2519 replies to this topic

[Mr Teddy Bear]

You missed one.

[sharpshooter]

Looks okay. I hope they don't drop the ball with this one...

[DamnCoffee]

Ford: 'There's more to learn about Indy'

Harrison Ford has discussed his character's development in the new Indiana Jones movie.

The actor claimed Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull would shed fresh light on the adventurous archaeologist.

He told ABC: "He's a guy who is pretty clear from the beginning. He has not changed so much between films.

"But we've learned more about him through various plot devices, such as the introduction of his father. And we'll learn something more about him in this film.

"I think it's required. If you're going to bring back a character, you'll have to supply the audience with something more and different. The adventure is very, very important. But it's interesting to discover a facet of the character that perhaps you hadn't explored before."

The fourth instalment of the action-adventure franchise premieres at the Cannes Film Festival on May 18.

It is the first movie in the series since 1989, though Ford insisted it wasn't difficult getting to grips with the role again.

He added: "It's as though you put on that hat, the leather jacket, the bag, the whip, the gun - or even the schoolteacher's suit - and it comes back to you."

[zencat]

Retraction in the 140 min story. It's not. It's just over 2 hours.

http://hollywood-els...4/okay_okay.php

You know, wish I would have seen the original source because it was based on ill informed speculation. Seven reels does NOT mean all reels are 20 minutes. You can carve up reels into any length you like.

[Bondian]

I'm wondering if the film was originally 140 mins. And since John Williams has completed the sessions, some further editing of the length of the film has been changed.

John Williams is usually very precise with times, dates etc. But maybe he's got it wrong.

[Harmsway]

I'm wondering if the film was originally 140 mins. And since John Williams has completed the sessions, some further editing of the length of the film has been changed.

No, it was originally 123 minutes, and then this was reconfirmed after Williams' comments.

John Williams is usually very precise with times, dates etc. But maybe he's got it wrong.

He never said that time, though. He just said that there was a certain number of reels, and each one was about 20 minutes. But he never said that he used all of each reel, so it was pretty much taking his comment for more than was intended. He wasn't being specific.

[Harmsway]

Here's some cool information on John Hurt's character, Oxley:

Spoiler

He's a previous colleague of Indy's who has gone mad in his quest for the skulls. He was left alone for 20 years. Hurt had this to say: "But, as it turns out, my character isn’t a man who was simply left on his own – he is a man who has become possessed, which comes out as a kind of madness."

So that's where the supernatural comes in... he's been possessed, presumably by an alien spirit. And if you look here:



That's his cell wall. All the words spell out "return" in different languages... presumably the aliens want to return home, which according to most spoiler reports, they do at the end of the film.

[JimmyBond]

[quote name='Harmsway' post='862376' date='20 April 2008 - 00:56']Here's some cool information on John Hurt's character, Oxley:

[spoiler]He's a previous colleague of Indy's who has gone mad in his quest for the skulls. He was left alone for 20 years. Hurt had this to say: "But, as it turns out, my character isn

[Loomis]

[quote name='Harmsway' post='862376' date='20 April 2008 - 06:56']Here's some cool information on John Hurt's character, Oxley:

[spoiler]He's a previous colleague of Indy's who has gone mad in his quest for the skulls. He was left alone for 20 years. Hurt had this to say: "But, as it turns out, my character isn

[DamnCoffee]

Oh Good God!

[Harmsway]

I thought John Hurt was playing:

No. That entire thing was a red herring. They released a huge set of production notes about INDY IV for media use, naming all the characters and giving detailed outlines. Hurt is Oxley.

Which implies that

Spoiler

the film features live aliens who are trapped on earth. Rather like a certain other Spielberg flick, which one was it again? The title completely escapes me. Unless, of course, the aliens are sorta inhabiting the bodies of people like Hurt's character via this "possession" thing (which sounds quite interesting) and will only revert to their original alien forms once the spaceship has arrived to take 'em home.

Spoiler

While I do believe they're trapped here, that's just my spin on it - it connects with what most reports have as the ending of the movie (the pyramid houses their ancient spacecraft, which takes off). The difference between this and E.T. is that the aliens aren't friendly. However it works out, it's interesting.

Spoiler

I can't see why people should be up in arms about the alien thing, given that the Indy series has been absolutely drenched in the supernatural from the get-go. And after the Grail Knight of LAST CRUSADE, anything goes, I'd have thought. It's not like the introduction of aliens in a season of MIAMI VICE (which I gather happened towards the end of the show's run).

Personally, I think this story is more interesting than than any of the sequel plots, partially for so boldly plotting its own territory and not just going after Noah's ark or whatever. And while it's a different spin, I think it entirely works within the Indiana Jones universe.

[HildebrandRarity]

Funny how different people view things differently.

I immediately thought of words like:

p

[Harmsway]

[Mr. Blofeld]

Obvious CGI here, folks...

[Royal Dalton]

It's only a still. Don't worry about it.

I read that synopsis a few days ago. Assuming it's real, I'm glad Hurt isn't playing you-know-who. This Oxley character sounds rather good.

[Loomis]

I thought John Hurt was playing:

No. That entire thing was a red herring. They released a huge set of production notes about INDY IV for media use, naming all the characters and giving detailed outlines. Hurt is Oxley.

Which implies that

Spoiler

the film features live aliens who are trapped on earth. Rather like a certain other Spielberg flick, which one was it again? The title completely escapes me. Unless, of course, the aliens are sorta inhabiting the bodies of people like Hurt's character via this "possession" thing (which sounds quite interesting) and will only revert to their original alien forms once the spaceship has arrived to take 'em home.

Spoiler

While I do believe they're trapped here, that's just my spin on it - it connects with what most reports have as the ending of the movie (the pyramid houses their ancient spacecraft, which takes off). The difference between this and E.T. is that the aliens aren't friendly. However it works out, it's interesting.

Spoiler

I can't see why people should be up in arms about the alien thing, given that the Indy series has been absolutely drenched in the supernatural from the get-go. And after the Grail Knight of LAST CRUSADE, anything goes, I'd have thought. It's not like the introduction of aliens in a season of MIAMI VICE (which I gather happened towards the end of the show's run).

Personally, I think this story is more interesting than than any of the sequel plots, partially for so boldly plotting its own territory and not just going after Noah's ark or whatever. And while it's a different spin, I think it entirely works within the Indiana Jones universe.

I concur. However, neither the trailer nor the posters nor the stills suggest to me any interesting new directions in tone or visuals. From what we've seen so far (which is, admittedly, very little), I'm simply getting a LAST-CRUSADE-reshot-as-TEMPLE-OF-DOOM vibe. This film has been in production for far, far too long to be able to get away with being merely Pretty Good™ - the last flick that had such a crushing weight of long-nursed expectations on its shoulders was, well, THE PHANTOM MENACE, and, gentlemen, when I say THE PHANTOM MENACE I need say no more. Thus far, INDY 4 ain't wetting my whistle, but I guess that all we can do at this point is just hang in there.

[Harmsway]

I concur. However, neither the trailer nor the posters nor the stills suggest to me any interesting new directions in tone or visuals.

I'm not really impressed with the teaser trailer, but I love the photographs. A lot. There are a lot of moody stills that suggest the atmosphere of mystery and intrigue that I desire from an Indiana Jones film.

But the issue wasn't to drastically change the tone or visuals. It was to keep the tone of previous Indiana Jones installments, and (as best they could) recreate the visual style of the earlier films. In subject material, we get some interesting new directions, but in style, it's still classic Indiana Jones. And I'm quite happy about that.

This film has been in production for far, far too long to be able to get away with being merely Pretty Good™

I disagree. "Pretty Good" is all anyone has the right to demand or expect. It's just another Indiana Jones film, not "The Greatest Movie Ever." If you're an Indiana Jones fan, as I am, that's a great thing. If you're looking for something more than another helping of Dr. Jones, well, I'll wager you're going to be disappointed.

- the last flick that had such a crushing weight of long-nursed expectations on its shoulders was, well, THE PHANTOM MENACE, and, gentlemen, when I say THE PHANTOM MENACE I need say no more.

Yeah, but THE PHANTOM MENACE is just plain bad. Not "Pretty Good."

I read that synopsis a few days ago. Assuming it's real, I'm glad Hurt isn't playing you-know-who. This Oxley character sounds rather good.

If we're talking about the Production Notes with all the interviews, it's 100% legitimate. No reason to doubt it's authenticity. John Hurt is Professor Oxley.

[Loomis]

This film has been in production for far, far too long to be able to get away with being merely Pretty Good™

I disagree. "Pretty Good" is all anyone has the right to demand or expect. It's just another Indiana Jones film.

Nah, can't agree there, Harms. I've been following INDY 4 production news for almost 15 years (I'm fairly precise on the timescale because I vividly remember reading a report in the summer of '94 that Kevin Costner would play Indy's brother, and I remember that because of where I happened to be holidaying when I read it; I was reading Empire on a plane in 2002 and Spielberg was sounding off about INDY 4, and then just a couple of years ago he and others reappeared in the same magazine gassing about their amazing ideas for the film).

Okay, you might say, well that was up to you, and you can't hold Ford, Lucas and Spielberg to a masterpiece just because you've anticipated this film for years. Well, actually, I can, because I wouldn't even want those guys, with all their squillions, to be even making another one after all this time unless they had the mother of all great Indy movies in mind. "Just another Indiana Jones film" won't cut it. Otherwise, well, then they're basically just doing it for the money.... which they can't possibly need (and am I the only one who remembers Lucas promising interesting and experimental fare to follow his STAR WARS prequels?). It's like saying, oh, well, as long as Cameron's AVATAR is a fairly decent watch that's all that matters. Well, yeah, on paper that's true, but then again he's set his own bar pretty high. Would you be satisfied with an average THE DARK KNIGHT or a so-so QUANTUM OF SOLACE, or have you - with considerable justification - got yourself pumped for real quality?

INDY 4 is probably the most anticipated film ever in geekdom. It has the potential to be one of the biggest blockbusters of all time, trailing just a couple of places behind TITANIC, and also to be the finest popcorn movie since, well, RAIDERS. With ROCKY BALBOA, Stallone more than delivered the goods for his fans after many years of no Rocky, and the same expectations - only more so - are on Ford, Lucas and Spielberg. And if Spielberg, in particular, hasn't been carefully crafting this film in his head, Kubrick-like, on and off since 1989, well, all I can say is that the AICN Talkbacks will run rivers of blood and tears. As for Lucas, this is his shot at redemption after those abysmal so-called prequels, and, believe me, the fanboys will be watching.

Angry fannish rant over.

[Harmsway]

Nah, can't agree there, Harms. I've been following INDY 4 production news for almost 15 years (I'm fairly precise on the timescale because I vividly remember reading a report in the summer of '94 that Kevin Costner would play Indy's brother, and I remember that because of where I happened to be holidaying when I read it).

So have I. I've been eating this stuff up ever since I saw LAST CRUSADE. I've been dying to see INDY IV come to fruition, but I've never expected anything grander and greater than what we already had.

Okay, you might say, well that was up to you, and you can't hold Ford, Lucas and Spielberg to a masterpiece just because you've anticipated this film for years. Well, actually, I can, because I wouldn't even want those guys, with all their squillions, to be even making another one after all this time unless they had the mother of all great Indy movies in mind.

Well, unfortunately for you, they don't have "the mother of all great Indy movies" in mind. Lucas and Spielberg actually said they had no intent to make INDY IV "bigger and better," and rather set out to make just another good entry in the franchise like the ones that preceded it.

Now, I do believe that KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL will be the best of the sequels, but it's hardly going to be a break from the tradition of the franchise. This isn't going to be the CASINO ROYALE of the Indiana Jones franchise. It's going to be an entertaining, enjoyable ride with all the appeal of an Indiana Jones adventure (with an added interest factor from story elements, like Jones' age and place in life, as well as some of the more spoileriffic things).

Otherwise, well, then they're basically just doing it for the money.... which they can't possibly need (and am I the only one who remembers Lucas promising interesting and experimental fare to follow his STAR WARS prequels?).

They're not doing it for the money. They're doing it for the fans of Indiana Jones who have asked for a sequel forever (Spielberg said he didn't really take the idea of INDY IV seriously until his kids asked when the next one was coming out after watching LAST CRUSADE), and they're doing it because they enjoy making Indiana Jones films.

Not that they don't care about quality (hell, they've been haggling over the script for over a decade and didn't agree to do it until they were all sufficiently excited about the direction of the film).

With ROCKY BALBOA, Stallone more than delivered the goods for his fans after many years of no Rocky, and the same expectations - only more so - are on Ford, Lucas and Spielberg.

I characterize ROCKY BALBOA as merely "pretty good." It's that level that I expect from KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL - an adventure that reminds everyone why they like Dr. Jones and provides equal or better entertainment to the sequels. That's all the fans want, anyhow.

[HildebrandRarity]

INDY 4 is probably the most anticipated film ever in geekdom. It has the potential to be one of the biggest blockbusters of all time, trailing just a couple of places behind TITANIC...

You're dreaming. This movie won't even be number one in its year, let alone number three all time. As for anticipation, i've felt greater anticipation out there for things like Lord Of The Rings, Harry Potter and Star Wars movies than IJandTKOTCS.

[Loomis]

Lucas and Spielberg actually said they had no intent to make INDY IV "bigger and better," and rather set out to make just another good entry in the franchise like the ones that preceded it. ... They're doing it for the fans of Indiana Jones who have asked for a sequel forever (Spielberg said he didn't really take the idea of INDY IV seriously until his kids asked when the next one was coming out after watching LAST CRUSADE), and they're doing it because they enjoy making Indiana Jones films.

In that case, all I can say is: big deal. Don't do us any favours, guys. Shame you couldn't have spent the time and money making something really good and interesting instead. Lucas and Spielberg aren't supposed to be average, any more than The Beatles are supposed to be average. Average. Just. Will. Not. Do.

Indiana Jones is one of the greatest icons in motion picture history returning after nearly twenty years. Am I truly alone in feeling that that merits something, well, great?

I characterize ROCKY BALBOA as merely "pretty good."

Of course you do, but that's because you're not a Rocky/Stallone fan, but, trust me, to the fans it was the CASINO ROYALE of the franchise. RB delivered the goods in every possible way for Italian Stallion geeks, and then some, with quality beyond our wildest dreams and certainly on a par with the first film.

The difference here is that you're saying that Indy fans have lower standards, that they'd basically be satisfied with the Indy equivalent of ROCKY IV or ROCKY V.

That's all the fans want, anyhow.

Not sure I can believe that all the fans merely want something that provides "equal or better entertainment to the sequels". I suspect that there are many Indy fans (whose fandom started with RAIDERS in the cinema) who will be disappointed if CRYSTAL SKULL doesn't top or at least match the original.

INDY 4 is probably the most anticipated film ever in geekdom. It has the potential to be one of the biggest blockbusters of all time, trailing just a couple of places behind TITANIC...

You're dreaming. This movie won't even be number one in its year, let alone number three all time. As for anticipation, i've felt greater anticipation out there for things like Lord Of The Rings, Harry Potter and Star Wars movies than IJandTKOTKS.

I'll grant you that the pre-release buzz for CRYSTAL SKULL is pretty underwhelming, or at least rather less than might have been expected (right now, it's kinda like the calm before the storm), but name a movie (other than EPISODE I) that was anticipated for such a huge amount of time by such a large and rabid fanbase. LOTR and Potter weren't looked forward to for almost twenty years.

And what will be number one this year, in your view? I expect CRYSTAL SKULL to humiliate Bond and the Bat at the box office and at the very least roughly equal Potter in takings.

[Harmsway]

Shame you couldn't have spent the time and money making something really good and interesting instead.

That's making the assumption that the Indiana Jones films aren't really good and interesting. Lucas and Spielberg believe TEMPLE and LAST CRUSADE to be really good, so do most of the Indiana Jones fanbase. And most of the general public, actually. So this is far from bad in their book... it's actually quite exciting and unusual if INDY IV lives up to the cinematic legacy of the character so far, given that 4th installments are generally a considerable degree lower in quality than previous films.

I characterize ROCKY BALBOA as merely "pretty good."

Of course you do, but that's because you're not a Rocky/Stallone fan, but, trust me, to the fans it was the CASINO ROYALE of the franchise. RB delivered the goods in every possible way for Italian Stallion geeks, and then some, with quality beyond our wildest dreams and certainly on a par with the first film.

The difference here is that you're saying that Indy fans have lower standards, that they'd basically be satisfied with the Indy equivalent of ROCKY IV or ROCKY V.

No, I'm saying that franchise fans appreciate what they're given more than those who aren't die-hard fans of the franchise. I'm not a die-hard ROCKY fan, so I didn't think ROCKY BALBOA was anything spectacular. Just more Rocky stuff, admittedly a little better-handled than it had been before.

And you, admittedly, aren't much of an Indiana Jones guy. But for us Indiana Jones die-hards, KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL is delivering the goods. A wonderful end-cap to a solid franchise that brings the thing full circle.

Not sure I can believe that all the fans merely want something that provides "equal or better entertainment to the sequels". I suspect that there are many Indy fans (whose fandom started with RAIDERS in the cinema) who will be disappointed if CRYSTAL SKULL doesn't top or at least match the original.

Not from my experience with the fanbase, or the general public. Nobody I've heard from or talked to has ever demanded or expected INDY IV to be as good as RAIDERS (which most folks consider an untouchable film classic, as I do). The fanbase, and general populace, hold TEMPLE and LAST CRUSADE to be wonderful pieces of entertainment and would be perfectly happy with a film on-par with those. A film that's actually better than either of those (as I believe KINGDOM will be) will really deliver the goods, then.

And what will be number one this year, in your view?

Definitely HARRY POTTER. Followed by NARNIA. Then INDY IV.

[Royal Dalton]

If we're talking about the Production Notes with all the interviews, it's 100% legitimate. No reason to doubt it's authenticity. John Hurt is Professor Oxley.

I'm sure it's legit, too. Just waiting for some official confirmation, that's all.

[Loomis]

Shame you couldn't have spent the time and money making something really good and interesting instead.

That's making the assumption that the Indiana Jones films aren't really good and interesting. Lucas and Spielberg believe TEMPLE and LAST CRUSADE to be really good....

Well, they would.

...so do most of the Indiana Jones fanbase. And most of the general public, actually. So this is far from bad in their book...

In that case perhaps my perception's a little askew. I thought that the consensus was that RAIDERS was wonderful but that the other two, far from being "really good", were watchable enough but really rather mediocre. But then I freely admit that I'm basing this on Maltin's reviews: **** for RAIDERS, with TEMPLE and CRUSADE on ** and **1/2 respectively.

Nobody I've heard from or talked to has ever demanded or expected INDY IV to be as good as RAIDERS (which most folks consider an untouchable film classic, as I do).

But I find this thinking a little defeatist. I mean, Spielberg's been on extremely interesting (and, crucially, very fresh) form for the past few years. Call me naive, but I can't see any valid reason - on paper, at least - why INDY 4 couldn't have blown RAIDERS away. But, hey, perhaps it does.

[Harmsway]

...so do most of the Indiana Jones fanbase. And most of the general public, actually. So this is far from bad in their book...

In that case perhaps my perception's a little askew. I thought that the consensus was that RAIDERS was wonderful but that the other two, far from being "really good", were watchable enough but really rather mediocre. But then I freely admit that I'm basing this on Maltin's reviews: **** for RAIDERS, with TEMPLE and CRUSADE on ** and **1/2 respectively.

Nah, the consensus (from what I gather through friends, contacts, the internet - both fanboy and otherwise) is that the other two Jones films are viewed as pretty classic in their own right. TEMPLE OF DOOM is the most controversial, but the love for that film has grown over the years, and there's oodles of goodwill and affection for LAST CRUSADE.

And Leonard Maltin's hardly indicative of more than Leonard Maltin and the lackeys he hires to produce his guide.

Nobody I've heard from or talked to has ever demanded or expected INDY IV to be as good as RAIDERS (which most folks consider an untouchable film classic, as I do).

But I find this thinking a little defeatist. I mean, Spielberg's been on extremely interesting (and, crucially, very fresh) form for the past few years. Call me naive, but I can't see any valid reason - on paper, at least - why INDY 4 couldn't have blown RAIDERS away.

Well, I think RAIDERS is the greatest adventure film of all time. The chances of a director equalling that, or besting it, in his lifetime is very, very slim. Especially since Spielberg's left his "groundbreaking classic" form. Sure, he's done solid, interesting stuff lately, but it's pretty much all inferior to his early work, where he produced the DUEL, JAWS, CLOSE ENCOUNTERS, E.T. and RAIDERS.

Anyway, I know enough about KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL to take the educated guess that it won't touch the perfection that is RAIDERS. But I do think it'll come out pretty good in its own right, with some nice familiar elements and some nice new ones.

[Monkeyfoahead]

I just saw the first trailer I've seen for this movie while I was watching Forbidden Kingdom. It was a great kung-fu kicker. The Indy film didn't look bad either.

[HildebrandRarity]

And what will be number one this year, in your view? I expect CRYSTAL SKULL to humiliate Bond and the Bat at the box office and at the very least roughly equal Potter in takings.

It won't be IJATKindomOTCSkull. Opinions are worthless and opinions on CBn are a dime-a-dozen. And why would you compare a fantasy period movie catering to all ages (including young children) to a relatively adult-oriented and relatively-realistic action movie? There's no comparison. And WHERE did I even mention James Bond and Quantum Of Solace in the post which began with "You're dreaming"?

Would you care to wager whether or not this instalment of Indiana Jones beats this year's Harry Potter offering, Loomis? If not, then EVEN you don't think this movie will be number one in its year, let alone number three all time.

So, let's put aside worthless opinions and let's make a gentleman's wager!

I'm willing to bet that more dollars will go towards the movies with the younger stars than a grandpa. Are you?

[Harmsway]

And why would you compare a fantasy period movie catering to all ages (including young children) to a relatively adult-oriented and relatively-realistic action movie?

Well, I think that KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL is every bit as family-friendly and as the current Harry Potter film (the films have gotten pretty dark). Lots of young kids are going to be there in the theater for INDIANA JONES IV, regardless of whether they genuinely belong there or not (ala REVENGE OF THE SITH).

[JimmyBond]

Well, I think that KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL is every bit as family-friendly and as the current Harry Potter film (the films have gotten pretty dark). Lots of young kids are going to be there in the theater for INDIANA JONES IV, regardless of whether they genuinely belong there or not (ala REVENGE OF THE SITH).

That much is true, Spielberg and Lucas wouldnt dare return to the format of ToD. The backlash on that film was so great we got the more family oriented LC. I just hope KOTCS is a mix between the tones of Raiders and LC, and maybe a hint of the darkness that we got with ToD.

Has the surge of "OMG we're getting a new Indy film 19 years later!!!!" worn off for anybody yet? Cause I gotta be honest, I still can't believe it's happening!!

[Loomis]

And what will be number one this year, in your view? I expect CRYSTAL SKULL to humiliate Bond and the Bat at the box office and at the very least roughly equal Potter in takings.

It won't be IJATKindomOTCSkull. Opinions are worthless and opinions on CBn are a dime-a-dozen. And why would you compare a fantasy period movie catering to all ages (including young children) to a relatively adult-oriented and relatively-realistic action movie? There's no comparison.

I seem to remember all the Indiana Jones film having huge child audiences. Given what Harmsway has revealed of the plot of this new one (which I won't mention here), CRYSTAL SKULL seems especially likely to draw plenty of viewers from the Potter crowd.

And WHERE did I even mention James Bond and Quantum Of Solace in the post which began with "You're dreaming"?

You didn't. But does that mean I can't mention Bond? You didn't mention THE DARK KNIGHT either, but I still exercised what I believe is my right to mention it.

Would you care to wager whether or not this instalment of Indiana Jones beats this year's Harry Potter offering, Loomis?

Nope. Will you stop challenging people to wagers?

I've already said how I think CRYSTAL SKULL will do relative to Potter (see the top of this very post). No need for wagers. We'll see how things play out over the coming months.