Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull

[gwynplaine]

Shia as a young Marlon Brando was the biggest miscast imo since, I don't know, Kevin Costner as Robin Hood ?

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I tried to watch them once but found them a bit ridiculous, so I just stuck with the adult version.

[Ultimate Movie-Man]

My bro got this on Blu-Ray and I totally agree with Shia. the audience has changed, but the spirit hasn't changed. And I hate this "Nuking the fridge". that's a stupid thing to say. I loved the idea that the aliens were a hive-mind in comparison to communists, I love that part. It's silly popcorn fluff, but nothing can beat the first one, even though Karen Allen WAS in this <3

[TwilightPro101]

Lucas confirmed there won't be a spinoff series of Mutt. Thank God for that.

My feelings exactly.

[Ultimate Movie-Man]

Why does he need to be? Just stop making movies period already.

[TwilightPro101]

Why does he need to be? Just stop making movies period already.

Considering Lucas, he'll likely milk all of his franchises for all their worth until there's nothing left.

[Dylan17]

How can anyone say Shia was miscast? He was pretty perfect for the role, I think...

[Doctor Jones]

He was great. I don't get the hate Shia gets. He's a fantastic actor who won't be leaving any time soon.

[Doctor Jones]

Considering Lucas, he'll likely milk all of his franchises for all their worth until there's nothing left.

Please, just because the films he made didn't meet your expectations, didn't mean he was milking them. They were all about telling that story they had in mind when they were planning these things out. There were five Indy films planned and Lucas already had in mind six SW films.

[TwilightPro101]

I liked this chapter, but by no means did it hold nor did it live up to the expectations of what it should have been in my personal opinion. While it had many good points. It fell into the same problems that points of the STAR WARS prequels suffered.

My order for the INDY movies:

1. LAST CRUSADE
2. RAIDERS
3. TEMPLE
4. CRYSTAL SKULL

While it's not the highest on my list. It's got some good points to it.

[Ultimate Movie-Man]

He was great. I don't get the hate Shia gets. He's a fantastic actor who won't be leaving any time soon.

:up:

[TwilightPro101]

-Edit.-

[Ultimate Movie-Man]

He totally got it too, everyone played their roles with such ham and cheese, so if we're using that analagy, Indy 4 was delicious!!!

I HATE The Last Crusade. Well, maybe hate's a strong word. Thats the only one I haven't seen all the way through and lets just say I ain't finishing it off anytime soon.

[Ultimate Movie-Man]

I did nick my dad's boxset with the special features DVD though :D

That's in storage in some box amongst hundreds of other boxes though :(

[OctaviousINC]

I'm an enormous Indiana Jones fan, and I watched KOTCS last night again and I really seem to enjoy it more and more with repeated viewings. It doesn't deserve the hate it gets. It has the same heart and soul as the old films, it's just that it's aged and the writing isn't as good lol. I still like it. My least favorite of the series, but it's faaaaaar from bad. Ford could still move for being 66. Shia was great in it. And for some reason I seem to find Blanchett sexy as hell as Spalko. I don't know why. Everytime I see her I just want to do stuff to her.

[JAK®]

Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull was never going to be good enough for the fans, simple as that. People have decided that they hate Shia LeBoeuf, which means the movie was doomed from the start. At least from a fan point of view. Because KOTCS made a killing at the box office.

"Nuke The Fridge" is the most pathetic thing that any fan community has come up with, ever. It is the best (worst) example of nerd-rage. As if Indiana Jones hasn't defied the law of physics before. Especially considering the movie's setting as a 50's B-Movie (which are notorious for their poor understanding of nuclear physics).

[SuperKoala]

this movie made me want to puke

[Bim]

Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull was never going to be good enough for the fans, simple as that. People have decided that they hate Shia LeBoeuf, which means the movie was doomed from the start. At least from a fan point of view. Because KOTCS made a killing at the box office.
That's true.. i think that no matter what movie they had done, there was gonna be people that hated it with a passion without even giving it a chance... their loss i say :cwink:

Wow Ultimate_Movie_Man, i think ur the first person i see that really dislikes Crusade!... usually the hate is saved for TOD :hehe: (I still dont get why either, but to each their own).

I'm with you Octavious: the more i watch this film, the more i enjoy it :woot:

[Doctor Jones]

Same here. the second time I watched it, it was alot better for me. Yes Blanchett was dead sexy as Spalko. I think there could be some other people around here that would agree with us. Her accent was kinda sexy too. I don't think I've never been turned on to a woman with that kind of power. And those kind of women aren't attractive.

[Doctor Jones]

He totally got it too, everyone played their roles with such ham and cheese, so if we're using that analagy, Indy 4 was delicious!!!

I HATE The Last Crusade. Well, maybe hate's a strong word. Thats the only one I haven't seen all the way through and lets just say I ain't finishing it off anytime soon.

Wow, you can't hate it can you? What makes the film for me is the quest for Indy and his father. Them finding eachother as father and son is the real quest.

I think without Connery and that whole angle, LC definately wouldn't have been as good.

Raiders is my favorite, then LC, it's a toss up between TOD and KOTCS for me. I find something new and great about TOD each time I watch it.

[SuperKoala]

raiders of the lost ark is one of my all-time favs

[JAK®]

The Last Crusade is my favourite. I'm not sure where I'd put KOTCS in my list, I really need to see it again. I already know that I enjoyed it more than Temple Of Doom, though.

[SuperKoala]

kotcs is a bottom dweller in my movie book

[Brian Braddock]

raiders of the lost ark is one of my all-time favs

Same here.

[Sam Fisher]

Last Crusade:up:
Raiders Of The Lost Ark:up:
Kingdom Of The Cyrstal Skull:up:



































Temple Of Doom:down:down:down:down

[I Am The Knight]

How dare you. TOD is better than Crusade.

[Brian Braddock]

It's funny how Temple of Doom comes last in most peoples lists. Mine too.

Although, I do love the opening credits and early scene in the nighclub.

[Brian Braddock]

How dare you. TOD is better than Crusade.

Gonna have to agree to disagree on that one, I'm afraid. :oldrazz:

[Sam Fisher]

How dare you. TOD is better than Crusade."pulls out bullwhip":oldrazz:

[Sam Fisher]

It's funny how Temple of Doom comes last in most peoples lists. Mine too.

Although, I do love the opening credits and early scene in the nighclub.TOD has some great scenes, but it's mostly just action and hardly any story.

[Matt Murdock]

TLC is better than TOD in my book simply because of "Remember, 'X' never, ever marks the spot."

...

"'X' marks the spot!"

[I Am The Knight]

It's funny how Temple of Doom comes last in most peoples lists. Mine too.

Although, I do love the opening credits and early scene in the nighclub.

The early scenes in TOD are the worst part of the movie :oldrazz:

This movie is massively underrated. I TELL YOU!

"pulls out bullwhip":oldrazz:

Prepare to meet Kali...IN HELL!

[Bim]

Prepare to meet Kali...IN HELL!
:hehe: cover ur heart Sam, he's gonna pull ur heart out! :oldrazz:

It's tough to rank these movies, because i think each one has its own charm... my personal favorite is Raiders for sure, but i love the other three aswell. I've been listening to the Indy music these days, and i gotta say, William's score just adds so much to them! like SW music, these scores just get a lot of play in my ipod :cwink:

[Sam Fisher]

The scores are awasome.

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

How dare you. TOD is better than Crusade.

I think this is a first IATK, but I STRONGLY disagree with you, TLC is my favourite by far, were as i consider TOD the worst.

[I Am The Knight]

I think this is a first IATK, but I STRONGLY disagree with you, TLC is my favourite by far, were as i consider TOD the worst.

Yes it is, AVE.

I see I've stirred the pot quite a bit here haven't I?

I would love to hear what makes everyone hate TOD so much. from ALL OF YOU :hehe:

OK here is how I rank them...

Raiders
Temple
Crusade
Crystal Skull

[Sam Fisher]

Yes it is, AVE.

I see I've stirred the pot quite a bit here haven't I?

I would love to hear what makes everyone hate TOD so much. from ALL OF YOU :hehe:

OK here is how I rank them...

Raiders
Temple
Crusade
Crystal Skull
Like I said, it needed more story in there:yay:

[Bim]

I see I've stirred the pot quite a bit here haven't I?
Troublemaker! :hehe:

Yeah people, what's so bad about TOD? :huh:

If i was forced to rank them, i guess this is how they would look:
- Raiders
- Crystal Skull
- Last Crusade
- Temple of Doom

Dont let this deceive you, i still enjoy TOD a lot (Short Round is one of the best sidekicks ever!)... but they cant all be tied for second, can they? :cwink:

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Yes it is, AVE.

I see I've stirred the pot quite a bit here haven't I?

I would love to hear what makes everyone hate TOD so much. from ALL OF YOU :hehe:

OK here is how I rank them...

Raiders
Temple
Crusade
Crystal Skull

HA ha, I dont hate TOD, just think its the worst of the quadriligy, just found it lacking compared to the 1st and 3rd movies, and enjoyed the 4th more than TOD.

[I Am The Knight]

Well, I love the intensity. The continous level of danger. The darkness they injected in it. I actually like Willie Scott and her banter with Indy. Short Round cracks me up. The story is simple, but I think the action makes up for it. I don't find it much better than say Crusade, but I prefer it slightly.

[cerealkiller182]

I wouldnt say TOD is bad. I think its the worst Indiana Jones but not a bad movie at any stretch of the imagination. I just liked the others better.

[Brian Braddock]

Yeah, what some would consider to be the worst of the series is still better than 90% of the stuff that comes out now.

Ok, maybe 90% is a tad harsh - but you get my drift.

[CFE]

The scores are awesome.

Agreed..."Temple of Doom" is easily Williams' best of the four 'Indy' scores...IMO.

[Secret_Riddle]

Raiders
Crusade
Temple
Crystal Skull

[jimmylace]

Raiders
Crusade
Temple
Crystal Skull


:pal:

[Doctor Jones]

Agreed..."Temple of Doom" is easily Williams' best of the four 'Indy' scores...IMO.

Hell yes. I've always said this. There's little moments where it is. Listen to the cue when Indy and the gang enter the village.

Then there's one in particular that I like. When Indy opens up the scroll and sees Shiva, you can hear this rattle and drum beat when he says, "Shankara..." And then he smiles in a greedy way. I loved that. Also when Indy grabs the first stone out of the skull. This isn't the Indy that we know yet.

[Doctor Jones]

Prepare to meet Kali...IN HELL!

I fooking love this line! :woot:

Then **** goes down and he chops the bridge! :woot:

[OctaviousINC]

Crusade was my favorite Indy film as a kid.

But now as an adult, Raiders is my fave. Followed by LC, ToD and KotCS. I really love all the films, though. I could watch ToD the most if that makes any sense. Short Round is pretty much my favorite Indy character. I still think Indy has the most solid movie franchise as far as quality goes.

My friend is a big Bond fan and we always say that James Bond was Indiana Jones's father. Though it's kinda true because Connery played him, but time wise it doesn't make sense. If anything, Indy would be Bond's father. But whatever, just something fun we say.

[TwilightPro101]

TLC is better than TOD in my book simply because of "Remember, 'X' never, ever marks the spot."

...

"'X' marks the spot!"

I still love that bit.

[Spider-Vader]

1. Last Crusade
2. Raiders
3. Crystal Skull
4. Doom

They're all in my top 12 favorite movies.

I have a feeling we'll see one more movie. I remember hearing Spielberg really wanted to do LC because of the negative reaction from TOD. Since KOCS is receiving the same reaction I think a 5 will happen.

[Cagefighterkip]

1. Last Crusade
2. Raiders
3. Crystal Skull
4. Doom

They're all in my top 12 favorite movies.

I have a feeling we'll see one more movie. I remember hearing Spielberg really wanted to do LC because of the negative reaction from TOD. Since KOCS is receiving the same reaction I think a 5 will happen.

agreed

[Doctor Jones]

Last week, I had a dream that Lucas was working on a story and a dude at Lucasfilm said there is chance of an Indy 5. Then all of a sudden, they announced it. It felt so real and awesome. But then I woke up, and I still freaking waiting for it.

Indy 4 was announced in late December 06, we could have something next week or a little after.

*Fingers crossed*

Here's hoping.

I was thinking yesterday, wouldn't Daniel Craig make a good Indy villain?

[SuperKoala]

no no no no NO NO NO!!!

[CFE]

What they need to do is make another one and somehow write it in that Mutt was killed off...

Because honestly I LOVED 'Crystal Skull' and all it's aspects except for one...and that one is Mutt.

It was a poor character fleshed out by a poor performance from a far too relevant celebrity (notice how I didn't use actor).

I'm sorry, but Shia is too much of an 'it' guy right now. He's too 'flavor of the week' to be in an Indiana Jones film. And because of being too relevant, he sticks out like a sore thumb in that cast and is thusly the weakest link in that chain.

I mean if you look at the casts of the other three films, with the notable exceptions of Sean Connery and Ford himself, the casts don't hold any HUGE stars. River Pheonix to a degree, but even he wasn't on the level then that Shia's on now.

What I'm saying is the point of the casting for 'Indiana Jones' is to find the best actors who can also blend seamlessly into the film itself. Just like how Donner insisted on an unknown to play Superman...because having a 'flavor of the week' star jumps out of the screen and says 'Hey look, it's Robert Redford dressed as Superman' as opposed to saying 'it's Superman.'

And for me it's not 'Mutt Williams' ... it's 'The Even Stevens Kid' in an Indiana Jones movie.

Though god knows Shia attempts to act his little heart out to be Mutt...

That's my two cents anyway.

[Doctor Jones]

What they need to do is make another one and somehow write it in that Mutt was killed off...

Because honestly I LOVED 'Crystal Skull' and all it's aspects except for one...and that one is Mutt.

It was a poor character fleshed out by a poor performance from a far too relevant celebrity (notice how I didn't use actor).

I'm sorry, but Shia is too much of an 'it' guy right now. He's too 'flavor of the week' to be in an Indiana Jones film. And because of being too relevant, he sticks out like a sore thumb in that cast and is thusly the weakest link in that chain.

I mean if you look at the casts of the other three films, with the notable exceptions of Sean Connery and Ford himself, the casts don't hold any HUGE stars. River Pheonix to a degree, but even he wasn't on the level then that Shia's on now.

What I'm saying is the point of the casting for 'Indiana Jones' is to find the best actors who can also blend seamlessly into the film itself. Just like how Donner insisted on an unknown to play Superman...because having a 'flavor of the week' star jumps out of the screen and says 'Hey look, it's Robert Redford dressed as Superman' as opposed to saying 'it's Superman.'

And for me it's not 'Mutt Williams' ... it's 'The Even Stevens Kid' in an Indiana Jones movie.

Though god knows Shia attempts to act his little heart out to be Mutt...

That's my two cents anyway.

They don't need to do that just to satisfy a person's hate for Shia.

My opinion? Make it a prequel. Set it in 1956 a year before the fourth one.

In my script and outline for the fifth Indy film, that's the year it took place. Because yeah, I don't want Shia and Marion to come back. Because it would just be a road trip chessy tag along film. The fourth film worked because Indy and Mutt had no idea they were father and son. That was great. And they all had to find eachother again. Tha was fine. But we need to move onto a different story and characters.

If you're gonna bring anyone back, bring back Mac. He was so underused and could work great as just a good guy to Indy's. Get them on a mission together because they haven't seen eachother in years. After this mission they're together until the fourth one. Something in this film has to make him snap and make him betray Indy. Though we'll only see a little of that towards the end of the film.

[Majik1387]

Shia had no problem blending into the story/movie.

[JAK®]

What they need to do is make another one and somehow write it in that Mutt was killed off...

Because honestly I LOVED 'Crystal Skull' and all it's aspects except for one...and that one is Mutt.

It was a poor character fleshed out by a poor performance from a far too relevant celebrity (notice how I didn't use actor).

I'm sorry, but Shia is too much of an 'it' guy right now. He's too 'flavor of the week' to be in an Indiana Jones film. And because of being too relevant, he sticks out like a sore thumb in that cast and is thusly the weakest link in that chain.

I mean if you look at the casts of the other three films, with the notable exceptions of Sean Connery and Ford himself, the casts don't hold any HUGE stars. River Pheonix to a degree, but even he wasn't on the level then that Shia's on now.

What I'm saying is the point of the casting for 'Indiana Jones' is to find the best actors who can also blend seamlessly into the film itself. Just like how Donner insisted on an unknown to play Superman...because having a 'flavor of the week' star jumps out of the screen and says 'Hey look, it's Robert Redford dressed as Superman' as opposed to saying 'it's Superman.'

And for me it's not 'Mutt Williams' ... it's 'The Even Stevens Kid' in an Indiana Jones movie.

Though god knows Shia attempts to act his little heart out to be Mutt...

That's my two cents anyway.
Shia is more than a 'flavour of the week'. He is an actual good actor. The internet hates him, because the internet always hates what the public likes.

[Geo7877]

Shia is more than a 'flavour of the week'. He is an actual good actor. The internet hates him, because the internet always hates what the public likes.

Or he is not that great of an actor. Which he isn't.

[Sam Fisher]

Shia gets too much hate. There are far worst actors out there.

[Geo7877]

Shia gets too much hate. There are far worst actors out there.

That doesn't make him good.

[Sam Fisher]

Actually he is a pretty good actor.

[Matt Murdock]

He delivered a strong performance in Eagle Eye, despite the film's hackneyed script.

[JAK®]

Or he is not that great of an actor. Which he isn't.
Steven Speilberg disagrees.

[Doctor Jones]

And when that happens, your opinion means s**t. :woot:

[Sam Fisher]

Lol:D

[블라스]

Heh poor Shia is the newest target of the annoying, illogical fanboy hate :rolleyes:
I'm sure he's very worried :hehe:

[Sam Fisher]

Heh poor Shia is the newest target of the annoying, illogical fanboy hate :rolleyes:
I'm sure he's very worried :hehe:Yeah, like he really gives a **** about what the fanboys say about him.

[Doctor Jones]

Yeah, like he really gives a **** about what the fanboys say about him.

Exactly. Where is he going where no one else is? Tapping Megan Fox, being in fanboy film like Transformers only which they wished they were in. Hell, I'm even a little jealous for that kid to be with Harrison Ford himself. But you don't see me moaning.

It's jealosy I tell you!

[CFE]

1: Shia's a tolerable actor...but hardly a good one.
2: Having a consecutive spot in the tabloid rag is being a 'Flavor of the Week.' Since when have you actually seen ACTORS (not Celebrities) be seriously discussed in those things?
3: While Shia might give a tolerable performance in one project that doesn't mean he'd give a sufficient performance in all of them. Since when did his doing an okay job in 'Eagle Eye' (Which is a poor example anyway) mean he's excellent through and through?
3: Steven Spielberg is human...and thusly not always right. Shia's the next Tom Hanks? Bulls**t.
4: I'm not jealous of Shia. I'm stating my opinion as to the potential weakest aspect of KOTCS is for me personally...aside from the script itself, which is the weakest. And personally, I found Shia's performance to start out promising and end up watered down and poor.

And he doesn't fit. Look at the casts for 'Raiders,' 'Doom,' and 'Crusade.' They got it right in terms of casting.

Can you imagine some bigtime 80s fad like Cory Feldman in an Indiana Jones movie? I can't...just like how I find it hard to swallow Shia Labouf in an Indiana Jones movie in THIS decade.

Besides, after 'Transformers' it feels an awful lot like Shia ony got the role out of friendship with Steven.

But no matter how 'good' you can say Shia is, you cannot sit there and tell me they couldn't have found someone better for Mutt. They totally could've found someone better.

[Sam Fisher]

Yes, you could find someone better. But he was fine in those movies. And that all that matters to me.

[CFE]

I suppose. As long as we're on the same page that a better casting choice could've been made, then we're in the clear.

[flash13]

Temple Of Doom:up::up::up::up::up: the best Indy Movie!

[Doctor Jones]

Well, who would of been a better Mutt?

[The Amazing Lee]

Tom Cruise.

[Papa Burgundy]

indy 4 (in my opinion remember that) was a huge dissapointing piece of crap with awful fx, ridiculously dumb situations, terrible one note characters, a lame storyline and a terrible climax.

just give me the originals on bluray and never be involved with a movie again lucas.

[TwilightPro101]

indy 4 (in my opinion remember that) was a huge dissapointing piece of crap with awful fx, ridiculously dumb situations, terrible one note characters, a lame storyline and a terrible climax.

just give me the originals on bluray and never be involved with a movie again lucas.

Sums up the issues and entirely agree.

[Papa Burgundy]

thanks. i know im we're not alone on the blu-ray issue either! why would the release the original (and much better) 3 movies on dvd earlier this year and not on bluray? and then release the 4th on bluray and ignore the originals? and where the hell is star wars at....whatever old georgie boy will probably botch the bluray releases like he did the dvd releases anyway...god i hate liking those movies sometimes.

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Well, I love the intensity. The continous level of danger. The darkness they injected in it. I actually like Willie Scott and her banter with Indy. Short Round cracks me up. The story is simple, but I think the action makes up for it. I don't find it much better than say Crusade, but I prefer it slightly.

Short Round is great, but Willie absolutely gets on my nerves in the movie, and I actually didnt think much of the action in TOD, but I can appreciate your reasons for liking it. But Raiders and Last Crusade are miles better than TOD and KOTCS IMO.

[I Am The Knight]

Tom Cruise.

:hehe: That is so...Obnoxiously brilliant....That I wish they had just cast him!!!

While we are on the subject of SHIA....I think he is a good actor. Not very good, not great..."Good." I think he has potential and he did a good job as Mutt. He's likable so maybe that shadows any acting hinderances he may have. He needs to expand his resume with more diverse roles and he'll be good to go.

Short Round is great, but Willie absolutely gets on my nerves in the movie, and I actually didnt think much of the action in TOD, but I can appreciate your reasons for liking it. But Raiders and Last Crusade are miles better than TOD and KOTCS IMO.

OK.

Well Raiders trumps them all...One of the greatest films. Ever. Too bad none of the sequels were ever as good as the first.

[DarknessOfDeath]

I liked TOD, followed by Raiders, KOTOC and TLC.

[Spider-Vader]

Someone's angry.... & doesn't know how to capitalize words.

[DarknessOfDeath]

Someone's angry.... & doesn't know how to capitalize words.

Ha...you assume too much. I was initalizing the movie titles so I didn't have to write out the entire titles in full. The way I did it is the short way. So don't tell me I don't know how to capitalize words and seriously though you wouldn't like it if I said the exact same thing to you. :oldrazz:

So don't take it personally. I'm just saying it like it is. :grin:

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

:hehe: That is so...Obnoxiously brilliant....That I wish they had just cast him!!!

While we are on the subject of SHIA....I think he is a good actor. Not very good, not great..."Good." I think he has potential and he did a good job as Mutt. He's likable so maybe that shadows any acting hinderances he may have. He needs to expand his resume with more diverse roles and he'll be good to go.



OK.

Well Raiders trumps them all...One of the greatest films. Ever. Too bad none of the sequels were ever as good as the first.

I actually prefer Last Crusade to Raiders, Last Crusade is my favourite of the series and a fantastic film IMO.

[Matt Murdock]

Ha...you assume too much. I was initalizing the movie titles so I didn't have to write out the entire titles in full. The way I did it is the short way. So don't tell me I don't know how to capitalize words and seriously though you wouldn't like it if I said the exact same thing to you. :oldrazz:

So don't take it personally. I'm just saying it like it is. :grin:
You got the acronym for Kingdom of the Crystal Skull wrong. And, technically, "TOD" ought to be "ToD," since "of" is considered to a minor word in titles and needn't be capitalized. By the same token, "KOTCS" ought to be "KotCS"

[Matt Murdock]

But we still love ya. :)

[I Am The Knight]

I actually prefer Last Crusade to Raiders, Last Crusade is my favourite of the series and a fantastic film IMO.

Some of the comedy bits in LC kind of held it back for me. Plus, you can't top Marion.

[Bim]

thanks. i know im we're not alone on the blu-ray issue either! why would the release the original (and much better) 3 movies on dvd earlier this year and not on bluray? and then release the 4th on bluray and ignore the originals? and where the hell is star wars at....whatever old georgie boy will probably botch the bluray releases like he did the dvd releases anyway...god i hate liking those movies sometimes.
I find that u contradict urself... u want a quality blu ray release for Indy and SW, and yet ur annoyed they're taking their time with it? :huh:

Yep, nothing will please all fans :hehe:

[Papa Burgundy]

I find that u contradict urself... u want a quality blu ray release for Indy and SW, and yet ur annoyed they're taking their time with it? :huh:

Yep, nothing will please all fans :hehe:

im not contradicting myself...i want a good bluray release...i dont want them editied and added with "special scenes" like the star wars dvd releases. is it to much to ask to watch the movie i like? to you maybe.

[Papa Burgundy]

Well Raiders trumps them all...One of the greatest films. Ever. Too bad none of the sequels were ever as good as the first.

last crusade was awesome!!!

[Bim]

im not contradicting myself...i want a good bluray release...i dont want them editied and added with "special scenes" like the star wars dvd releases. is it to much to ask to watch the movie i like? to you maybe.
Well if u want a good blu ray release, i say it's best they take their time with it to include new documentaries and stuff, not some simple re-release of the stuff that's already on the boxset dvd... and i would say that takes a bit more time, dont u think?

[Papa Burgundy]

Well if u want a good blu ray release, i say it's best they take their time with it to include new documentaries and stuff, not some simple re-release of the stuff that's already on the boxset dvd... and i would say that takes a bit more time, dont u think?
yes but what i was saying was that theres no need to edit them with "improved special fx" and digitally remaster them with walkie talkies

[Lord Valumart]

if i'm honest i really don't care about blu ray...since by the time it is actaully widely affordable we will be on tothe next format...

plus i like my dvds fine...i don't need to see the fake boulder look any more fake...

[Bim]

yes but what i was saying was that theres no need to edit them with "improved special fx" and digitally remaster them with walkie talkies
Well fair enough, but who knows how the old effects in let's say TOD would look on blu ray, so who knows if they would retouch some scenes.

Lord Voldemart: i'm with ya... i dont have blu ray and i dont plan on getting one anytime soon either :cwink:

[I Am The Knight]

last crusade was awesome!!!

Yes...

[Spider-Vader]

Ha...you assume too much. I was initalizing the movie titles so I didn't have to write out the entire titles in full. The way I did it is the short way. So don't tell me I don't know how to capitalize words and seriously though you wouldn't like it if I said the exact same thing to you. :oldrazz:

So don't take it personally. I'm just saying it like it is. :grin:

Sorry I was typing to the guy who had the last post on the other page.

[Papa Burgundy]

Well fair enough, but who knows how the old effects in let's say TOD would look on blu ray, so who knows if they would retouch some scenes.

Lord Voldemart: i'm with ya... i dont have blu ray and i dont plan on getting one anytime soon either :cwink:

ok well i still think its pretty fair to give us the original versions...you know the ones that were praised and loved and the ones people grew up with?

that would be nice.

[DarknessOfDeath]

Sorry I was typing to the guy who had the last post on the other page.


oh... okay then. nvm :o http://forums.superherohype.com/images/icons/icon11.gif :heart:

[Captain Craig]

So I love this movie. Love the IJ Universe and have all 29 of the newest toy figures. I'm still waiting on my mail away crystal skeleton with throne however. Hate that the toy line is ending. We didn't get a Mack, Oxley, Brody, German Mechanic, Toht and other costume variations for Indy and Marion. So many more figs I wanted from this line. KOTCS totally reignited my love for Indiana Jones.

So when is IJ:5 coming out? :word:

[theShape]

As a huge Indy fan, I found KOTCS to be somewhat enjoyable in theaters, but disappointing overall. After watching it on Blu ray, WOW, is that a boring movie! What a huge disappointment. Ford was great, didn't have a problem with Shia, but seeing all the CGI (from the gophers to the monkey-swinging to the aliens) in an Indy movie feels so artificial. It's okay for Iron Man, but not Indy.

It just seems like they dropped the ball here with this one and tried to make the action TOO over-the-top. Indy's done some unrealistic things in his day, but some of the things were hard to watch in the one, especially with Ford being 60+ now.

[theShape]

if i'm honest i really don't care about blu ray...since by the time it is actaully widely affordable we will be on tothe next format...

plus i like my dvds fine...i don't need to see the fake boulder look any more fake...

I'm sure that was said when DVD was taking over VHS, and now they've officially stopped producing films on VHS for good. I'd switch over if I were you. You can still enjoy all your DVDs just fine (though they'll look even better) and you can start picking up new movies in the highest definition available.

Oh, and I got a Blu ray player for about $200. Seems affordable to me.

[GhostPoet]

It's not just about affordability though. (though that does play a huge part of it)
It's about flexibility. With dvd's I can watch them anywhere...I can bring them on trips with me to watch with a portable dvd player...and I use that same player to watch stuff while on the treadmill. With blu-ray...i'm stuck watching the movie in one room of my house. when I buy a movie, I buy it with the plan that eventually I'm gonna wanna watch it doing those other things as well.

[Lord Valumart]

I'm sure that was said when DVD was taking over VHS, and now they've officially stopped producing films on VHS for good. I'd switch over if I were you. You can still enjoy all your DVDs just fine (though they'll look even better) and you can start picking up new movies in the highest definition available.

Oh, and I got a Blu ray player for about $200. Seems affordable to me.

it's not really about getting to see things better or hear things clearer...

dvd was a massive leap from vhs, which was never that good to begin with really. bluray just isn't that big a leap to be worth caring about to me.

the first film i saw on bluray was 40year old virgin and my instant thought was "who the hell needs to see steve carrel in hd?"

[Bim]

ok well i still think its pretty fair to give us the original versions...you know the ones that were praised and loved and the ones people grew up with?

that would be nice.
And who's saying that it isnt a fair thing to want? my point is they might take some more time in releasing those movies and maybe add documentaries and stuff that havent been released in the current dvd sets. I'm sure the originals will be released in blu ray at one point.

the Shape: I dont think comparing the VHS to DVD change is similar to the Blu Ray vs regular dvd's... i agree with Lord Vauldemort here, the vhs to dvd change was HUGE... dvd to blu ray isnt that radical. I dont think regular dvd's are going away just yet and personally i know there's movies i just dont care to see in blu ray, so even if i switch to blu ray at some point, i wont be rebuying every single movie i own to that format.

[Matt Murdock]

It's Valumart, not Vauldemort! :cmad:

[Bim]

It's Valumart, not Vauldemort! :cmad:
:hehe: sorry, i read it fast :hehe:

[spideyboy_1111]

yeah, i must say HD looks great for television shows... but so far nothing is eye popping amazing to me to "need" to get in blu-ray. i'm very content with just an upconvert DVD player that is pretty close to "HD".

the biggest joke are people who buy older movies in blue ray.. that weren't even shot in hi-def. so what there really doing is spending $10+ more on a movie that they could have easily just bought in DVD format and used an up convert on.

[Doctor Jones]

Doesn't Blu-Ray convert DVD's to HD quality?

[DarknessOfDeath]

Yes and I see where most of you are coming from. I own a lot of films on standard dvd and I am not wasting anymore $$$ on replacing those with blue ray. I'm better off saving up for a blue ray player or better yet, a PS3 and I'm cool with the upconvert thing. Y'know, think about all the $$$ you spent on standard dvds alone in the past years since DVD took over VHS. In my mind, its a lot depending on how many you own.

So for me, I don't see the point of going out and replacing all your standard dvds with HD blue rays and what LV has said before and even my family members have said it: Once HD-BR sinks into people over the next several years or so, another format will come along and take over HD-BR. Then what's next? Something else will take over and so on and so on in the future to come.

I assure you, I am quite content with what I have now and that is all that matters. :)

But if standard dvd stops becoming available, which it will one of these days, I'll start buying HD-BR but that doesn't mean I'm going to replace the ones I already have with HD-BR. That would be silly.

[spideyboy_1111]

Doesn't Blu-Ray convert DVD's to HD quality?

most blue rays are indeed up-converts, but you don't need a blue ray to have an up-convert dvd player.

up-converts (including DVD compatible blu-ray players) are not technically HD quality, but pretty close (and the same quality u'd get from a blu-ray disc of a film thats not shot in HD).

[spideyboy_1111]

But if standard dvd stops becoming available, which it will one of these days, I'll start buying HD-BR but that doesn't mean I'm going to replace the ones I already have with HD-BR. That would be silly.

that's a very long way away though, because up until this year, walmart even still carried VHS of new films.

[Matt Murdock]

As far as the HD stuff goes, I saw Cars on BluRay the other day on an incredibly advanced television (The Samsung LED I think it was) and it was somewhat eerie. There was an extreme amount of detail. The picture quality was incredible. There were some incredible details.

[Bim]

most blue rays are indeed up-converts, but you don't need a blue ray to have an up-convert dvd player.

up-converts (including DVD compatible blu-ray players) are not technically HD quality, but pretty close (and the same quality u'd get from a blu-ray disc of a film thats not shot in HD).
Aaah this is interesting, i didnt know that.

I'm not rushed to get Blu-Ray and i know the day i do i need to upgrade to the proper tv aswell, so i'm just gonna wait it out as long as i can :cwink:

[The Amazing Lee]

yeah, i must say HD looks great for television shows... but so far nothing is eye popping amazing to me to "need" to get in blu-ray. i'm very content with just an upconvert DVD player that is pretty close to "HD".

the biggest joke are people who buy older movies in blue ray.. that weren't even shot in hi-def. so what there really doing is spending $10+ more on a movie that they could have easily just bought in DVD format and used an up convert on.

Film is a powerful medium and looks better than the screens are capable of showing. :o

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I'm with most on here about Blu-ray, it just hasnt sunk in with me yet, I'm happy with conventional DVD's at the moment,, and will be for the foreseeable future.

BTW is Indy 5 still happening?

[Papa Burgundy]

And who's saying that it isnt a fair thing to want? my point is they might take some more time in releasing those movies and maybe add documentaries and stuff that havent been released in the current dvd sets. I'm sure the originals will be released in blu ray at one point.

the Shape: I dont think comparing the VHS to DVD change is similar to the Blu Ray vs regular dvd's... i agree with Lord Vauldemort here, the vhs to dvd change was HUGE... dvd to blu ray isnt that radical. I dont think regular dvd's are going away just yet and personally i know there's movies i just dont care to see in blu ray, so even if i switch to blu ray at some point, i wont be rebuying every single movie i own to that format.

yes but forcing us to wait until another crappy sequel is released (which im sure will happen) is just mean.

dude dvd to bluray is an amazing jump, if you have a hdtv with 1080i or 1080p that is. thats my only real problem with it, you have to have a expensive freakin hdtv to get the most enjoyment out of it. with vhs-dvd you didnt have to go out and buy a whole new tv to appreciate the diffrence in quality. though dvd players were freakin expensive when they came out, just like blurays, but now bluray prices are dropping thank god.

and seriously, watching the dark knight, iron man, 300, the harry potter movies (the third one looks incredible in bluray) and good god wall e (amazing!) in bluray really shows you how much more advanced this format is than dvd.

of course you dont need to buy comedys or dramas in bluray yet. just like with dvds, those arent the first movies you should run out and buy to watch on it. pixar movies, action/special fx heavy movies, or just visually great looking movies do the trick. dont be a fool and buy the house bunny as your a way to show it off.

[Sam Fisher]

Indy Figures are on clearence at Walmart for $3 for anyone interested. Picked up 5 of them myself.

[Doctor Jones]

most blue rays are indeed up-converts, but you don't need a blue ray to have an up-convert dvd player.

up-converts (including DVD compatible blu-ray players) are not technically HD quality, but pretty close (and the same quality u'd get from a blu-ray disc of a film thats not shot in HD).

Sounds good. Thanks alot.

[Papa Burgundy]

ok this is starting to turn into a bluray thread...but yea i put supperman returns into bluray and thought it looked a little better too...but im a little curious so wasnt superman returns filmed kinda like the dark knight? like you know certain parts in imax? if so can anyone tell me how superman returns looks in bluray? ive seen in on hd cable but im curious what it looks like in bluray. i know not everyone liked that film, but you cant deny ity looked amazing at times. superman flying up to the sun looked amazing.

[Hooded Justice]

Uh, maybe the title of this thread should just be converted to Blu-ray discussion thread.

[Matt Murdock]

that's a very long way away though, because up until this year, walmart even still carried VHS of new films.
No they didn't. The last VHS to be put on the market was A History of Violence, in 2006. (I think.)

[spideyboy_1111]

No they didn't. The last VHS to be put on the market was A History of Violence, in 2006. (I think.)

actually they did.. just because it was the last VHS to be put on the market, doesn't mean walmart stopped carrying VHS's. just means no other new films were made on VHS. Hell the last VHS stand alone player was made in 2008. I remember hearing something this year about Walmart officially no longer selling VHS. they reduced there distribution in 05 though.

[Sam Fisher]

Walmart stopped carrying VHS long before 2008.

[spideyboy_1111]

Walmart stopped carrying VHS long before 2008.

not the ones in california :o

[Sam Fisher]

not the ones in california :oI've lived in two seperate places in California and all the Walmarts I've been to got rid of their VHS before 2007.

[Bim]

yes but forcing us to wait until another crappy sequel is released (which im sure will happen) is just mean.
Well crappy or not is a matter of opinion :oldrazz:

AVEITWITHJAMON: havent heard anything new regarding Indy 5, so i would say keep ur eyes open but dont expect anything :cwink:

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Well crappy or not is a matter of opinion :oldrazz:

AVEITWITHJAMON: havent heard anything new regarding Indy 5, so i would say keep ur eyes open but dont expect anything :cwink:

Good stuff, cant see them not doing one after the money Indy 4 made, but stranger things have happened!

[Bim]

Good stuff, cant see them not doing one after the money Indy 4 made, but stranger things have happened!
Well for another movie to be made they have to come up with another story that Lucas, Harrison and Spielberg agree on, cause if one isnt happy, they dont do it ... they said they would consider making anoither based on how it was received... it's all a question of can they come up with something they all agree on?

[Hooded Justice]

Well for another movie to be made they have to come up with another story that Lucas, Harrison and Spielberg agree on, cause if one isnt happy, they dont do it ... they said they would consider making anoither based on how it was received... it's all a question of can they come up with something they all agree on?

Oh God, please no. Ya saw what happened the last time they all agreed on the script.

[JAK®]

Oh God, please no. Ya saw what happened the last time they all agreed on the script.
We got a good movie.

[Hooded Justice]

We got a good movie.

Yeah, one with atomic bomb proof fridges and little green men. Great, :whatever:.

[cerealkiller182]

**** that noise. I hate that a group of people who frequent a message board where one of the favorite characters is a flying alien in tights but gets to make fun of atomic bomb proof fridges. The movie was a fun action adventure like INdy has always been, get over it.

[Eggyman]

Fair point.

Still don't like it though.

[cerealkiller182]

Fair point.

Still don't like it though.

Fair enough

Its just for a film series whose purpose has been primarily to put a mild mannered man in larger than life situations, its hard to take offence to what turned out to be a cool scene leading up to and a sweet visual after said explosion.

[Hooded Justice]

**** that noise. I hate that a group of people who frequent a message board where one of the favorite characters is a flying alien in tights but gets to make fun of atomic bomb proof fridges. The movie was a fun action adventure like INdy has always been, get over it.

First point, Indy's a human, not a flying alien in tights, so different rules apply.

Second point, the Covenant, Earth-based. Whatever they were looking for in the Temple of Doom, I forget its name, Earth-Based. The Grail, Earth-based. Aliens from another planet, inherently not Earth-based, inherently other planet-based.

Third point, no matter how ridiculous any of the other movies got, at least they didn't have atomic bomb proof fridges.

Fourth point, Shia LaWhatsHisName.

Fifth point, do I need a fifth point?

[Lord Valumart]

First point, Indy's a human, not a flying alien in tights, so different rules apply.

Second point, the Covenant, Earth-based. Whatever they were looking for in the Temple of Doom, I forget its name, Earth-Based. The Grail, Earth-based. Aliens from another planet, inherently not Earth-based, inherently other planet-based.

Third point, no matter how ridiculous any of the other movies got, at least they didn't have atomic bomb proof fridges.

Fourth point, Shia LaWhatsHisName.

Fifth point, do I need a fifth point?

in temple a guy pulled out a heart...aliens aren't that big a leap from magic really...

[cerealkiller182]

First point, Indy's a human, not a flying alien in tights, so different rules apply.

In larger than life situations. its part of the appeal. Normal human in larger than life situations.

Second point, the Covenant, Earth-based. Whatever they were looking for in the Temple of Doom, I forget its name, Earth-Based. The Grail, Earth-based. Aliens from another planet, inherently not Earth-based, inherently other planet-based.

The concept of aliens jump starting human civilization is not a new one. Its been tackled before both in fiction and real studies (although that doesnt mean I believe). Indiana Jones, being someone who studies human civilizations, could certainly come across such incident given that his life has been one crazy adventure after another.

Third point, no matter how ridiculous any of the other movies got, at least they didn't have atomic bomb proof fridges.

Instead they had humans staying alive without their hearts in their chest. Weighing the impossibilities in Indiana Jones movies, they all seem to be about the same level of impossible.

Fourth point, Shia LaWhatsHisName.

Its cool to hate Shia Labeouf like its cool to hate Ben Affleck. I find him mildly entertaining and a good sidekick.

Fifth point, do I need a fifth point?

Apparently you do.

[Matt Murdock]

Hypothetically speaking, "aliens" are, technically, more likely than successful magic.

[JAK®]

Yeah, one with atomic bomb proof fridges and little green men. Great, :whatever:.
Uh Huh. Fantastic film :up:

[JAK®]

Indiana Jones can survive a nuclear explosion if he can survive jumping out of a plane in an inflatable raft.

If God and magic exists, aliens and alternate dimensions certainly can exist.

[Eggyman]

Fair enough

Its just for a film series whose purpose has been primarily to put a mild mannered man in larger than life situations, its hard to take offence to what turned out to be a cool scene leading up to and a sweet visual after said explosion.

I've never really thought of a fridge in flight being a cool scene... but ok. :D

I was fine with the film generally, but I just don't think Indy and aliens mix very well.

[Hooded Justice]

Indiana Jones can survive a nuclear explosion if he can survive jumping out of a plane in an inflatable raft.

If God and magic exists, aliens and alternate dimensions certainly can exist.

How does jumping out of a plane in an inflatable raft compare to a nuclear explosion?

Fine, but I've always thought of the Indy movies more as fantasy than sci-fi.

[JAK®]

How does jumping out of a plane in an inflatable raft compare to a nuclear explosion?

Fine, but I've always thought of the Indy movies more as fantasy than sci-fi.
Indiana Jones is about archaeology. His stories are based on ancient myths and theories. This is the first and only movie that deals with extraterrestrials, but then again Temple of Doom was the only movie based on hindu mythology instead of christianity. It didn't have any nazis either.

[cerealkiller182]

I've never really thought of a fridge in flight being a cool scene... but ok. :D

Not the fridge everything leading up to the fridge. The Area 51 fight and Indy running through the fake town.

[Dr. Watson]

I've never really thought of a fridge in flight being a cool scene... but ok. :D

Pun intended? :D

[cerealkiller182]

How does jumping out of a plane in an inflatable raft compare to a nuclear explosion?

Fine, but I've always thought of the Indy movies more as fantasy than sci-fi.

Neither of which is anyway possible.

Indy movies were fantasy because they were based on 30s serials. Lucas and Spielberg thought it would be a cool idea to use sci fi because Indy was now living in the 50s and the movie could mirror 50 serials. The fact that the science fiction was kept to "get under your school desk, the bomb is coming" mentalities and alien influence on ancient civilization (the subject of archeology) it made a pretty solid transition

[roach]

I find it funny how people complain about the fridge scene in a series that had Arks melting Nazis, Hindu mysticism, long living knights and the holy grail.

[Cagefighterkip]

I find it funny how people complain about the fridge scene in a series that had Arks melting Nazis, Hindu mysticism, long living knights and the holy grail.

agreed --
i been sayin that since may 22

[roach]

Calling out any of the Indy flicks on not being real is like playing basketball against a 2 year old...sure you can block his shot by why would you?

[Cagefighterkip]

Calling out any of the Indy flicks on not being real is like playing basketball against a 2 year old...sure you can block his shot by why would you?

good one :) lol

[Sam Fisher]

Are we still complaining about the fridge nuke?:yay: Cmon, there are worse things in movies. AND IT'S INDIANA FREAKEN JONES FOR GOD SAKES! It's supposed to be a fun movie, not grounded in reality.

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I find it funny how people complain about the fridge scene in a series that had Arks melting Nazis, Hindu mysticism, long living knights and the holy grail.

It makes me laugh also.

[Symbiotic]

I find it funny how people complain about extraterrestrials in a series that had Arks melting Nazis, Hindu mysticism, long living knights and the holy grail.How I see it.

[Bim]

I find it funny how people complain about the fridge scene in a series that had Arks melting Nazis, Hindu mysticism, long living knights and the holy grail.
:hehe: i find this odd too, but to each their own i guess. The way i see it, these movies have always had a level of fantastic things happening.

[Papa Burgundy]

i found it odd when shia labeouf started swinging on vines with poor looking cg.

and the ants were bad too.

[Adrian89]

6/10, ok to average.

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

i found it odd when shia labeouf started swinging on vines with poor looking cg.

and the ants were bad too.

Thats the only part I found a bit TOO OTT for me, the rest, I found it inline with the rest of the series.

[I Am The Knight]

i found it odd when shia labeouf started swinging on vines with poor looking cg.

I can't believe how much this comes up.

[Doctor Jones]

Yeah, it's really not that bad. The first time, maybe, but the other times it wasn't that bad. Though it could of been avoided. Peole just need to have something to bash on.

[Doctor Jones]

Neither of which is anyway possible.

Indy movies were fantasy because they were based on 30s serials. Lucas and Spielberg thought it would be a cool idea to use sci fi because Indy was now living in the 50s and the movie could mirror 50 serials. The fact that the science fiction was kept to "get under your school desk, the bomb is coming" mentalities and alien influence on ancient civilization (the subject of archeology) it made a pretty solid transition

Exactly! This had to be done. This was all in the 50's. You couldn't ignore any of that. Annybody who grew up in the 50's would say that same thing. This was all going on. Area 51, the roswell crash, the cold war, etc. This was all huge. How couldn't that be ignored?

[Doctor Jones]

We need to take these great points and post them all over the board for the hate of Indy 4. Yeah, it the film was disapointing to people that's fine. It's just that they thought the rest of thhe film was crappy and disregard everything else that was great.

[Doctor Jones]

How does jumping out of a plane in an inflatable raft compare to a nuclear explosion?

Fine, but I've always thought of the Indy movies more as fantasy than sci-fi.

But Indy's going through all these different periods. The other 3 were the thirties. Focus what was happening then. In the 50's none of that was happening. Indy is in a new age where he seems out of place one of the things that they handled great. Like I said, the 50's was all about the cold war, aliens, area 51, etc. Of course with all the adventures that Indy has in his life, he would come across something like this. It's just one of his adventures. One of many that we've seen.

[The Cape]

The whole movie seems natural to me.I dont know why its gotten some negative responses, yes it has some exagerated stuff(the fridge,the ants) but I dont think thats enough to ruin it but to each their own.The originals are way better anyway.
9/10.

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Exactly! This had to be done. This was all in the 50's. You couldn't ignore any of that. Annybody who grew up in the 50's would say that same thing. This was all going on. Area 51, the roswell crash, the cold war, etc. This was all huge. How couldn't that be ignored?

:up: Not criticising anyone, but A LOT of people fail to realise this, Indy 4 is a movie from a different era, the era that sci-fi, essentially, was borne into the consciousness of many people with alien beings, atomic bombs, etc, so it had to mirror that era like the others did. It is practically spelled out in the movie from the opening sequence (Elvis and the car chase) onwards ("I hardly recognise this country anymore....the government has us seeing commies in our soup!").

This is why I find it hard to understand that many people dont...well...understand some thing in the movie.

OH and DJ, GREAT avatar, Ferlito is a stunner!

[spideyboy_1111]

I've lived in two seperate places in California and all the Walmarts I've been to got rid of their VHS before 2007.

well i was at the gardena walmart earlier last year and saw a VHS section :o

[spideyboy_1111]

in temple a guy pulled out a heart...aliens aren't that big a leap from magic really...

well to be fair... ancient magics, from curses, voodoo, mummies, etc.. have all been intertwined with archaeological/adventurer movies and serials since the dawn of them. extrademinsional aliens, have not.

[Papa Burgundy]

Yeah, it's really not that bad. The first time, maybe, but the other times it wasn't that bad. Though it could of been avoided. Peole just need to have something to bash on.
bashing? bashing? im bashing a movie i waited for and anticipated for years? i went in the movie that i waited forever for to just bash on internet forums with people i dont even know? i wasnt disappointed in anyway? i cant be disappointed in the movie? i wouldnt bash a series i love.

[Bim]

:up: Not criticising anyone, but A LOT of people fail to realise this, Indy 4 is a movie from a different era, the era that sci-fi, essentially, was borne into the consciousness of many people with alien beings, atomic bombs, etc, so it had to mirror that era like the others did. It is practically spelled out in the movie from the opening sequence (Elvis and the car chase) onwards ("I hardly recognise this country anymore....the government has us seeing commies in our soup!").

This is why I find it hard to understand that many people dont...well...understand some thing in the movie.
Indeed... from the moment i heard 'Hound Dog' playing i knew it was a different time for Indy :yay:

[terry78]

Now if he's still around in the 60's or gives up the title to Shia....:dry:, what would the theme for 1960s be?

[Johnny Drama]

Wow this thread stil exists?

[flash13]

Indy never dies

[Doctor Jones]

Now if he's still around in the 60's or gives up the title to Shia....:dry:, what would the theme for 1960s be?

Not happening. Lucas confirmed it thank God.

[Doctor Jones]

bashing? bashing? im bashing a movie i waited for and anticipated for years? i went in the movie that i waited forever for to just bash on internet forums with people i dont even know? i wasnt disappointed in anyway? i cant be disappointed in the movie? i wouldnt bash a series i love.

Yes, you can be disapointed and have an opinion.

But really, if you're gonna not like the movie, please not jump on the bashing Lucas badwagan and start giving child like reason why you hated it. Though I'm not saying you are. Just people in general. Opinions are fine. It's just immature posts get me.

[Doctor Jones]

:up: Not criticising anyone, but A LOT of people fail to realise this, Indy 4 is a movie from a different era, the era that sci-fi, essentially, was borne into the consciousness of many people with alien beings, atomic bombs, etc, so it had to mirror that era like the others did. It is practically spelled out in the movie from the opening sequence (Elvis and the car chase) onwards ("I hardly recognise this country anymore....the government has us seeing commies in our soup!").

This is why I find it hard to understand that many people dont...well...understand some thing in the movie.

OH and DJ, GREAT avatar, Ferlito is a stunner!

Thanks, dude!

But I completely agree with your post. Their hate clouds reasoning. When I heard Elvis in the beginning, I knew it was gonna be a different Indy film. But it was still Indy. We are just as out of place in this time period mostly because we've never seen him in this time period and because he's past his prime and in a period he doesn't understand. Perfect way to connect what the character is feeling with the audience.

George Lucas: More than meets the fanboy eye.

[Doctor Jones]

Indy never dies

And he never will.

[I SEE SPIDEY]

I love how people are still making excuses for this movie. Keep up the good work guys.:up:

[8wid]

I find that the production team needs to use realistic twists with the mythology use so it isn't so "out there." Instead of a night several hundred years old, just the tomb of a night that guarded it. The Ark of the Covenant could have conducted lightning to be a bit more historically concise. Shankara Stones were done alright because it needed a Hindu incantation for its powers to take effect. The crystal skulls make sense if there was no flying saucer expect a portal to another dimension, just to continue the deep sense of mystery. As for the next artifact, hopefully its not so crazy but still grounded in reality.

[cerealkiller182]

I disagree. Everything is supposed to build up to a larger than life out-there twist.

[Bim]

Indy never dies
QFT! :indy:

I have no issues with the artifacts that they've gone after in the movies... they all have ground in reality, in the sense that it's objects that we have heard about or are based on mythology (of course the biggest stretch was with the Sankara stones)... their take on them i find have been interesting. I dont think these movies would be the same if there wasnt a supernatural object involved.

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Indeed... from the moment i heard 'Hound Dog' playing i knew it was a different time for Indy :yay:

Exactly, I knew we were getting something different from that moment.

Thanks, dude!

But I completely agree with your post. Their hate clouds reasoning. When I heard Elvis in the beginning, I knew it was gonna be a different Indy film. But it was still Indy. We are just as out of place in this time period mostly because we've never seen him in this time period and because he's past his prime and in a period he doesn't understand. Perfect way to connect what the character is feeling with the audience.

George Lucas: More than meets the fanboy eye.

Exactly, he is out of his time, as Bim says above from the first moment Hounddog came on this was obvious, the movie represents the decade its based in and makes it very obvious.

[Captain Craig]

Indy Figures are on clearence at Walmart for $3 for anyone interested. Picked up 5 of them myself.

I finished up my set just before they went on sale. :cmad:
However, I did pick up some of the more rare figs and sold them on Ebay for a profit so it all worked out.

For anyone curious about what the Raiders 2.0 set in the line would have been had it continued into 2009 here they are. This would have been known as Wave 5 (http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b67/toymastermike/Slide68.jpg). It indicates a shelf date of Jan.15, 2009. Man it would be cool to have these.

[flash13]

i have collected a few of the "Raiders" and "Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" figures but i can't find the "Temple of Doom" set anywhere!

[Captain Craig]

Most retailers began clearing out their Indy figs when Hasbro said they were ending the line. Thus they didn't reorder any of the Wave 4 line once their initial orders were gone, if they even placed one.

I found some of them at grocery stores of all places cause after all during the holidays everyone is in the toy business. However, I had to order a few on Ebay. I've also found some Temple of Doon figures at places like Marshalls and TJ Max. Since the line is cancelled I'm going to start checking close out stores like Big Lots to see if they get them.
:indy:

[Papa Burgundy]

Yes, you can be disapointed and have an opinion.

But really, if you're gonna not like the movie, please not jump on the bashing Lucas badwagan and start giving child like reason why you hated it. Though I'm not saying you are. Just people in general. Opinions are fine. It's just immature posts get me.

well i also hate episode 1 and the re edited versions of star wars....lol but i dont really bash. i just get mad when i see a great hero in a wacky made for tv mini series type movie. but go ahead and like the movie if you want im not trying to force you guys not to. im glad you guys liked it. i wish i couldve.

[Doctor Jones]

I love how people are still making excuses for this movie. Keep up the good work guys.:up:

Keep up the good work popping in and out of threads to bash their independant views more relevant than your post. :up:

[Doctor Jones]

well i also hate episode 1 and the re edited versions of star wars....lol but i dont really bash. i just get mad when i see a great hero in a wacky made for tv mini series type movie. but go ahead and like the movie if you want im not trying to force you guys not to. im glad you guys liked it. i wish i couldve.

It's cool with me dude.

[Bim]

I came across an interview with Lucas for Vanity Fair when Indy 4 was about to come out. I dunno if any of u read it, but something stood out to me that i think is very accurate:

And maybe after five years people will accept it.
Well … the motivation for the whole thing, to go more than three, was to have a good time. We had fun making those movies, they were fun movies, we liked them, and … of course it’s hard to go home again. Things change. But the eerie part of this movie—I call it the Motion Picture, the Movie of Dorian Gray, because nobody changed. Everybody looks exactly as they did, Steven is directing exactly as he did, and everybody had a wonderful time. And I think we got a great movie. I know the critics are going to hate it. They already hate it. So there’s nothing we can do about that. They hate the idea that we’re making another one. They’ve already made up their minds. And all they’re going to do is go to the movie to say they saw it, but they could already write their review today. The fans are all upset. They’re always going to be upset. “Why did he do it like this? And why didn’t he do it like this?” They write their own movie, and then, if you don’t do their movie, they get upset about it. So you just have to stand by for the bricks and the custard pies, because they’re going to come flying your way. You know it’s gonna come. Will this be Titanic? Probably not. Will this do O.K.? I think, yes, it will. So there’s not much to worry about.

U can read the rest of the interview here:http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2008/02/lucas_qanda200802?currentPage=1 (http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2008/02/lucas_qanda200802?currentPage=1)

[Sam Fisher]

I completely agree with him.

[Sam Fisher]

Keep up the good work popping in and out of threads to bash their independant views more relevant than your post. :up:
Keep up the good work hating anything George Lucas does Lucas haters:up:

[Cagefighterkip]

I completely agree with him.

agreed too

[GhostPoet]

I liked the film. There were some scenes I was dissapointed with. Primarely the waterfall scene. The story itself I really enjoyed. I wish Indy used his gun more.

[Ratcrawler]

Godzilla, Van Helsing, Lost in sPace, Transformers, Jurassic Park 3, Pitch Black and Snakes On A Plane were all way more enjoyable than this film. v_v

[Captain Craig]

^^^^
So are you saying you don't like the above movies either?
Godzilla is blah
Van Helsing is average
Lost In Space I passed on
Transformers kicks arse
JP: 3 is fun
Pitch Black is average
Snakes on a Plane is what it is, didn't anyone really expect greatness?


IJ:4 is a great movie with one or two scenes I'd have done over/left out. Its so much better than all of them except Transformers which I'd say is a close race between the two.

[Bim]

There were some scenes I was dissapointed with. Primarely the waterfall scene.
I gotta say, when Marion drives them to the top of the tree and they drop to the water was my least favorite bit. The falling itself was kinda funny, specially when Indy takes off his hat and presses it against his chest :hehe:

[Captain Craig]

The one scene I really gave a *sigh* at was Mutt 'Tarzan' Williams. The CGI was evident and it was silly.

I know the film is honoring the cinema of the 50's there and it serves to give the kids something to like(it is a family film).

Other than that I think the movie is top notch.

[Doctor Jones]

Agreed with on Lucas. People think he's oblivious to the hate. But he's modest guy and I always liked that about him. He doesn't have an ego or act like a semi douche like *coughJamesCameroncough*.

[I Am The Knight]

Godzilla, Van Helsing, Lost in sPace, Transformers, Jurassic Park 3, Pitch Black and Snakes On A Plane were all way more enjoyable than this film. v_v

Thank god that is entirely subjective....

VAN HELSING!!!!???? :dry:

[8wid]

I came across an interview with Lucas for Vanity Fair when Indy 4 was about to come out. I dunno if any of u read it, but something stood out to me that i think is very accurate:

And maybe after five years people will accept it.
Well … the motivation for the whole thing, to go more than three, was to have a good time. We had fun making those movies, they were fun movies, we liked them, and … of course it’s hard to go home again. Things change. But the eerie part of this movie—I call it the Motion Picture, the Movie of Dorian Gray, because nobody changed. Everybody looks exactly as they did, Steven is directing exactly as he did, and everybody had a wonderful time. And I think we got a great movie. I know the critics are going to hate it. They already hate it. So there’s nothing we can do about that. They hate the idea that we’re making another one. They’ve already made up their minds. And all they’re going to do is go to the movie to say they saw it, but they could already write their review today. The fans are all upset. They’re always going to be upset. “Why did he do it like this? And why didn’t he do it like this?” They write their own movie, and then, if you don’t do their movie, they get upset about it. So you just have to stand by for the bricks and the custard pies, because they’re going to come flying your way. You know it’s gonna come. Will this be Titanic? Probably not. Will this do O.K.? I think, yes, it will. So there’s not much to worry about.

U can read the rest of the interview here:http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2008/02/lucas_qanda200802?currentPage=1 (http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2008/02/lucas_qanda200802?currentPage=1)

That's actually a great point. It really makes me change my mind about how Lucas makes movies, he ain't so bad.

[The Chris]

I have to agree with Lucas too. Those guys on chud.com in particular decided to hate it when they heard it was getting made, and dogged it every day until it came out, until they finally gave it mega negative reviews.

[cerealkiller182]

I came across an interview with Lucas for Vanity Fair when Indy 4 was about to come out. I dunno if any of u read it, but something stood out to me that i think is very accurate:

And maybe after five years people will accept it.
Well … the motivation for the whole thing, to go more than three, was to have a good time. We had fun making those movies, they were fun movies, we liked them, and … of course it’s hard to go home again. Things change. But the eerie part of this movie—I call it the Motion Picture, the Movie of Dorian Gray, because nobody changed. Everybody looks exactly as they did, Steven is directing exactly as he did, and everybody had a wonderful time. And I think we got a great movie. I know the critics are going to hate it. They already hate it. So there’s nothing we can do about that. They hate the idea that we’re making another one. They’ve already made up their minds. And all they’re going to do is go to the movie to say they saw it, but they could already write their review today. The fans are all upset. They’re always going to be upset. “Why did he do it like this? And why didn’t he do it like this?” They write their own movie, and then, if you don’t do their movie, they get upset about it. So you just have to stand by for the bricks and the custard pies, because they’re going to come flying your way. You know it’s gonna come. Will this be Titanic? Probably not. Will this do O.K.? I think, yes, it will. So there’s not much to worry about.

U can read the rest of the interview here:http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2008/02/lucas_qanda200802?currentPage=1 (http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2008/02/lucas_qanda200802?currentPage=1)

:up: :up:

[Darkness Falls]

I love how people are still making excuses for this movie. Keep up the good work guys.:up:

what a waste of a post
why do you visit the indy 4 thread if you didn't like it ?

But judging from your sig, you don't have much taste in what a good movie is

[OctaviousINC]

I came across an interview with Lucas for Vanity Fair when Indy 4 was about to come out. I dunno if any of u read it, but something stood out to me that i think is very accurate:

And maybe after five years people will accept it.
Well … the motivation for the whole thing, to go more than three, was to have a good time. We had fun making those movies, they were fun movies, we liked them, and … of course it’s hard to go home again. Things change. But the eerie part of this movie—I call it the Motion Picture, the Movie of Dorian Gray, because nobody changed. Everybody looks exactly as they did, Steven is directing exactly as he did, and everybody had a wonderful time. And I think we got a great movie. I know the critics are going to hate it. They already hate it. So there’s nothing we can do about that. They hate the idea that we’re making another one. They’ve already made up their minds. And all they’re going to do is go to the movie to say they saw it, but they could already write their review today. The fans are all upset. They’re always going to be upset. “Why did he do it like this? And why didn’t he do it like this?” They write their own movie, and then, if you don’t do their movie, they get upset about it. So you just have to stand by for the bricks and the custard pies, because they’re going to come flying your way. You know it’s gonna come. Will this be Titanic? Probably not. Will this do O.K.? I think, yes, it will. So there’s not much to worry about.

U can read the rest of the interview here:http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2008/02/lucas_qanda200802?currentPage=1 (http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2008/02/lucas_qanda200802?currentPage=1)

Lucas is pretty much hit the nail on the head. The big problem Indy 4 had was that they waited too long to make it. I'm not saying everyone got too old (Hell, Ford did as much stunts here as he did in Raiders)But everyone's expectations got WAAAYY too high. Expectations and ideas were stacked on top of each other for 20 years causing an Indy Hunger that the 4th movie, or ANY movie for that matter, could not fill.

I liked Indy 4. I thought it was good. My least favorite out of the 4 but I still like it. You can't please everyone. People *****. That's what they do. They ***** while sitting at their 'lil computer monitors judging films that they have no idea about the amount of work that goes into them.

And nothing will change that.

I'm a diehard fan and I enjoyed it. It's a sequel based off a 20 year old franchise. It was a fun adventure movie. Some stuff was goofy, but it's not like you physically feel pain every time it shows. STFU and watch...or not.

I say go on with Indy 5.:cwink:

Oh, and if you're pullin' the 'ol "Lucas raped my childhood!:csad:"

2 words: GET. LAID.

[Ratcrawler]

^^^^
So are you saying you don't like the above movies either?
Godzilla is blah
Van Helsing is average
Lost In Space I passed on
Transformers kicks arse
JP: 3 is fun
Pitch Black is average
Snakes on a Plane is what it is, didn't anyone really expect greatness?


IJ:4 is a great movie with one or two scenes I'd have done over/left out. Its so much better than all of them except Transformers which I'd say is a close race between the two.

Actually, those films are all guilty pleasures of mine. Bad movies I managed to find enjoyable desPite massive lamentations from most other people. I actually forgot to put AVP on that list LOL. So feel free to mock my taste.

But Indy 4, well I watched the original trilogy when I worked at a video store a few years back and enjoyed it though I didn't revere it as most fanboys do. I went to see this movie with a friend of mine and, frankly, her company was the best thing about it.

I didn't mind "nuking the fridge" or using aliens instead of holy artifacts. I set my corniness/susPension of disbelief levels pretty high for this one. But some things just couldn't be overlooked.

Indy & Marion are sinking in quicksand. Indy tells Mutt to go and find a rope or stick to pull them out with. Shouldn't be too hard, right? Then, for some brilliant reason, Indy tells the retardified professor to go find help. In the jungle. At night. Where the only people around are their commie enemies or natives who would only stare blankly at him. Really, Indy? REALLY? Then, Shia returns with a frakking boa constrictor because he couldn't find a stick or a vine in the jungle. Naturally, a large snake is a perfect substitute. Don't get me wrong, Indy's reaction was hilarious, but as a joke that was terribly set up. Now if the family was sinking and they sent retardified professor man to find a rope, that would have at least made some sense and been funny. And the commies would have found them anyway so the scene could have played out the same way without sounding like it was written by an incoherent moron.

Later, Indy blow up the buzzsaw-mobiles cutting a path for jungle vehicles behind. Not that they mattered anyway, because there are evidently enough roads in the middle of the Amazon for them to have the following worst car chase scene ever. Somehow, Shia-er, Mutt, whichever name's dumber, manages to have a sword fight with the Ukrainian Psychic (BTW, was she really a psychic? I mean, I don't recall her ever disPlaying any actual psychic prowess at all in this movie. It was like when Stick said he was blind in Elektra and went on to disPlay absolutely no blind characteristics) while standing with each foot firmly planted on a different jeep running side by side on the smoothest jungle ever. He's than caught in a vine which somehow rises 30ft (WTF?) bringing him to a very accomodating tribe of Capuchin monkeys while the jeeps run off without him. They keep going for about 4 minutes. Then, Mutt reveals that he is in fact a master vine swinger (a difficult task since vines actually grow upwards but whatever) to the extent that he can catch up with the sPeeding jeeps. This so inmpresses the monkeys, that they decide to follow him and attack the commies because they can naturally tell who the bad guys are. Later, intelligent monster ants show up and they're the most plausible development in this whole scene.


Later, Marion accidentally drops a huge stone block on Indy which flattens him to a paper thin cartoon. Indy sticks his thumb in his mouth and reinflates himself to his normal dimensions.

Oops, wait. I think I just sPoiled a scene from Indy 5.:o

[Bim]

Lucas is pretty much hit the nail on the head. The big problem Indy 4 had was that they waited too long to make it. I'm not saying everyone got too old (Hell, Ford did as much stunts here as he did in Raiders)But everyone's expectations got WAAAYY too high. Expectations and ideas were stacked on top of each other for 20 years causing an Indy Hunger that the 4th movie, or ANY movie for that matter, could not fill.

I liked Indy 4. I thought it was good. My least favorite out of the 4 but I still like it. You can't please everyone. People *****. That's what they do. They ***** while sitting at their 'lil computer monitors judging films that they have no idea about the amount of work that goes into them.

And nothing will change that.

I'm a diehard fan and I enjoyed it. It's a sequel based off a 20 year old franchise. It was a fun adventure movie. Some stuff was goofy, but it's not like you physically feel pain every time it shows. STFU and watch...or not.

I say go on with Indy 5.:cwink:

Oh, and if you're pullin' the 'ol "Lucas raped my childhood!:csad:"

2 words: GET. LAID.
:lmao: very well put!

I think with very popular franchises that's the problem: people create their own ideas of what the movies are and should be, and there's no way in hell any movie can live up to that, specially with movies you saw as a child and had a big impact on u.

[I Am The Knight]

Oh, Mr. Lucas, won't you make the movie in my head?

[Norman Bates]

I think he's 50/50. While that may be the case inevitably, it just didn't seem like there was much intelligence put into the Indy 4 script while the others clearly had effort put into them.

[Doctor Jones]

:lmao: very well put!

I think with very popular franchises that's the problem: people create their own ideas of what the movies are and should be, and there's no way in hell any movie can live up to that, specially with movies you saw as a child and had a big impact on u.

Correctamundo! We have a winner! Pick a prize from the wall. What will it be? A brand new Camaro? A lifetime supply of Coco Cola? Two hundred thousand dollars? A kitchen set that unbreakable?

[Doctor Jones]

what a waste of a post
why do you visit the indy 4 thread if you didn't like it ?

But judging from your sig, you don't have much taste in what a good movie is

Edit.

[Bim]

Correctamundo! We have a winner! Pick a prize from the wall. What will it be? A brand new Camaro? A lifetime supply of Coco Cola? Two hundred thousand dollars? A kitchen set that unbreakable?
C'mon Doctah Jones, no million dollar prize? :huh: play with u, no fun! :hehe:

[spideyboy_1111]

I think he's 50/50. While that may be the case inevitably, it just didn't seem like there was much intelligence put into the Indy 4 script while the others clearly had effort put into them.

agrees, and lucas always pulls this excuse, critics and fans alike, even most of the general public dogged indy and the star wars prequels. It's no secret he's got an ego in which thinks he's way better of a director than what he is. And he says that stuff to make himself feel better.

Personally the last (and im sure people will argue this with me) but the last good movie he's made, was Episode I. Alot of people didn't like things about it, but least it still used puppets, real places, had pretty good acting for the most part. It had an element of "classicness" to it that i felt was the same formula as the original trilogy. Everything about it cinematically, was beautiful, it was shot very well and i felt it was obvious alot of hard work went into it. Alot of that is due to the fact lucas had alot of help with other creative people working on episode 1, episode 2 and 3 he got rid of alot of them, and he wanted to do it "his way" only. And i think it's pretty obvious the decline in the films. Lucas has an amazing imagination and is honestly one of the best creators in movie history... director, writer, etc... he is not.

[8wid]

I was upset that the production team used strange alien crystal skulls instead of the already established Mitchell-Hedges skull and other like it, that actually exist. There are still ways that they may have been used without coming directly from alien corpses found across the world.

I hope that there is an Indy 5 that uses a Biblical artifact just so it shows more strength.

[COAL TIGER]

Does anybody know if the ending with the aliens is up on youtube somewhere?

[spideyboy_1111]

I was upset that the production team used strange alien crystal skulls instead of the already established Mitchell-Hedges skull and other like it, that actually exist. There are still ways that they may have been used without coming directly from alien corpses found across the world.

I hope that there is an Indy 5 that uses a Biblical artifact just so it shows more strength.

i agree, the other artifacts were and are actually legends.... these were not.. just "other versions" of the real things

[Bim]

I was upset that the production team used strange alien crystal skulls instead of the already established Mitchell-Hedges skull and other like it, that actually exist. There are still ways that they may have been used without coming directly from alien corpses found across the world.

I hope that there is an Indy 5 that uses a Biblical artifact just so it shows more strength.
I'm actually a bit tired of the religious artifacts :hehe:, i guess that's why i liked the Crystal Skulls, it just felt refreshing.

The Sankara stones per se were made up, werent they?:huh:... there are magical stones though.

spidey: yeah, i'm gonna have to disagree with u :p

[JAK®]

A lot of complaints this movie receives are based on things that also appear in Temple Of Doom. Ironically, a lot of people who make those complaints probably like Temple Of Doom the best.

[Doctor Jones]

agrees, and lucas always pulls this excuse, critics and fans alike, even most of the general public dogged indy and the star wars prequels. It's no secret he's got an ego in which thinks he's way better of a director than what he is. And he says that stuff to make himself feel better.

Personally the last (and im sure people will argue this with me) but the last good movie he's made, was Episode I. Alot of people didn't like things about it, but least it still used puppets, real places, had pretty good acting for the most part. It had an element of "classicness" to it that i felt was the same formula as the original trilogy. Everything about it cinematically, was beautiful, it was shot very well and i felt it was obvious alot of hard work went into it. Alot of that is due to the fact lucas had alot of help with other creative people working on episode 1, episode 2 and 3 he got rid of alot of them, and he wanted to do it "his way" only. And i think it's pretty obvious the decline in the films. Lucas has an amazing imagination and is honestly one of the best creators in movie history... director, writer, etc... he is not.

Huh? :huh: Come on, I heard bad excuses just to bash the guy but that's not him at all. He acknowledges and accepts the fans decision of these films and is comfortable with it and accepts it.

This isn't directed at you, but it seems for peoplpe to heal their pain of the prequels, they just bash Lucas for the sake of it. When clearly it's partly there fault, like Bim said, they have their own little film in their heads but when that doesn't happen and it never will, they hate on it. I can agree on not living up to your expectation, but when you want everything your way and disregard the PT because it didn't have what you wanted is just silly. And they just bash him for the sake of it but it's still not gonna fix anything.

[Carmine Falcone]

Does anybody know if the ending with the aliens is up on youtube somewhere?

I can't find it anywhere either, there are hardly any scenes from the film on youtube... How strange.

[Doctor Jones]

And I still don't get why people are up in arms about the redo's of the OT. That was Lucas's intended vision for God's sake. It wasn't like he stipped all the special effects away from those films and replaced them all with CG. He just added on of what he wanted. If all that stuff was done back when they were released people would look at it differently.

[Cagefighterkip]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTD6RdzNz0sI can't find it anywhere either, there are hardly any scenes from the film on youtube... How strange.

thats a good video tuned to the RAIDERS March w/clips from all 4

[8wid]

I always find it a good idea for fans who despise a movie to get editing software, a formal education, and make their own cut of that film. That or get a life and move on!

[CelticPredator]

And I still don't get why people are up in arms about the redo's of the OT. That was Lucas's intended vision for God's sake. It wasn't like he stipped all the special effects away from those films and replaced them all with CG. He just added on of what he wanted. If all that stuff was done back when they were released people would look at it differently.

Adding **** to fill up the screen does not make the film better. I almost turned of ANH when I saw that Mos Eisley scene again.

Lucas makes a good point, but I still think he's an idiot.

[TwilightPro101]

Have we even heard anything more on Indy 5 lately?

[TwilightPro101]

-Edit.-

[COAL TIGER]

This movie was entertaining to me. It got very silly at some moments like Shia swigging on vains. But I like the aliens crystal skulls idea and I was hoping we'll get to see actual aliens and the Aztec Pyraimd turn into a spaceship.

[The Amazing Lee]

Watched this again today...Although some bits were cool...I was ultimately left bored.

This isn't me bashing the film, as I'm not looking to push into other peoples views but it just didn't feel epic enough to me...and felt TOO much like a family film. :o

[Bim]

Adding **** to fill up the screen does not make the film better. I almost turned of ANH when I saw that Mos Eisley scene again.
So if he sacrificed his original vision at the time because:1) he didnt have the money to finish it and/or 2) he didnt have the time to do it... He cant go back and change it the way he wanted to originally so he doesnt upset the fans?

Twilight: no idea about Indy 5, i havent heard anything concrete.

Lee: arent all Indy movies family movies though? i would say Temple is the darkest one, but overall i consider the Indy movies family oriented.

[TwilightPro101]

So if he sacrificed his original vision at the time because:1) he didnt have the money to finish it and/or 2) he didnt have the time to do it... He cant go back and change it the way he wanted to originally so he doesnt upset the fans?

Twilight: no idea about Indy 5, i havent heard anything concrete.

Lee: arent all Indy movies family movies though? i would say Temple is the darkest one, but overall i consider the Indy movies family oriented.

Thanks Bim.

[CelticPredator]

Or he could've took more time, and make it look....good. Because it doesnt. Theres no reason for there to be a giant bantha whatever walking across the screen, it provides no story point, or reason, other then to show off some crappy effect.

[The Amazing Lee]

Lee: arent all Indy movies family movies though? i would say Temple is the darkest one, but overall i consider the Indy movies family oriented.

Ok, maybe family is the wrong word...but this indy just seemed I dunno...like it was playing it safe...I never ever felt on the edge of my seat and it was almost like they wrapped Indy in cotton wool...it just didn't do much for me...

...it felt like all the characters acknowledged that they were in this movie and were all "WOW, were in an INDY movie!"

there just wasn't enough at stake and the bad guys just weren't believable enough to be honest. :(

It's not a bad movie, but it definitely feels very formulaic and sticks to a very paint by numbers script.

[Spoarz™]

Ok, maybe family is the wrong word...but this indy just seemed I dunno...like it was playing it safe...I never ever felt on the edge of my seat and it was almost like they wrapped Indy in cotton wool...it just didn't do much for me...

...it felt like all the characters acknowledged that they were in this movie and were all "WOW, were in an INDY movie!"

there just wasn't enough at stake and the bad guys just weren't believable enough to be honest. :(

It's not a bad movie, but it definitely feels very formulaic and sticks to a very paint by numbers script.
I agree with what you’re saying dude.

I think the problem is that the film is significantly lacking the level of threat to any of the characters that the original three films had.

I know there were many set pieces that saw the characters in perilous circumstances (killer ants, sword fighting across two moving vehicles, waterfalls, etc), but for me, they just seemed too formulaic and a little, dare I say it, unremarkable. :csad:

The only time I felt any real indication of imminent danger for any of the characters was during the atomic test sequence. And considering how early in the film that happened, I think the threat level just peaked too early.

I hope this doesn’t sound like I’m bashing the movie, because I don't hate it, and I certainly don’t think it’s a bad movie. I really wanted to love this film in the way I love the original trilogy.

But considering how good the last entry in the franchise was, average just isn’t good enough in my opinion. :(

[Bim]

Ok, maybe family is the wrong word...but this indy just seemed I dunno...like it was playing it safe...I never ever felt on the edge of my seat and it was almost like they wrapped Indy in cotton wool...it just didn't do much for me...
Gotcha :yay:

Well if it didnt do much for u, it didnt :cwink:

[spideyboy_1111]

Huh? :huh: Come on, I heard bad excuses just to bash the guy but that's not him at all. He acknowledges and accepts the fans decision of these films and is comfortable with it and accepts it.

This isn't directed at you, but it seems for peoplpe to heal their pain of the prequels, they just bash Lucas for the sake of it. When clearly it's partly there fault, like Bim said, they have their own little film in their heads but when that doesn't happen and it never will, they hate on it. I can agree on not living up to your expectation, but when you want everything your way and disregard the PT because it didn't have what you wanted is just silly. And they just bash him for the sake of it but it's still not gonna fix anything.

look i respect the guys work of imagination and creativity like crazy, but he's proven time and time again that he just simple does things for himself. (this is proof because he sure as hell doesn't give the fans what they want (ask just about any die hard star wars fan), and he certainly isn't doing the movies for the critics... all thats left is himself and the "casual" movie goer.. and since when do people gear a franchise to a "casual" movie goer?

(i think this thread needs a pic of the cartoon lucas scribbling with a crayon, again) lol.. it pretty much sums things up.

[Bim]

look i respect the guys work of imagination and creativity like crazy, but he's proven time and time again that he just simple does things for himself. (this is proof because he sure as hell doesn't give the fans what they want (ask just about any die hard star wars fan), and he certainly isn't doing the movies for the critics... all thats left is himself and the "casual" movie goer.. and since when do people gear a franchise to a "casual" movie goer?
And what movie maker is gonna make a film he doesnt like himself? :huh: i would think that they would have to fall in love with that project for a few years, if not for the rest of their lives. I dunno, maybe it's just my perception, but i always thought that directors make movies they would want to see themselves.

Lucas was/is never going to please everyone (specially with Star Wars)... i'm a die hard SW fan and i realize this. Years of reading many forums make it obvious. If his vision doesnt coincide with yours, and you dont like what he does, well you can always choose not to watch it. No one should be forced to see something they dont enjoy. But keep in mind, just because U didnt like it, doesnt mean other people didnt. Many enjoyed what he did with the saga as a whole.

[Octoberist]

I think that Lucas will be remembered as an influence in Hollywood for sure. I don't hate him but I do disagree with some of things that he has done. To me I think in the long run, the prequels will always be known as the less beloved of the two trilogies. When I have kids, I'll show them both, but obviously I'll be bias towards the original (which I think were more groundbreaking than the prequels). But it doesn't mean that I hate the prequels either.

[Octoberist]

Ok, maybe family is the wrong word...but this indy just seemed I dunno...like it was playing it safe...I never ever felt on the edge of my seat and it was almost like they wrapped Indy in cotton wool...it just didn't do much for me...

...it felt like all the characters acknowledged that they were in this movie and were all "WOW, were in an INDY movie!"

there just wasn't enough at stake and the bad guys just weren't believable enough to be honest. :(

It's not a bad movie, but it definitely feels very formulaic and sticks to a very paint by numbers script.

When I left the theater with my friends, I just said "Man, this movie didn't add anything to the original movies". I felt that there was a 'take or leave it' quality, and because of that, it's probably the one movie that I can just dismiss in the long run.

[GhostPoet]

I think Lucas has gone mad, or at the very least lost his mind a little. Just judging from his "ideas" lately.

[Eggyman]

When I left the theater with my friends, I just said "Man, this movie didn't add anything to the original movies". I felt that there was a 'take or leave it' quality, and because of that, it's probably the one movie that I can just dismiss in the long run.

That's absolutely how I saw it, too. I didn't enjoy it, but whatever.

[TwilightPro101]

When I left the theater with my friends, I just said "Man, this movie didn't add anything to the original movies". I felt that there was a 'take or leave it' quality, and because of that, it's probably the one movie that I can just dismiss in the long run.

Felt the exact same way in regards to the prequels.

[JAK®]

The film was great, a perfect addition to the franchise! It was just as good as the other ones.

[Doctor Jones]

I think Lucas has gone mad, or at the very least lost his mind a little. Just judging from his "ideas" lately.

He hasn't gone mad. He just hasn't done anything you or others have wanted in the prequels. :whatever:

[Doctor Jones]

look i respect the guys work of imagination and creativity like crazy, but he's proven time and time again that he just simple does things for himself. (this is proof because he sure as hell doesn't give the fans what they want (ask just about any die hard star wars fan), and he certainly isn't doing the movies for the critics... all thats left is himself and the "casual" movie goer.. and since when do people gear a franchise to a "casual" movie goer?

(i think this thread needs a pic of the cartoon lucas scribbling with a crayon, again) lol.. it pretty much sums things up.

You see this is everyone's problem with these films. He didn't do anything you people wanted. No filmmaker should have what the fans want in mind. Becuase if that happens, it's what those couple people want, not all of them, it still won't satisfy. It wouldn't make a differance either way. If any filmmaker has this in mind while making a film or writing one, they shouldn't be doing one in the first place. He did what he liked. And what filmmaker makes movies for the critics? He never said anything about the GA. Don't assume what he never said. If he did, maybe because they don't care about the stuff that we do. They're able to sit down and enjoy a film without nitpicking and tearing it to pieces like us. But these films are his films. What he wants to see on screen. And if his stuff doesn't agree with what you wanted to see that's fine. Just don't like many others go off saying he's insane because he didn't do what you wanted. Because that doesn't happen. A filmmaker should be free with their vision and not have interferance from others on the story they want to tell, which could be a great one. Especially the fans, they're the worst. Let them run with it, chances are, like TDK they're better than what we wanted because Nolan stuck to his guns and didn't listen to the fans. He put in what was appropriate to the story. He didn't care about the whining fanboys about the permawhite Joker or the casting of Heath. He did it for a reason. A filmmaker always does something for a reason. It may not always be agreed with with you, but it allows him to be comfortable while making a film he wants to tell, It's in his hands.

Like I said before, thank God that fanboys don't direct these films.

[TwilightPro101]

I agree with what you’re saying dude.

I think the problem is that the film is significantly lacking the level of threat to any of the characters that the original three films had.

I know there were many set pieces that saw the characters in perilous circumstances (killer ants, sword fighting across two moving vehicles, waterfalls, etc), but for me, they just seemed too formulaic and a little, dare I say it, unremarkable. :csad:

The only time I felt any real indication of imminent danger for any of the characters was during the atomic test sequence. And considering how early in the film that happened, I think the threat level just peaked too early.

I hope this doesn’t sound like I’m bashing the movie, because I don't hate it, and I certainly don’t think it’s a bad movie. I really wanted to love this film in the way I love the original trilogy.

But considering how good the last entry in the franchise was, average just isn’t good enough in my opinion. :(

Felt the same watching it again recently.

[The Amazing Lee]

I think also creating another film almost 20 years on, it just doesn't have the same feel as the trilogy especially because technology has improved and so has the image, and I just feel that the glossed over look detracts away from the gritty feel of the originals.

[spideyboy_1111]

I think also creating another film almost 20 years on, it just doesn't have the same feel as the trilogy especially because technology has improved and so has the image, and I just feel that the glossed over look detracts away from the gritty feel of the originals.

see this is why, if i was a film maker, i would have dug up old equipment, and actually used it to shoot the film, so that way it would have the same look

[Bim]

I think also creating another film almost 20 years on, it just doesn't have the same feel as the trilogy especially because technology has improved and so has the image, and I just feel that the glossed over look detracts away from the gritty feel of the originals.
Dont forget people that watched the originals will also have a different perspective, automatically that will influence how they view the newer one. Even if they had used the old technology, i get the feeling that we would still be getting the same comments. Loved franchises are a very delicate thing.

[GhostPoet]

He hasn't gone mad. He just hasn't done anything you or others have wanted in the prequels. :whatever:

Oh, it's not that. It's the fact he wants to put CGI creatures into his movies. And he was the guy who created Jar Jar and thought it was funny.
He trys to kiddy-ize everything. Let's just gut the seriousness out of all his movies by throwing in a CGI creature.

[dark_b]

i was having a great time watching this new movie. it was over the top but i didnt have a problem.ok maybe with the tarzan scene he he he

[Cagefighterkip]

Spielberg Says Indy 5 is Not for Right Now

After accepting the Cecil B. DeMille Award at the 2009 Gold Globe Ceremonies, Steven Spielberg took a few minutes to speak with writers from the cable channel, ReelzChannel, and here is what he said about Indy coming back:

10:22 PM: Backstage Steven Spielberg is asked whether he might consider revisiting any of his characters again. "Visit them again?" asks Spielberg. "You mean like bring them out of mothballs? Not really. Some day there may be another Indiana Jones. George and I have had a couple of conversations about 'What If?' we made another Indiana Jones film, but right now we aren't in the position to do that."

[Doctor Jones]

see this is why, if i was a film maker, i would have dug up old equipment, and actually used it to shoot the film, so that way it would have the same look

Hey, it's 2009. :cwink:

2007 before that when they were filming. That's exactly what someone would say to have it their way.

Plus, it's the 1950's. A different feel to the 30's. The cinamatography was quite consistant but still altered because of the setting. It's the Cold War, new decade. New tone calls for it.

[Doctor Jones]

Oh, it's not that. It's the fact he wants to put CGI creatures into his movies. And he was the guy who created Jar Jar and thought it was funny.
He trys to kiddy-ize everything. Let's just gut the seriousness out of all his movies by throwing in a CGI creature.

What's wrong with putting in CGI creatures? He pushed the bounderies of technology. Nothing wrong with that. Hell, he even said himself if he went too far before TPM came out when he watched it in a SFX screening.

Jar Jar was funny to me as a seven year old and a little later. It worked for me. But now I don't like him, but it's for the kids. People who aren't kids can't even speak for them.

[Octoberist]

I don't mind CGI as long as it's good.

And Jar Jar was failed attempt at creating a likable R2D2/C3PO type character. Luckily, Lucas listen to the fans (to a point) and lessen Jar Jar's involvement in the other prequel movies.