Iron Man?) just as much, if not more.

[DACrowe]

:huh: What was self-depricating about it?

Oh it's just a tongue-in-cheek moment where they're beginning a "dark adventure movie" with a bright and shiny musical number from the 1930s being sung in Chinese. It is saying don't take the proceedings too seriously, because we're not. And after this really glamerous opening with confetti, balloons and glamerous dresses and tuxedos, it turns into an extremely violent and somewhat disturbing adventure with the most gruesome sights in the series.

It was ironic and I liked it. ;)

[spideyboy_1111]

Well I'm not going to argue about the drag car race, except that I thought it was very well paced/edited and had a nice breezy fun-ness (I know that is not a word) to the beginning and set the tone well for 1957. I mean it is no more out there than the very self-deprecating beginning (which I love) of TOD, with Kate Capshaw singing and dancing to "Anything Goes" in Mandarin Chinese.

Anyway as for the rest of the teaser (or pre-titles, really) I see nothing wrong with it being closely connected with the movie''s plot. They are still after the "artifact" of alien remains which serve no point in the movie other than two more shots an hour later as a bit of exposition. You may dislike that, but Indy talks about the Idol in the following scene in Raiders and the Cross makes a reappearence as well in TLC.

As for being closely related to the plot, I have no problem with a movie bbreaking a wee bit of formula, but each of the previous three, especially TOD, hinted at the main themes or plot of the movie. Raiders introduced Belloq as the corrupt rival, TLC showed Indy's estranged father researching the Holy Grail and TOD directly affected the plot. It is because of the events in the teaser that forces Willie Scott to be on this adventure with INdy and Short Round and it is because of the bad blood between him and the Chinese gangster that causes the pilots after the teaser to crash the plane, leading Indy and co. surviving by landing ultimately in India -- where the rest of the movie takes place.

So I do find it a bit hypocritical to criticize KOTCS for doing something all previous three did to some extent and I'd argue TOD was more directly related to the plot than KOTCS. Even if the teaser had not happened, other than finding out Mac was a traitor later, the events in KOTCS would have mostly proceeded the same (maybe without being black listed by the Feds as well). If Indy hadn't angered the gangster or grabbed Willie while leaving in Doom's teaser, they never would have ended up in India (or have the girl there) and there wouldn't have been a movie.

o don't get me wrong, the drag race scene wasn't bad at all and i wont put it down, i'd rather have something different though like i mentioned.

I don't think your quite understanding... the openings of the other films are after an artifact from an unrelated adventure that ends up setting up this other one. KOTCS just starts honestly right into the plot, introducing the main antagonist, and idea of what there after and the alien influence already. the previous movies slowly develop the plot so its like a big mystery i just felt KOTCS was spelt out almost from the beginning.

KOTCS did't use the same formula... Bellroq was just an annoyance not the main villain (that was the nazi's imo) the previous movies left you with a mystery, joining indy on an expedition that really wasn't related to the main plot of the film, i look at them as a prelogue. Where you feel like your just walking in on an adventure after it already began. Where i feel KOTCS already starts on the main adventure right away.

[Rezzo]

I can only afford to see a movie once . I'll save the multpial viewing for the dvd. So is anyone upset about the box office race

How anyone other than studio executives can be upset about box office numbers is beyond me.

[DACrowe]

Well I see what you're saying and respect that. I suppose you could argue that it'd be nice if it was an unrelated artifact, but I loved Indy being in the warehouse where the Ark is.

I will say I think Belloq was the main villain of Raiders, as he was the only one who got Indiana. As he said "I'm a shadowy relfection of you." He is the one who flirts with Marion, the one who figures out where Indy is digging, the one who calls INdy's bluff because he knows Indy is just like him and challenges him to blow up the Ark. Belloq is Indy's dopplenganger. The Nazis were just really evil, but really dumb in that movie. They are the same in TLC where they burn books and are ignorants that Donovhan manipulates in.

[spideyboy_1111]

How anyone other than studio executives can be upset about box office numbers is beyond me.

agrees... i think it's awesome when a amazing movie does well.. but blockbusters i usually dont care about doing well due to the fact its predictable when they have a huge fan following. Anyone who didn't think indy was going to do well is an idiot... lol it's like saying a star wars movie or harry potter movie wont do well.

plus crap-tastic movies that don't do well still get sequels so the money isn't much of a reason to warrant or not warrant a sequel imo.

[BloodyWolverine]

I'm not upset i expected a few movies being under 300 mill do to the competitionthis year . Indy 4 is second most BO wise in the trilogy and may come close to Raiders domestically. I am glad Iron Man is doing amazingly well and hope for TIH and TDK to continue a good summer BOx office. And Universal needs a hit after teh fire today.

[spideyboy_1111]

Well I see what you're saying and respect that. I suppose you could argue that it'd be nice if it was an unrelated artifact, but I loved Indy being in the warehouse where the Ark is.

I will say I think Belloq was the main villain of Raiders, as he was the only one who got Indiana. As he said "I'm a shadowy relfection of you." He is the one who flirts with Marion, the one who figures out where Indy is digging, the one who calls INdy's bluff because he knows Indy is just like him and challenges him to blow up the Ark. Belloq is Indy's dopplenganger. The Nazis were just really evil, but really dumb in that movie. They are the same in TLC where they burn books and are ignorants that Donovhan manipulates in.

o i never said the area 51 scene wouldn't happen... just not directly at the begining... it'd come after he got kidnapped in the opening or so.

[BloodyWolverine]

If i do recall didn't indy have some pottery stuff they broke so he did have something in perhaps artifact wise they were just broken instead of being stolen.

[spideyboy_1111]

If i do recall didn't indy have some pottery stuff they broke so he did have something in perhaps artifact wise they were just broken instead of being stolen.

yes, they kidnapped him while he was on an excavation.... just because he was on one.. doesn't make it count... lol it didn't show it, instead he was forced to go on a russian recovery (not even an expedition)

[ultimatefan]

So, Indy IV dropped around 54% according to Box Office Mojo estimates. Pretty reasonable for a post-Memorial day weekend. The movie is sure to beat 300m domestic and possible be the biggest movie of the summer.

The opening of Sex And The City... Geez, did every chick in America go to see that crap? I actually watched that show for a while, but it became annoingly soap-operish after a while. and those chicks are the biggest bunch of self-obsessed, shallow, high-maintenance divas the world has seen.

[jimslimbo]

Since ben burtt returned to do the sound for the film. Could someone explain to be how was the sound. How creative was it? How was the surround usage? How much did the theater shake with subwoffer acton?

thanks

[theJ0K3R]

^ There were a few scenes where the theaters' speakers shook. All around though, didn't notice it much.

[spideyboy_1111]

^ There were a few scenes where the theaters' speakers shook. All around though, didn't notice it much.

umm that doesn't say anything about the sound :o

jimslimbo.. why dont you just go see the movie?

[theJ0K3R]

Sorry he asked how much did the speakers shaked, so I answered that.

[spideyboy_1111]

Sorry he asked how much did the speakers shaked, so I answered that.

o my bad...

odd he asked that though... speaker shaking has nothing to do with sound quality

[theJ0K3R]

^ No prob. I think he asked both questions but I could only answer that one since I didn't really watch the movie worrying about the sound.

[jimslimbo]

umm that doesn't say anything about the sound :o

jimslimbo.. why dont you just go see the movie?

I didn't get a chance yet.unfortunately.

But i will

[jimslimbo]

^ No prob. I think he asked both questions but I could only answer that one since I didn't really watch the movie worrying about the sound.

Yeah basically i did. But i was aking if the theater shaked. Not the speakers.As in the movie had a good amount of bass.

And i was wondering if the sound was good. Because with ben burtt doing the sound i was wondering if it was good. because most of the soundwork he does is fantastic. But i guess since no one payed attention to the sound. I'll just have to experience it for my self

[theJ0K3R]

Thanks for clearing that up, and yeah, you should go see it. I was actually impressed with it.

[jimslimbo]

Thanks for clearing that up, and yeah, you should go see it. I was actually impressed with it.


good to hear positive feedback. it seems everyone keeps focusing on negitive things of the movie.

[spideyboy_1111]

Yeah basically i did. But i was aking if the theater shaked. Not the speakers.As in the movie had a good amount of bass.

And i was wondering if the sound was good. Because with ben burtt doing the sound i was wondering if it was good. because most of the soundwork he does is fantastic. But i guess since no one payed attention to the sound. I'll just have to experience it for my self

but umm... also depends on the theater and how good there speakers are as well ;)

[theJ0K3R]

^ Very true.

[Bruce_Wayne29]

Anybody knows if there's any scene after the end credits ?

[Rezzo]

Anybody knows if there's any scene after the end credits ?

There's nothing after the end credits.

[Spider-Vader]

Indy won the weekend despite losing Friday:

Title
(Click to view chart) Friday
5/30
(Estimates) Saturday
5/31
(Estimates) Sunday
6/1
(Estimates) Monday
6/2
1 INDIANA JONES AND THE KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL
Paramount

4,264 $12,233,000

+131.8% / $2,869
$183,114,000 / 9 $19,875,000

+62.5% / $4,661
$202,989,000 / 10 $13,892,000

-30.1% / $3,258
$216,881,000 / 11
N/A
2 SEX AND THE CITY
New Line

3,285 $26,930,000

-- / $8,198
$26,930,000 / 1 $17,920,000

-33.5% / $5,455
$44,850,000 / 2 $10,890,000

-39.2% / $3,315
$55,740,000 / 3
N/A

I knew Indy'd beat the old ****s, when I saw Indy on Friday only two people were walking out of SATC.

Iron Man surprisingly came in 4th behind Indy, Sex & the Strangers.

[danoyse]

So, Indy IV dropped around 54% according to Box Office Mojo estimates. Pretty reasonable for a post-Memorial day weekend. The movie is sure to beat 300m domestic and possible be the biggest movie of the summer.

The opening of Sex And The City... Geez, did every chick in America go to see that crap? I actually watched that show for a while, but it became annoingly soap-operish after a while. and those chicks are the biggest bunch of self-obsessed, shallow, high-maintenance divas the world has seen.

I saw Sex and the City today...it's not crap, it was funny as hell, and I think I'm going to start watching my DVDs of the series again this week, because...like Indy, it was nice to see them again too.

As for Indy...I'm seeing that again some time this week. Glad to see it still doing well this weekend.

[Spider-Vader]

To you, but to most of the people here (men) it's stupid. I doubt Indy will beat Iron Man, that was an unpredictable beast. Not even people who were anticipated for it (me) predicted this happening. I see Indy at #2 domestic & world wide, behind the iron beast.

[danoyse]

To you, but to most of the people here (men) it's stupid.

But we don't want you in the movie theater for it anyway, so that's OK.

I love how we get ONE movie this whole summer and they start acting like the world is going to stop spinning when it has a big weekend. :whatever:

And for the record, I loved Indiana Jones and Iron Man, and I can't wait for The Dark Knight. But SATC was awesome.

And you should update your box office post. Looks like "the old ****s" won by about $9 million this weekend. :woot:

[GreenKToo]

So, Indy IV dropped around 54% according to Box Office Mojo estimates. Pretty reasonable for a post-Memorial day weekend. The movie is sure to beat 300m domestic and possible be the biggest movie of the summer.

The opening of Sex And The City... Geez, did every chick in America go to see that crap? I actually watched that show for a while, but it became annoingly soap-operish after a while. and those chicks are the biggest bunch of self-obsessed, shallow, high-maintenance divas the world has seen.
I went to the movies last nite, and while waiting in line, I saw dozens and dozens of ladies all grouped up to see Sex and the city, most, if not all, were dressed up like the chics in the film.
It was funny to see. On one side were all these dressed up chics, and on the other side were a bunch of guys with I.M. t-shirts on and the like.
Talk about a gender clash.:word:

Anywho, I finally got to see Indy, loved it.

[spideyboy_1111]

To you, but to most of the people here (men) it's stupid. I doubt Indy will beat Iron Man, that was an unpredictable beast. Not even people who were anticipated for it (me) predicted this happening. I see Indy at #2 domestic & world wide, behind the iron beast.

thats because men have to be macho... and put it down and call it stupid :o:whatever: please..... least have the mature and well rounded ability to accept the fact it's a very popular thing. might not be your cup of tea but to call it stupid makes you sound arrogant and ignorant... esp because i doubt u've watched A episode, let alone several or the movie :o

[spideyboy_1111]

But we don't want you in the movie theater for it anyway, so that's OK.

I love how we get ONE movie this whole summer and they start acting like the world is going to stop spinning when it has a big weekend. :whatever:

And for the record, I loved Indiana Jones and Iron Man, and I can't wait for The Dark Knight. But SATC was awesome.

And you should update your box office post. Looks like "the old ****s" won by about $9 million this weekend. :woot:

*claps*

[danoyse]

I went to the movies last nite, and while waiting in line, I saw dozens and dozens of ladies all grouped up to see Sex and the city, most, if not all, were dressed up like the chics in the film.
It was funny to see. On one side were all these dressed up chics, and on the other side were a bunch of guys with I.M. t-shirts on and the like.
Talk about a gender clash.:word:

Anywho, I finally got to see Indy, loved it.


I saw SATC this afternoon and it was almost sold out. I think we counted less than 5 guys in the theater. We were joking afterwards that line at the ladies room wasn't nearly as long the night I saw Iron Man.

We could see the line of women waiting to get into the next show, and there were men waiting to get into one of the other movies, and everyone was having a laugh about the man/woman separation in the crowds. It was pretty funny.

I can't wait to see Indy again. Next weekend! :woot:

[turtlefocker]

I also liked how the beginning of Kingdom used the same text for the titles as Raiders/Last Crusade did. Man, they should really reformat the text for the beginning of Temple to match the other three.

I'd be down for that...

I'd also be cool with the title screen of Raiders being changed to say "Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the lost arc" and the date being changed to 35...

And having Temple of Doom's date being changed to 37... since as many have pointed out, it doesn't really work as a prequel...

I'm heading to the theater to watch this again , it'll be my second time .

I've seen it 3 times now and like it more and more each time. I had some issues upon first viewing (3 water falls, Shia swinging) but I've come to enjoy those parts.

I love the opening drag race too.

[spideyboy_1111]

I'd be down for that...

I'd also be cool with the title screen of Raiders being changed to say "Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the lost arc" and the date being changed to 35...

And having Temple of Doom's date being changed to 37... since as many have pointed out, it doesn't really work as a prequel...



I've seen it 3 times now and like it more and more each time. I had some issues upon first viewing (3 water falls, Shia swinging) but I've come to enjoy those parts.

I love the opening drag race too.


actually it works better as a prequel... :o for the fact that 1) people would wonder wtf happened to marion and 2) where are the nazi's? that was the whole reason they made it a prequel because they wanted a new female lead and didn't want to include the nazi era :o

[DACrowe]

But we don't want you in the movie theater for it anyway, so that's OK.

I love how we get ONE movie this whole summer and they start acting like the world is going to stop spinning when it has a big weekend. :whatever:

And for the record, I loved Indiana Jones and Iron Man, and I can't wait for The Dark Knight. But SATC was awesome.

And you should update your box office post. Looks like "the old ****s" won by about $9 million this weekend. :woot:

I respect your opinion and agree guys shouldn't give a movie **** for appealing only to women (I personally don't like the main characters of SATC and think they are all kind of *****y, but whatever).

To be fair y'[all also have Mamma Mia at the end of the summer and while "What Happens in Vegas" is likely an awful movie, there was another piece of counterprogramming.

[Spider-Vader]

Can we get a pic of Indy & Iron Man kicking the rest of the summer's butt?

[spideyboy_1111]

I respect your opinion and agree guys shouldn't give a movie **** for appealing only to women (I personally don't like the main characters of SATC and think they are all kind of *****y, but whatever).

To be fair y'[all also have Mamma Mia at the end of the summer and while "What Happens in Vegas" is likely an awful movie, there was another piece of counterprogramming.

actually vegas was for both... but mostly for the highschool age group... and to be fair men get way more movies geared toward them.... :o

and mama mia! looks awesome :o

[turtlefocker]

actually it works better as a prequel... :o for the fact that 1) people would wonder wtf happened to marion and 2) where are the nazi's? that was the whole reason they made it a prequel because they wanted a new female lead and didn't want to include the nazi era :o

1) Same place she is in Last crusade.. somewhere else. They broke up. She's giving birth to Mutt...

2)Where are the Nazi's? Not in India.... There were just as many Nazi's in 35 as 37... no change...

[spideyboy_1111]

1) Same place she is in Last crusade.. somewhere else. They broke up. She's giving birth to Mutt...

2)Where are the Nazi's? Not in India.... There were just as many Nazi's in 35 as 37... no change...

1) ya but we don't know any of this.. it makes more sense the way it is :o quit complaining, esp about something so trivial.. why the hell does TOD not work as a prequel? :huh:

2) TOD happened before Indy's involvement with the nazi's ... If it wasn't a prequel then theres a guarantee that Nazi's probably would have showed up, esp after such a religious and powerful artifact

[DACrowe]

actually it works better as a prequel... :o for the fact that 1) people would wonder wtf happened to marion and 2) where are the nazi's? that was the whole reason they made it a prequel because they wanted a new female lead and didn't want to include the nazi era :o

Maybe, but I'd argue that being set in India and Shanghi, Indy wouldn't have to worry about the Nazis or Axis there in 1936 or '37.

And Indy doesn't stay bolted down in any relationship for long IMO. After all TLC takes place two years after Raiders and Marion is nowhere to be seen and he beds Elsa the day he meets her.

Or another reason it has trouble being a prequel is when the two ninjas attack Indy on the hillside and he smirks like he's seen it before and reachs for his pistol -- which isn't there. And then he grins and runs...how does that work if he hadn't had that showdown with the swordsman in Raiders first?

On the other hand in TOD he doesn't believe in mystical stuff and is after fortune and glory. He is much more respectful to that sort of thing in Raiders o the Lost Ark.

[DACrowe]

actually vegas was for both... but mostly for the highschool age group... and to be fair men get way more movies geared toward them.... :o

and mama mia! looks awesome :o

Oh that is totally true, especially in the summer. I was agreeing there is nothing wrong with SATC being a hit and women should have their films to. It is a shame most movies are geared towards men and women have fewer great parts because of it (look at Oscar nom. comparisons), women directors have no respect in Hollywood, WB said they are making no more movies with women as the sole leads, etc. It's a real double standard shame.

As for Mamma Mia...ahh. I'm not a fan of ABBA and the stage show was okay but it isn't Sweeney Todd or even Phantom of the Opera for that matter. And for musical comedies Spamalot, The Producers, Avenue Q, etc. are much funnier. But I never cared for jukebox musicals.

[spideyboy_1111]

Maybe, but I'd argue that being set in India and Shanghi, Indy wouldn't have to worry about the Nazis or Axis there in 1936 or '37.

And Indy doesn't stay bolted down in any relationship for long IMO. After all TLC takes place two years after Raiders and Marion is nowhere to be seen and he beds Elsa the day he meets her.

Or another reason it has trouble being a prequel is when the two ninjas attack Indy on the hillside and he smirks like he's seen it before and reachs for his pistol -- which isn't there. And then he grins and runs...how does that work if he hadn't had that showdown with the swordsman in Raiders first?

On the other hand in TOD he doesn't believe in mystical stuff and is after fortune and glory. He is much more respectful to that sort of thing in Raiders o the Lost Ark.

people forgot about marion though by the release of the third movie... lol they just assumed it was like bond... new babe per movie.

where did u see a hill in shanghi? it was just club obi-wan and the car chase?. plus you telling me indy has never had an experience like that in his several years ?

and yup another reason. it'd be very odd for him to not believe in the mystical when he saw what he saw with the arc.

the only reason against it being a prequel imo is because it doesnt seem like one.. for the fact theres nothing in the movie that acknowledges that it was a prequel. It's the stand alone film of the franchise

[DACrowe]

1) ya but we don't know any of this.. it makes more sense the way it is :o quit complaining, esp about something so trivial.. why the hell does TOD not work as a prequel? :huh:

2) TOD happened before Indy's involvement with the nazi's ... If it wasn't a prequel then theres a guarantee that Nazi's probably would have showed up, esp after such a religious and powerful artifact

not so sure on 2. The Nazis were still quietly stealing the land from neighboring countries around them in 1937 (same as 1935-1936) and they aren't personally chasing Jones. They're after big religious artifacts and Shiva stones in India is far out of their reach and not a major point of reference. Indiana ended up in India by accident, anyway.

[Darkly Dexter]

Saw it the other day and I loved it. It's not at same level of Raiders and The Last Crusade but it's faaaaaaaaaaaaaaar better than The Temple of Doom.

[turtlefocker]

1) ya but we don't know any of this.. it makes more sense the way it is :o quit complaining, esp about something so trivial.. why the hell does TOD not work as a prequel? :huh:

2) TOD happened before Indy's involvement with the nazi's ... If it wasn't a prequel then theres a guarantee that Nazi's probably would have showed up, esp after such a religious and powerful artifact

There are plenty of reasons that TOD works better as a sequel than Raiders, I'm not complaining, I'm just stating a fact. I'm happy with the films the way they are and TOD happens to be my fav of the four... your "lack of Nazi" argument makes no sense... I don't even understand how this is an issue...

As for why it doesn't work as a prequel... here are a couple point off the top of my head..

1)In Temple of Doom Indy witnesses voodoo first hand, cursed blood, and still-beating hearts, yet he doesn't seem to believe in things like this in Raiders, at least not until the ending.

2) If you're gonna bring up the fortune and Glory thing then just go check out the opening scene of "Last Crusade" and re-think the opening of Temple: It's very ambiguous to say the least. Perhaps Indy had his partner there to double cross them and get both the diamond and the statue. When his partner was shot his plan could have gone to ****. It's obvious he walked into a situation where he didn't trust the people he was doing business with.

3)I don't see how setting TOD after ROTLA would have made any difference to there being Nazis or not. There were Nazis around in 1936, after all.... sorry, but seriously this is your main argument and it makes no sense...

4)the scene where he tries to unsuccessfully pull the stunt he pulls in Raiders [involving pulling out a gun and shooting somebody who's attacking him with a weapon which isn't a gun] - "sequel"

...

[DACrowe]

people forgot about marion though by the release of the third movie... lol they just assumed it was like bond... new babe per movie.

where did u see a hill in shanghi? it was just club obi-wan and the car chase?. plus you telling me indy has never had an experience like that in his several years ?

and yup another reason. it'd be very odd for him to not believe in the mystical when he saw what he saw with the arc.

the only reason against it being a prequel imo is because it doesnt seem like one.. for the fact theres nothing in the movie that acknowledges that it was a prequel. It's the stand alone film of the franchise

No I meant he is on the hill after escaping the temple and two ninjas jump him and he reachs for his gun that isn't there, which is obviously a reference to that famous scene in Raiders.

[turtlefocker]

apparently while I was typing that some fellow Indy fans were jumping into the discussion and saying the same thing... oh well I feel kind of slow now...

I'd still like to see you attempt to argue against my points though... I think they are pretty air tight.

[spideyboy_1111]

There are plenty of reasons that TOD works better as a sequel than Raiders, I'm not complaining, I'm just stating a fact. I'm happy with the films the way they are and TOD happens to be my fav of the four... your "lack of Nazi" argument makes no sense... I don't even understand how this is an issue... Take it up with Lucas and Spielberg, not me.


As for why it doesn't work as a prequel... here are a couple point off the top of my head..

1)In the Temple of Doom Indy witnesses voodoo first hand, cursed blood, and still-beating hearts, yet he doesn't seem to believe in things like this in Raiders, at least not until the ending. Actually we just talked about this... he does believe in stuff like this *yawn*

2) If you're gonna bring up the fortune and Glory thing then just go check out the opening scene of "Last Crusade" and re-think the opening of Temple: It's very ambiguous to say the least. Perhaps Indy had his partner there to double cross them and get both the diamond and the statue. When his partner was shot his plan could have gone to ****. It's obvious he walked into a situation where he didn't trust the people he was doing business with. did i bring up anything that has to do with this? nope not sure what your talking about here.

3)I don't see how setting TOD after ROTLA would have made any difference to there being Nazis or not. There were Nazis around in 1936, after all.... sorry, but seriously this is your main argument and it makes no sense... Again... the fact "makes no difference" doesn't support anything :o


4)the scene where he tries to unsuccessfully pull the stunt he pulls in Raiders [involving pulling out a gun and shooting somebody who's attacking him with a weapon which isn't a gun] - "sequel"

...

see above... it was just a thing for audiences... you really think indy has never pulled that trick before raiders? the guy was all over the map on adventures.

[Cagefighterkip]

was dragged to see Sex and the City last night... it wasnt a bad movie, but it wasnt for me... maybe if it wasnt 2 1/2 hours long i wouldn't have wanted to wretch so many times... anyways moral of the story is Indy 4 was WAAAY better

[turtlefocker]

Take it up with Lucas and Spielberg, not me.

Stupid Statement. Completely irrelevant to weather Temple works as a prequel or a sequel more.


Actually we just talked about this... he does believe in stuff like this *yawn*
did i bring up anything that has to do with this? nope not sure what your talking about here.
Again... the fact "makes no difference" doesn't support anything :o


In Raiders he doesn't believe in any of that stuff.... I'm watching it right now... the scene with Marcus... the entire first act... There is no way Indy has went through anything like he did in Temple.



see above... it was just a thing for audiences... you really think indy has never pulled that trick before raiders? the guy was all over the map on adventures.

It was a very "sequel" moment is all.

[spideyboy_1111]

on another note... it probably was his first time experiencing voodoo so ya... of course he's gonna be shocked over it *yawn*

[turtlefocker]

on another note... it probably was his first time experiencing voodoo so ya... of course he's gonna be shocked over it *yawn*

...what the **** are you talking about? Let me break this down for you...

In Raiders Indy doesn't believe in any mystical type stuff...

In Temple, which takes place prior to it, he witnesses mystical type stuff.

Therefore... plot hole

which means it would work better as a sequel

Do you have a counter argument to this? Or do you still have no idea what I'm trying to say and think that because Nazi's weren't in India there is no way it could have happened after Raiders...

[theShape]

Temple of Doom sucks. Last Crusade is right up there with Raiders. :up:

[turtlefocker]

Lets put it this way, if the films didn't have dates at the beginning Temple would be universally considered as taking place after Raiders... even if Lucas said it was meant to be a prequel.

That's all I'm saying. It works better as a sequel. I'm not trying to get them to change the dates, because **** like that doesn't matter.

[DACrowe]

Well I'm not sure he was so worried about the Ark of the Covenant, but he sure as ****e knew not to look at the inside of the Ark of the Covenant after it was opened. I think your "reaching for gun" moment is the best evidence that it should take place after Raiders. Well that and he has none of the scars he should have acquired from whippings and such in Temple when we saw him without a shirt in Raiders.

But it is set in 1935 oh well. There is no reason in the original 3 that it couldn't have been set in 1937, except now we know (thanks to KOTCS) that Indy almost married Marion and was with her for some time before bailing and leaving town (perhaps to chase the Cross of Coronado?).

But look at it this way, he looked at the rocks as a prize and kept spouting "Fortune and glory" in TOD, but even if he doesn't believe that God has powers in the Ark, he is far more respectful to it in Raiders then he is to the stones in Temple of Doom. He is also more careless in TOD than he is in Raiders (getting caught by picking a fight with a man hundreds of feet away).

But really it may just be a joke from Speilberg and Lucas, because outside of KOTCS, these movies and their order are interchangeable because they are all stand alone stories. For that I like it not going the SW approach. Which is what POTC tried to copy and failed miserably.

[theShape]

Lets put it this way, if the films didn't have dates at the beginning Temple would be universally considered as taking place after Raiders... even if Lucas said it was meant to be a prequel.

That's all I'm saying. It works better as a sequel. I'm not trying to get them to change the dates, because **** like that doesn't matter.

I agree with you completely. The simple reason that this shouldn't be considered a prequel is that there is nothing remotely "prequel" about the film. Think about it. We don't learn anything about Indy's that we hadn't already learned from Raiders. It's just a stand-alone story that follows the exact same formula as Raiders. Luckily, Last Crusade was much more interesting and brought something new to the series, unlike TOD.

[spideyboy_1111]

Well I'm not sure he was so worried about the Ark of the Covenant, but he sure as ****e knew not to look at the inside of the Ark of the Covenant after it was opened. I think your "reaching for gun" moment is the best evidence that it should take place after Raiders. Well that and he has none of the scars he should have acquired from whippings and such in Temple when we saw him without a shirt in Raiders.

But it is set in 1935 oh well. There is no reason in the original 3 that it couldn't have been set in 1937, except now we know (thanks to KOTCS) that Indy almost married Marion and was with her for some time before bailing and leaving town (perhaps to chase the Cross of Coronado?).

But look at it this way, he looked at the rocks as a prize and kept spouting "Fortune and glory" in TOD, but even if he doesn't believe that God has powers in the Ark, he is far more respectful to it in Raiders then he is to the stones in Temple of Doom. He is also more careless in TOD than he is in Raiders (getting caught by picking a fight with a man hundreds of feet away).

But really it may just be a joke from Speilberg and Lucas, because outside of KOTCS, these movies and their order are interchangeable because they are all stand alone stories. For that I like it not going the SW approach. Which is what POTC tried to copy and failed miserably.

great post.. all is well said.

[DACrowe]

Thanks. :cool:

[spideyboy_1111]

I agree with you completely. The simple reason that this shouldn't be considered a prequel is that there is nothing remotely "prequel" about the film. Think about it. We don't learn anything about Indy's that we hadn't already learned from Raiders. It's just a stand-alone story that follows the exact same formula as Raiders. Luckily, Last Crusade was much more interesting and brought something new to the series, unlike TOD.

but thats not even really a reason... just because "ignoring the date" it can fit pretty much anywhere.. isn't much of a reason either... I think DA Crowe says it best.

plus if it really doesn't matter that much, and is interchangeable.. then why not keep it the way it is? especially now that KOTCS establishes that him and marion were together long enough after raiders to plan a wedding? throwing the temple in the time period between raiders and crusade makes even less sense now.

[turtlefocker]

Well I'm not sure he was so worried about the Ark of the Covenant, but he sure as ****e knew not to look at the inside of the Ark of the Covenant after it was opened. I think your "reaching for gun" moment is the best evidence that it should take place after Raiders. Well that and he has none of the scars he should have acquired from whippings and such in Temple when we saw him without a shirt in Raiders.

But it is set in 1935 oh well. There is no reason in the original 3 that it couldn't have been set in 1937, except now we know (thanks to KOTCS) that Indy almost married Marion and was with her for some time before bailing and leaving town (perhaps to chase the Cross of Coronado?).

But look at it this way, he looked at the rocks as a prize and kept spouting "Fortune and glory" in TOD, but even if he doesn't believe that God has powers in the Ark, he is far more respectful to it in Raiders then he is to the stones in Temple of Doom. He is also more careless in TOD than he is in Raiders (getting caught by picking a fight with a man hundreds of feet away).

But really it may just be a joke from Spielberg and Lucas, because outside of KOTCS, these movies and their order are interchangeable because they are all stand alone stories. For that I like it not going the SW approach. Which is what POTC tried to copy and failed miserably.

It doesn't really matter, but as I said, people have to force themselves to see it as a prequel because of the dates if you actually look at the films as they are and the character of Indy it makes more sense as a sequel rather than a prequel.

Indy witnesses crazy magical **** and has one crazy adventure adventure which includes hearts being ripped out and still beating...:

http://sportinggnomes.com/images/temple_of_doom_flaming-heart.jpg

A year later Indy has blacked out said adventure:

Marcus: Marion's the least of your worries right now, believe me, Indy.
Indy: What do you mean?
Marcus: Well, I mean that for nearly three thousand years man has been searching for the lost ark. It's not something to be taken lightly. No one knows its secrets. It's like nothing you've ever gone after before.
Indy: [laughing] Oh, Marcus. What are you trying to do, scare me? You sound like my mother. We've known each other for a long time. I don't believe in magic, a lot of superstitious hocus pocus. I'm going after a find of incredible historical significance, you're talking about the boogie man. Besides, you know what a cautious fellow I am.
[throws his gun into his suitcase]

[Matt Murdock]

I think that Indy was making reference to the stone's cultural power, its influence on the people who hold it, if you will.

[turtlefocker]

I think that Indy was making reference to the stone's cultural power, its influence on the people who hold it, if you will.

http://sportinggnomes.com/images/temple_of_doom_flaming-heart.jpg

[spideyboy_1111]

not to mention if you want to say "indy didnt believe in the mystical" before Raiders... then that pretty much makes the young indy tv show irrelevant as well... i'm pretty sure mystical moments happened in that as well

[Matt Murdock]

http://sportinggnomes.com/images/temple_of_doom_flaming-heart.jpg

Just my opinion.

[turtlefocker]

Just my opinion.

He still saw crazy magical stuff and then a year later forgot it happened... Temple works better as a sequel is all I'm saying.

[Matt Murdock]

He still saw crazy magical stuff and then a year later forgot it happened... Temple works better as a sequel is all I'm saying.

It probably does, but it's okay. I'm not worried about it. :yay:

[turtlefocker]

not to mention if you want to say "indy didnt believe in the mystical" before Raiders... then that pretty much makes the young indy tv show irrelevant as well... i'm pretty sure mystical moments happened in that as well

TV show is irrelevant, can we focus on the films.

I don't understand why it bothers you so much that the film doesn't quite work as a prequel... it doesn't bother me at all and I've been an Indy fan all my life... The only reason you are arguing this is because of the dates. In fact there is no argument.

[Arkady Rossovich]

It was like, #3 on the biggest Memorial day weekend openings ever list...if that's not a huge success, I dont know what is...

I wish there was some numbers to this. Like how it would rate against the past 3 films.

Production Budget: $185 million

Domestic Total as of May. 26, 2008: $151,958,445
+ Foreign: $146,399,872

= Worldwide: $298,358,317

"Raiders of the Lost Ark, would equal over $600 million today, but Kingdom of the Crystal Skull was only realistically aiming for the attendance levels of the other two, with The Last Crusade as the low bar at $340 million adjusted."

I guess this makes more sense,it looks like people weren't too keen on a older Indiana Jones. I don't think a sequel will be made...

[turtlefocker]

I guess this makes more sense,it looks like people weren't too keen on a older Indiana Jones. I don't think a sequel will be made...

Opening Weekend: $100,137,835

Domestic: $216,881,000 59.6%
+ Foreign: $146,972,020 40.4%

= Worldwide: $363,853,020

Looks like it will beat "Last Crusade's" adjusted numbers...

[DarknessOfDeath]

...

ugh. this again?

[cerealkiller182]

He still saw crazy magical stuff and then a year later forgot it happened... Temple works better as a sequel is all I'm saying.

Whatabout batman? Batman sees the crazy **** all the time. He says just because I cant explain doesnt mean its not explainable.

[spideyboy_1111]

TV show is irrelevant, can we focus on the films.

I don't understand why it bothers you so much that the film doesn't quite work as a prequel... it doesn't bother me at all and I've been an Indy fan all my life... The only reason you are arguing this is because of the dates. In fact there is no argument.

same could be said of you... why cant you understand? infact there's no argument now anyway with the events speaking for them self in KOTCS... only 3 years passed between raiders and the last crusade... we know him and marion spent alot of time together during that time period.. we also know they were to wed, and marion got pregnant before the wedding. Mutt we don't really know his age... he dropped out of school and i'd assume the prep schools he was talking about were well to do colleges. lets say hes between 18 and 20 since he was too young to be drinking (since indy grabbed the beer). that means he was born somewhere between 1937 and 1939. since marion and indy were together in 1936 and started a relationship, one would assume there marriage was probably being planned in 1937 when indy backed out... and enough time had passed so that in 1939 for crusade there was no acknowledge of her :o. So if you really wanted to squeeze TOD inbetween movies it'd have to of happened near the end of 39.. which makes the shanghi setting and musical slightly beginning to out date, and makes indy a douche for moving on and not even acknowledging Marion in his life when he was more then eager to bag to bag willie like a young buck.

[DarknessOfDeath]

What I think is that Indy keeps things to himself and wants to leave it that way. In a lot of ways, he does and this whole thing about mystical powers and s*** doesn't really interest him even though he saw something similiar in TOD but perhaps he just wants to forget about it and not ever mention it again in case someone starts calling him an insane crazy lunatic... or something.

[spideyboy_1111]

What I think is that Indy keeps things to himself and wants to leave it that way. In a lot of ways, he does and this whole thing about mystical powers and s*** doesn't really interest him even though he saw something similiar in TOD but perhaps he just wants to forget about it and not ever mention it again in case someone starts calling him an insane crazy lunatic... or something.

agrees

[DarknessOfDeath]

Thats why... I don't mind when I watch TOD first, then Raiders and so on.

[Bim]

What I think is that Indy keeps things to himself and wants to leave it that way. In a lot of ways, he does and this whole thing about mystical powers and s*** doesn't really interest him even though he saw something similiar in TOD but perhaps he just wants to forget about it and not ever mention it again in case someone starts calling him an insane crazy lunatic... or something.

I think that despite Indy's encounters with supernatural objects it's important to remember he's an archaeologist, and he must maintain certain objectivity... at least that's the way i see it.

[DarknessOfDeath]

I think that despite Indy's encounters with supernatural objects it's important to remember he's an archaeologist, and he must maintain certain objectivity... at least that's the way i see it.

yeah, but while he chooses to ignore it, thats where the objectivity of finding arti-facts come into play during his expeditions. He's an archeologist - so he knows better.

I mean, personally, I wouldn't want to get myself involved in some cult no one ever believes in but coming out of it and witnessing what its all about, I'm better off just to keep my mouth shut and move on without getting labled as a insane crazy archeologist.

Finding myself locked in a institution is not exactly the place I want to be in.

[danoyse]

I respect your opinion and agree guys shouldn't give a movie **** for appealing only to women (I personally don't like the main characters of SATC and think they are all kind of *****y, but whatever).

To be fair y'[all also have Mamma Mia at the end of the summer and while "What Happens in Vegas" is likely an awful movie, there was another piece of counterprogramming.

Thank you. Though I don't know any women excited for What Happens in Vegas or Mamma Mia (I didn't even want to see that on Broadway). SATC was definitely our 'Indiana Jones' of this summer.

And it worked out double for me--I loved Indy and SATC. :woot:

[DACrowe]

Your welcome. ;)

As for this whole argument: to be fair Indy mocks mythology and his father's religious partiality in TLC and says "X never marks the spot" after amazing adventures. He even disproves that last assumption about a quarter way through the movie.

[Bim]

Thank you. Though I don't know any women excited for What Happens in Vegas or Mamma Mia (I didn't even want to see that on Broadway). SATC was definitely our 'Indiana Jones' of this summer.
Heeey i'm a woman and there's only one Indy for me this summer! :p :woot:

[spideyboy_1111]

What I think is that Indy keeps things to himself and wants to leave it that way. In a lot of ways, he does and this whole thing about mystical powers and s*** doesn't really interest him even though he saw something similiar in TOD but perhaps he just wants to forget about it and not ever mention it again in case someone starts calling him an insane crazy lunatic... or something.

I think that despite Indy's encounters with supernatural objects it's important to remember he's an archaeologist, and he must maintain certain objectivity... at least that's the way i see it.

exactly and a true scientist does not believe in magic... even if witnessed they'd most likely try to explain it in the most logical way.

[danoyse]

Heeey i'm a woman and there's only one Indy for me this summer! :p :woot:

There's only been one Indy for me since Raiders! We actually made a stop in the middle of cross-country drive just to see KOTCS on it's opening weekend.

But seriously, I have friends who wanted to see SATC above all else this summer. Which to me is downright insanity when there's a new Indiana Jones movie out first.

[DarknessOfDeath]

exactly and a true scientist does not believe in magic... even if witnessed they'd most likely try to explain it in the most logical way.


uh...you quoted my other previous post...

http://forums.superherohype.com/images/icons/icon11.gif

[spideyboy_1111]

uh...you quoted my other previous post...

http://forums.superherohype.com/images/icons/icon11.gif

i did?

[DarknessOfDeath]

i did?

Yes

The part thats bolded is mine.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bim http://forums.superherohype.com/images/Drakon/AFD/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?p=14933736#post14933736)


Dr. Indiana Jones says:
What I think is that Indy keeps things to himself and wants to leave it that way. In a lot of ways, he does and this whole thing about mystical powers and s*** doesn't really interest him even though he saw something similiar in TOD but perhaps he just wants to forget about it and not ever mention it again in case someone starts calling him an insane crazy lunatic... or something.


Bim says:
I think that despite Indy's encounters with supernatural objects it's important to remember he's an archaeologist, and he must maintain certain objectivity... at least that's the way i see it.

Spidy says:
exactly and a true scientist does not believe in magic... even if witnessed they'd most likely try to explain it in the most logical way.

[bullets]

Lets put it this way, if the films didn't have dates at the beginning Temple would be universally considered as taking place after Raiders... even if Lucas said it was meant to be a prequel.

That's all I'm saying. It works better as a sequel. I'm not trying to get them to change the dates, because **** like that doesn't matter.


I like to view Temple of Doom after Raiders because of the way its set up.
I know chronologically TOD takes place beforehand but Raiders is a better introduction to the character.

[Nirvana]

I like to watch Raiders before Temple of Doom, as well...

[spideyboy_1111]

Yes

The part thats bolded is mine.

and? i was agreeing? :huh:

[Jspider13]

FINALLY saw it tonight...and really enjoyed it.

That is all.

[DarknessOfDeath]

and? i was agreeing? :huh:

Bim is not using the quoting thing properly... thats all.

[DarknessOfDeath]

I like to view Temple of Doom after Raiders because of the way its set up.
I know chronologically TOD takes place beforehand but Raiders is a better introduction to the character.

I like to watch Raiders before Temple of Doom, as well...

I don't really have a preference when I watch TOD, either before and/or after Raiders - I don't care. hehe. :hehe:

[DACrowe]

Well for the first time like ever I tried watching TOD first and while chronologically it makes sense, the sense of the character's introduction as said earlier feels more apt to begin with Raiders, which is unsurprising. It is the first film, everything about the beginning of TOD is "We know this is an Indiana Jones movie and we're going to have some fun with what you expect." Which I love about btw.

Still have to watch Raide3rs tomorrow and then TLC.

[Mostpowerful]

I thought it was good, not great, but very entertaining, though too over the top on some scenes, but since I'm not a big Indy fan, I don't really care. I had fun at the movies.
The best thing out of the movie? Harrison Ford, of course, he still has it, but not for long, hehe.


8/10

[Bim]

Yes

The part thats bolded is mine.
I never added the "Dr. Indiana Jones says" part that was quoted... i simply selected the part i wanted to expand on, cause i thought it was making a good point :woot: i dont even remember who said it :hehe:

[Ancracks]

8/10 I enjoyed it, I didn't expect it to surpass the original trilogy, but I enjoyed more than I thought I would.

[Tojo]

Saw it for a second time to see if i was just being hard on it, but no, i still can't believe how poor it is compared to Raiders and Crusade. I would say it's worse than Doom(which i still love), but only by a mile. It's light years behind Raiders and Crusade and the reasons are thus;

1. The script. It's half-assed, not funny at all, unoriginal and convulted to insane degrees. It has no creativity or imagination, in my humble opinion.

2. The action sequences. Again, all pretty unoriginal really, mostly the amazon jungle chase. I really loved the warehouse scene and pretty much the whole opening, even the A-Bomb part. Despite that severely stupid fridge moment. Couldn't he have just found a bunker? Even for Indy that was too much.

3. Shia swinging through the forest. Probably a Spielberg idea.

4. The acting. Stellar cast yet they all looked ridiculous. Marion was underused and badly written.

5. Harrison Ford. I get it he's old, and while i saw that old charm in a few places he was very bland, tired and uninspiring. Which is a shame because he's what made the originals so great.

[DarknessOfDeath]

I never added the "Dr. Indiana Jones says" part that was quoted... i simply selected the part i wanted to expand on, cause i thought it was making a good point :woot: i dont even remember who said it :hehe:


That was me who said it...

Your just not using the quote thingy correctly

[DarknessOfDeath]

What I think is that Indy keeps things to himself and wants to leave it that way. In a lot of ways, he does and this whole thing about mystical powers and s*** doesn't really interest him even though he saw something similiar in TOD but perhaps he just wants to forget about it and not ever mention it again in case someone starts calling him an insane crazy lunatic... or something.

:dry:

[Tojo]

I really wonder what Darabonts script was like too. I'm sure it had more humour than Koepps'.

[DarknessOfDeath]

I found plenty of humor in KOTCS. I mean if your familiar with the relationship between Marion and Indy (from Raiders that is) and their past, to me, I caught on pretty quick cause I already understood the two and what kind of a past they had together. Between their banter and Mutt, I found their moments and connections pretty hilarious while at the same time, it brought back memories of what they had been through in Raiders.