2519 replies to this topic

[dodge]

I hope this is definitely It as for HF in the lead role. I'd be thrilled to see more entries with him in the background and a young lead with the old Indy charisma. Is that the sidekick with the unspellable name? Too soon to tell. But I can't see Crystal Skull being less anything less than a knockout.

[Tarl_Cabot]

Funny video.

No Shia adventures please.I have nothing against the kid but just let it go...

[Righty007]

That video is hilarious!

"I'm not even good enough to be Short Round's sidekick."

[jaguar007]

Apparently the UK Times has seen the movie and liked it. Since I am posting this from my Iphone I can't give a link but it is posted on timesonline.co.uk.

[Qwerty]

Great video.

Gotta love George Lucas.

[Mr Teddy Bear]

Indy has been screened at Cannes and Empire's initial impressions are up:

http://www.empireonl...y.asp?NID=22591


Summary: it is not the Indy film we were dreading.

[Mr Teddy Bear]

Another: http://news.bbc.co.u...ent/7407209.stm

And very brief impressions with the promise of a full review to come:

http://www.variety.c...1117937176.html

[Johnboy007]

Well, it's a promising start.

[Matt_13]

Sounds like what I was expecting so far which is good. Hopefully my baseball game Thursday ends early so I can head over to theaters for opening night.

[Safari Suit]

"LaBeouf even apes Tarzan", eh? Sounds familiar

[Mr. Blofeld]

"LaBeouf even apes Tarzan", eh? Sounds familiar

Does he get chased by Kamal Khan, too?

[marktmurphy]

Summary: it is not the Indy film we were dreading.

And that's all I wanted to know

The only bad review I've seen is from the Guardian, and he gives it two stars- not because it's actually bad but because it doesn't do anything new. Well, I don't want anything new, so I'm over the moon. I simply can't wait- but I won't be reading any more reviews- they're all too spoilery.

Indy's back! We're all going to be watching a new Indiana Jones movie this week! And it's good! How brilliant does that look to read?

[Matt_13]

http://www.rottentom...ndiana_jones_4/

All the official reviews that are in.

[marktmurphy]

Incidentally, the Times have their full review up: four stars

http://entertainment...icle3957935.ece

[JimmyBond]

Indy's back! We're all going to be watching a new Indiana Jones movie this week! And it's good! How brilliant does that look to read?

I know right!?

[Loomis]

Well, here's a pretty negative review from the Chicago Tribune:

http://www.chicagotr...0,4432579.story

[HildebrandRarity]

Well, here's a pretty negative review from the Chicago Tribune:

http://www.chicagotr...0,4432579.story

Thank goodness us James Bond fans don't have to put up with annoying and stupid little teen-aged 'side-kicks' and 'fake-looking' sound stage sets.

It's absolutely great to know we have an outstanding, tough-as-nails 40 year-old actor going to real locations in a story without aliens!

James Bond is going to wipe the floor with Grandpa Jones' in the quality department in 2008!

[Tarl_Cabot]

It took a long time to get here HBR.

Time's review was positive...so, I expect if you really wanna love Indy 4 you will and if you're determined to rip G-lu you'll find ammunition.

[HildebrandRarity]

O, i'll be seeing it, Tarl. I'll be there at the theatre on Friday. I want to see it with my own eyes and then I want to see The Dark Knight and then Quantum Of Solace.

We need movies like Indy 4 to tide us over to James Bond.

[Matt_13]

Well, here's a pretty negative review from the Chicago Tribune:

http://www.chicagotr...0,4432579.story

This review claims that Indiana Jones isn't a memorable movie character to begin with..........................................................that's adorable. The writer was clearly hunting for blood with this review.

[HildebrandRarity]

Well, here's a pretty negative review from the Chicago Tribune:

http://www.chicagotr...0,4432579.story

This review claims that Indiana Jones isn't a memorable movie character to begin with..........................................................that's adorable. The writer was clearly hunting for blood with this review.

Yes. The envious loser's on a witch hunt.

But he does state something which I think may differentiate this movie from the next James Bond movie. That the sets on the soundstages look fake and the lighting is poor.

As I said, i'm going in with not the highest of expectations...lower than the expectation I had for Iron Man (which was, well, considerable.)

Make no mistake. I have high expectations for this film. But my expectations for this film are not as high as the other three main films for me this year, namely Quantum Of Solace, The Dark Knight and Iron Man.

[Loomis]

I seem to remember THE PHANTOM MENACE getting an awful lot of rave reviews on the eve of its release. Just sayin'.

And I'd agree that Indy isn't a memorable character, at least not to the degree that Bond is. Indy just happens to get caught up in amazing adventures, that's all. He's a bit of a blank canvas, lacking the personality or spark of, say, Bond or Rocky. He's closer to someone like John McClane, who's all very well and good fun to watch, but basically just a backdrop for the action, which is the real star of the show.

Tarl hits the nail on the head, though: people will see in INDIANA JONES 4 exactly what they want to see.

[jaguar007]

James Bond is going to wipe the floor with Grandpa Jones' in the quality department in 2008!

Maybe in quality, but I doubt in box office.

The reviews are mixed but from what I gather, the general movie going public will love it. It does not break any cinematic ground but will be a fun ride. I think the other sequels fall into the same category and the crowds ate them up.

I for one can't wait until Tuesday when I get to go to an advance screening. My review will follow either Tuesday night or Wednesday morning.

[Tarl_Cabot]

I'd say he is a memorable character who started a fashion trend and opened the door for Banana Republic inc to take off(it started out as an Indy gear wherehouse but the current co is more like high end Gap).
He's our James Bond(USAers); well traveled, cultured, multi-langual kicking stud.But the sequels were pretty uneven to lame compared to the masterpiece that was Raiders. "fake looking sets"? That's one of my complaints about 'Crusade.

[Safari Suit]

I seem to remember THE PHANTOM MENACE getting an awful lot of rave reviews on the eve of its release. Just sayin'.

If anything I'd say that was an incentive for critics to be tougher on the film. They don't want to be accused of giving this one a free ride as well, or second guessing the public's response (as they have often been accused of doing with TPM).

Incidently, I would say McClane's wisease attitude was more central to the appeal of the Die Hards than any of Indy's personality traits are to these films.

[jaguar007]

I don't know how anyone could say Indiana Jones is an unmenorable character. He is the only movie character that consistantely outranks James Bond as the public's #1 favorite action/adventure hero in several surveys.

[HildebrandRarity]

Before anyone here (a lovefest thread for Indy) nails me to the board I have to qualify why i've been less than enthusiastic about this film. [Before I do, i'll say that I am going to see it opening weekend...and I really liked Raiders and Last Crusade.]

So, here goes:

Philosophically speaking, I am an opponent of having an aging/old actor playing an action/adventure hero side-kicked by some snot-nosed 19 year old so that the studio in question can make a 'connection' with the teen demographic.

That to me is a cowardly way of delivering a blockbuster. That to me is a full dilution of the essence of the character that originally moved audiences to come see him, and him alone. That to me smacks of intellectual dishonesty. That to me smacks of an admittance by the producers that the hero, on his own, is unsellable...that it (the movie) won't be bought on the wings of the original hero's own cachet. That, let's throw in a 19 year-old so we, the studio, can play it safe and not alienate the 14 to 21 year olds.

It happened with LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD and it's happening here.

And i'm simply not a fan of such an idea.

I don't expect people here to understand what i'm trying to say. Fine. It's a personal preferrence. I want my heroes to be able to stand on their own feet and I want the studio that bank-rolls the film to have faith, *some* faith, in either the confidence of the character itself or the confidence of it's audience to deliver the goods with-out a dilution...the dilution of having a puppy as a side-kick...the puppy being a stupid punk teen...the teen being there only to 'help bring in the demographic'.

So there you have it. I abhore the idea of a Shia Lebuff, or whatever his name is, in a movie like this. Let Indy stand on his own...now that would be bold, wouldn't it?

People here are so cought up in a new Indy film...They have fond memeories of watching the films growing up. Fine, and that's how it should be. But I have a different view and each of us are entitled to that view. And the view is that Indy 4 ought not to have been sold to audiences with a punk in tow.

The day James Bond is played by a 60 plus year old with a 19 year-old side kick is the day I sell my Rolex, BMW, and everything that has anything to do with the Eon Bond. I'm betting that ain't gonna happen.

[kneelbeforezod]

I seem to remember THE PHANTOM MENACE getting an awful lot of rave reviews on the eve of its release. Just sayin'.

Hmmm I remember the exact opposite. I was crushed when I started hearing all the negative reviews for that film. I went into it praying they were all wrong. Sadly, they weren't

And I'd agree that Indy isn't a memorable character, at least not to the degree that Bond is. Indy just happens to get caught up in amazing adventures, that's all. He's a bit of a blank canvas, lacking the personality or spark of, say, Bond or Rocky.

Loomis, theres no doubt that you are one of the Yodas of this site, but that is pure insanity . Blank canvas! How anyone could watch Raiders and say that is beyond me. I mean okay, he's not Daniel Plainview, but in the world of action heroes he more than holds his own with the likes of Bond and Rocky.

Edited by kneelbeforezod, 18 May 2008 - 09:54 PM.

[Loomis]

Philosophically speaking, I am an opponent of having an aging/old actor playing an action/adventure hero side-kicked by some snot-nosed 19 year old so that the studio in question can make a 'connection' with the teen demographic.

That to me is a cowardly way of delivering a blockbuster. That to me is a full dilution of the essence of the character that originally moved audiences to come see him, and him alone. That to me smacks of intellectual dishonesty. That to me smacks of an admittance by the producers that the hero, on his own, is unsellable...that it (the movie) won't be bought on the wings of the original hero's own cachet. That, let's throw in a 19 year-old so we, the studio, can play it safe and not alienate the 14 to 21 year olds.

It happened with LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD and it's happening here.

And i'm simply not a fan of such an idea.

I don't expect people here to understand what i'm trying to say. Fine. It's a personal preferrence. I want my heroes to be able to stand on their own feet and I want the studio that bank-rolls the film to have faith, *some* faith, in either the confidence of the character itself or the confidence of it's audience to deliver the goods with-out a dilution...the dilution of having a puppy as a side-kick...the puppy being a stupid punk teen...the teen being there only to 'help bring in the demographic'.

So there you have it. I abhore the idea of a Shia Lebuff, or whatever his name is, in a movie like this. Let Indy stand on his own...now that would be bold, wouldn't it?

Agreed with all that. Sidekicks never work. Thank goodness Stallone didn't have one for this year's RAMBO, and it's a road that Rambo could so, so easily have gone down (and I imagine that studio execs were pleading for it). All they needed to do was enlarge the role of Schoolboy, get some up-and-coming teen idol like Shia to play him, and bingo.

There's actually a teen sidekick - of sorts - for the Italian Stallion in ROCKY BALBOA, but he's hardly in the movie at all, and he isn't on the posters, and you wouldn't even know about him if you hadn't seen the film. At least Stallone, for one, knows how to keep the focus - rightly - on the star of the franchise, the character people have loved for decades and want to see. (Rambo was originally going to have a sidekick in RAMBO: FIRST BLOOD PART II, but Sly wisely nixed the idea.)

And it's not just teen sidekicks that ruin franchises - for me, DIE HARD 3 was diluted by the co-starring status of Samuel L. Jackson's character. I wanted to see McClane as one man against the world again, not to endure the spectacle of the series trying for some strange reason to be LETHAL WEAPON. LETHAL WEAPON 4 was almost-but-not-quite marred by Chris Rock. And LAST CRUSADE was definitely hampered by Connery, and I speak as a Bond fan who considers Connery the greatest 007 of all time!

I seem to remember THE PHANTOM MENACE getting an awful lot of rave reviews on the eve of its release. Just sayin'.

Hmmm I remember the exact opposite. I was crushed when I started hearing all the negative reviews for that film. I went into it praying they were all wrong. Sadly, they weren't

And I'd agree that Indy isn't a memorable character, at least not to the degree that Bond is. Indy just happens to get caught up in amazing adventures, that's all. He's a bit of a blank canvas, lacking the personality or spark of, say, Bond or Rocky.

Loomis, theres no doubt that you are one of the Yodas of this site, but that is pure insanity . Blank canvas! How anyone could watch Raiders and say that is beyond me. I mean okay, he's not Daniel Plainview, but in the world of action heroes he more than holds his own with the likes of Bond and Rocky.

Okay, I'll give you RAIDERS, but I do find Indy a blank canvas (read: boring) in TEMPLE and CRUSADE. Actually, I'm holding out hope that the character will be rather more interesting in CRYSTAL, being as how the new film supposedly addresses the ageing issue.

As for THE PHANTOM MENACE, okay, perhaps I'm overstating it when I talk about "an awful lot of rave reviews", but I do recall that The Sun praised it to the skies just a couple of days before it opened (okay, The Sun....), and I seem to remember Empire giving it the maximum ***** rating.

[HildebrandRarity]

Yes, Loomis, you are 100 percent correct in your views regarding Stalone w Rambo and Rocky, Die Hard 3 w Sam Jackson, Sean Connery w Indy 3. Have I forgotten anything, my friend?