2519 replies to this topic

[marktmurphy]

[quote name='Judo chop' post='878497' date='10 June 2008 - 20:53'][quote name='Safari Suit' post='877683' date='7 June 2008 - 03:34']I thought this was a lethargic, slapdash bore. More or less DOA and it never really picked up. A couple of nice action scenes. [/quote]
Unfortunately, I think it

[stromberg]

Personally, I found the better on repeat viewings, but also thet it's enough after the third time.
Might give it a fourth one, but only if I can can catch an English screening somewhere over here.

My only complaint would be that we didn't get an Indy movie set during WWII. Them talking, very little, about the missions Indy was in durning the war really made me interested to see them.

The brief mention of "Flensburg" in his talk gives an interesting background for a possible story: Flensburg, Germany's northernmost town, was the hideaway of the last German Reich Government under Karl D

[Judo chop]

[quote name='marktmurphy' post='878546' date='10 June 2008 - 16:42'][quote name='Judo chop' post='878497' date='10 June 2008 - 20:53'][quote name='Safari Suit' post='877683' date='7 June 2008 - 03:34']I thought this was a lethargic, slapdash bore. More or less DOA and it never really picked up. A couple of nice action scenes. [/quote]
Unfortunately, I think it

[marktmurphy]

Fair points.

I think it's very enjoyable and sits alongside the previous Indy films very well. That said, I think it's the weakest, but the weakest in a strong series isn't a bad film. You'll enjoy it, but you might not need to see it again for a while.
I've seen it twice, and my opinion of it didn't diminish after the first viewing; it's still good and rattles along nicely. In fact, I think you're more likely to enjoy it more the next time as you've had time to get used to any of the surprises (and disappointments: because no matter how good a film is, if you've been waiting for it for twenty years, you'll be disappointed) and just enjoy it as it is.

[Harmsway]

The Frank Darabont draft has finally leaked, and in a big way. So how is INDIANA JONES AND THE CITY OF THE GODS? Find out for yourself:

Indiana Jones and the City of the Gods by Frank Darabont

I can see why Steven was so excited about this draft, comparing it to ROBIN & MARIAN and things like that. It's a really strong read, aside from some occasional places. It could have been the best since RAIDERS by a large margin... had Spielberg really given it his all. If he'd directed it in the same way he directed KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL, I don't know that it would have been all that and a bag of chips.

Still, I think the ending is infinitely more interesting than what we got in KINGDOM. Darabont handles the aliens quite well indeed.

[marktmurphy]

oh wow- thanks for that! Can't wait to read it!

[marktmurphy]

I'm not far in but I'm loving it so far. It has one thing that Crystal Skull was missing: a sense of danger. And this version actually uses the whole Indy-accused-of-being-a-Communist-thing, which works really well.

[DamnCoffee]

WOW.... thanks for this.

[Harmsway]

A lot of fans over at TheRaider think this script is weaker than what Koepp eventually turned in. It's getting roasted.

I strongly disagree. It's certainly as zany as KINGDOM, if not zanier (which, for me, isn't necessarily a bad thing), but it's also darker, and there's a far better sense of character, suspense, and genuine excitement than there ever was in KINGDOM.

[Andrew]

I'm only at the part where Indy just arrives in Peru and I can already say I find it superior to and more enjoyable than KotCS.

[Harmsway]

I'm only at the part where Indy just arrives in Peru and I can already say I find it superior to and more enjoyable than KotCS.

I think it just about handles every aspect better.

It's still just as over-the-top as KINGDOM, with all the big stunts and zany story elements, but they all fit better into a much more satisfying ride because of how much better the characters are handled.

And as overt as some of the trilogy references are, I love them. I think the scene with the drunk Indiana Jones in the museum is a riot, and a touching character moment, to boot.

[Andrew]

I haven't finished it yet but here's my thoughts:

I feel that it fits better with the original trilogy than KotCS. To me, it feels like a hybrid of RotLK and ToD with some LC thrown in, which is a perfect combination to me. I also feel that the Indy/Marion scenes are better written in this draft (although my favorite part of KotCS was Indy's line "They weren't you, honey" which I don't believe is in this draft). The action scenes seem to be superior as well, as long as they wouldn't be CGI-ed to hell like in KotCS.

My favorite scene so far is the club and hotel scenes in Peru where Indy re-encounters Marion, which seems much more effective than in KotCS.

This script seems to have a sense of compelling exotic adventure (and danger, as others have pointed out) that I felt was missing in KotCS.

Another solid point: no son of Indy angle...hooray!

If Spielberg was on top of his game and if they executed this properly, I think this would have been a very solid film. I can't believe that the Indy diehards are bashing it. Did they really prefer KotCS?

Another interesting point is that for some reason I cannot help but to picture young Indy rather than old Indy while reading it...odd...

I'll give another update once I've finished it.

[Harmsway]

I feel that it fits better with the original trilogy than KotCS. To me, it feels like a hybrid of RotLK and ToD with some LC thrown in, which is a perfect combination to me.

I agree. Even though KINGDOM was packed with references to previous films, CITY OF THE GODS feels like a much more successful "tie-up" for the franchise.

If Spielberg was on top of his game and if they executed this properly, I think this would have been a very solid film. I can't believe that the Indy diehards are bashing it. Did they really prefer KotCS?

I guess they do. Or at least they don't think it's any better. Most of them just hate the moments like the fridge and the waterfalls, which are still here (and the fact that there's a giant snake scene can't have been much better). However, I do think a lot of fans are ignoring how much better those elements are handled here.

[marktmurphy]

And as overt as some of the trilogy references are, I love them. I think the scene with the drunk Indiana Jones in the museum is a riot, and a touching character moment, to boot.

Yeah, I think that's great. I think I'd heard of the Idol popping again and it sounded like a bit of an irritating back reference, but reading it I think it works surprisingly well, along with all the other Raiders references (of which there are quite a few).
The action's great, there's a real feel of danger, and the skull is actually mysterious for most of the movie instead of being blown right at the beginning of the show.

I do think that KOTCS has merits, though: the villain's a bit stronger, I think the opening is a little cleaner and more streamlined, and I actually think the Mutt/Indy thinking life has passed him by plotline makes KOTCS a bit more personal. KOTCS does have that scene with the Dean where they lament life taking things away, which sets up the discovery of Indy's family later in the film: COTG doesn't really have that sense that this is an older Indy (apart from the little bit at the beginning where Indy says he's retired from adventure: but then I like the way that he's simply still Indiana Jones at the beginning of KOTCS with no putting-the-batsuit-back-on scene).

I think I prefer COTG so far, but I think it would be even better if elements from KOTCS were mixed in.

And I can't understand the Raven forums; how do you see the most recent post?

[Scottlee]

I saw it last night and I was quite impressed. It was better than I thought it would be, but the slight cheesiness of some of the action places it slightly below the original trilogy in terms of overal quality. There were also far too many companions helping Indy in the final third of the film for my liking. That said, for the most part it was a very entertaining ride. The magnetic alien thing worked very well for me, as did the relationship between Indy and Mr young guy, whose name I forget.

It's just a slight shame the light-heartedness killed a lot of the potential tension. For example, when Indy is in danger of drowning in quicksand, it would be nice if he was fretting a bit (like when the spike ceiling was coming down of old) rather than having a debate with Marion over something. There were several instances of this and it's a shame. Not bad a film though. Not bad.

[MkB]

Saw it last week, at last, and I enjoyed myself.

Of course, the film has flaws. There are some loose ends in the script, and waaaaaaay too much underwhelming CGI (why the monkeys, really?), but Harrison Ford looks good even at 65, and Shia LaBeouf is not bad either in the role. It's sometimes a silly movie, but in a funny way and over all it's entertaining.

It made me think about DAD, in some ways: a kind of homage film filled with references, and a poor use of the CGI. I am to the Indy franchise what the general audience can be to Bond films (someone who has seen the movies with pleasure, maybe several times along the years, but doesn't know them by heart and has no other knowledge of the series), so I guess I felt like the general audience may have feel about DAD: they enjoyed themselves, despite the silly bits. Maybe fans are overcritical

PS.: I was yet disappointed by the poor design of the main prop of the film, the Crystal skull: it looks like a cheap plastic thing stuffed with crumpled plastic film... It was way too obvious, seeing how the characters manipulated it, that the thing weighed about 1 lb, instead of the at least 20 lbs of a crystal piece of this size.

[DamnCoffee]

For those in the UK, Legend of the Crystal Skull is on Channel 5. There is a lost city! Indiana Jones 4 isn't as unrealistic as one may think.

[HildebrandRarity]

I've seen the movie close to 5 or 6 times now, and I have to say, it's generally improved on repeat viewings for me.

You've paid for those viewings, I presume?

Only the first two were theatrical (and I only paid for one of those).

I'm totally amazed that someone here is openly admitting to engaging in, or encouraging, piracy...and gleefully so.

[tambourineman]

I loved the film, it was pretty much everything I wanted from a new Indy film. I grew up with the originals and they were my favorite movies when I was a kid (probably still are) so I was looking forward to this film with a lot of excitement, and it delivered.

Harrison was excellent as Indy again. Still the same old Indy, but an older and wiser one. I liked the way that Indy had become more like his father was at the same age in Last Crusade. It was great to see Marion back, Spalko was a great villain, and I thought Mutt was a great addition to the cast.

I loved the story. Im a big fan of 1950's B movies, which helped. I thought mixing the legend of El Dorado with the crystal skulls and the Chariots Of The Gods theory and making it all into a homage to 1950's drive-in B movies was a stroke of genius. Loved it. Dont see why anyone had a problem with the aliens either, I think the Nazca lines/ancient astronaut theories fit the Indy universe like a glove, especially an Indy movie set in the 50's at the height of UFO hysteria and sci-fi films.

The action scenes were great. Sometimes they got a little over-the-top, but its Indy. The nuclear town, the bike chase, the graveyard fight (I really liked that one especially the blowpipe), the quicksand, the jungle chase, the ants, the fight at the lost city, all great. Only thing I could have done without was the Tarzan scene).

Overall, I found it a fun and exciting adventure film that was everything I wanted from it. And Im glad they tried doing something a little different rather then just doing Raiders mkIII. The movie acts as both a great new Indy film and a clever resurrection of both 1950's sci-fi films as well as Indy's traditional 30's serial roots. Cant wait to revisit it on DVD.

[AngryPolarBear]

nt see why anyone had a problem with the aliens either, I think the Nazca lines/ancient astronaut theories fit the Indy universe like a glove, especially an Indy movie set in the 50's at the height of UFO hysteria and sci-fi films.

I liked the idea. Did not care to much for the execution though.

[DamnCoffee]

Indy IV Gross - Worldwide: $720,078,249.

[marktmurphy]

Is that good? I don't know what yer average blockbuster gets.

[Harmsway]

Is that good? I don't know what yer average blockbuster gets.

Yes. It's very good indeed.

[Shadow Syndicate]

Heres the thread I started on the Raven...Haters threadIt's got a decent amount of Indy fan's who absolutly hate it, as well as the reasons why

Edited by Shadow Syndicate, 07 July 2008 - 12:23 AM.

[Judo chop]

Saw it. Didn't like it. Not very good at all. Probably the worst entry of the series, though I'm willing to give it the chance to climb over TEMPLE OF DOOM at some point.

'Review' posted in the general film thread.

[[dark]]

The Sunday Times interviewed George Lucas about The Clone Wars, and landed this snippet over a possible fifth Indiana Jones film.

"We were hoping for box-office figures like that, which is, ultimately, with inflation, what the others have done, within 10% ... So, we squeaked up there. Really, though, it was a challenge getting the story together and getting everybody to agree on it. Indiana Jones only becomes complicated when you have another two people saying 'I want it this way' and 'I want it that way', whereas, when I first did Jones, I just said, 'We'll do it this way' - and that was much easier. But now I have to accommodate everybody, because they are all big, successful guys, too, so it's a little hard on a practical level.

"If I can come up with another idea that they like, we'll do another. Really, with the last one, Steven wasn't that enthusiastic. I was trying to persuade him. But now Steve is more amenable to doing another one. Yet we still have the issues about the direction we’d like to take. I'm in the future; Steven's in the past. He's trying to drag it back to the way they were, I'm trying to push it to a whole different place. So, still we have a sort of tension. This recent one came out of that. It's kind of a hybrid of our own two ideas, so we'll see where we are able to take the next one."

Unless there's a good narrative reason to do so (and there wasn't with Crystal Skull), then I'd rather it didn't happen. Of course, if it does, I'll still be there, front and centre.

[Harmsway]

The Sunday Times interviewed George Lucas about The Clone Wars, and landed this snippet over a possible fifth Indiana Jones film.

"We were hoping for box-office figures like that, which is, ultimately, with inflation, what the others have done, within 10% ... So, we squeaked up there. Really, though, it was a challenge getting the story together and getting everybody to agree on it. Indiana Jones only becomes complicated when you have another two people saying 'I want it this way' and 'I want it that way', whereas, when I first did Jones, I just said, 'We'll do it this way' - and that was much easier. But now I have to accommodate everybody, because they are all big, successful guys, too, so it's a little hard on a practical level.

"If I can come up with another idea that they like, we'll do another. Really, with the last one, Steven wasn't that enthusiastic. I was trying to persuade him. But now Steve is more amenable to doing another one. Yet we still have the issues about the direction we’d like to take. I'm in the future; Steven's in the past. He's trying to drag it back to the way they were, I'm trying to push it to a whole different place. So, still we have a sort of tension. This recent one came out of that. It's kind of a hybrid of our own two ideas, so we'll see where we are able to take the next one."

Those comments explain so much about KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL.

[DamnCoffee]

I'm in the future; Steven's in the past. He's trying to drag it back to the way they were, I'm trying to push it to a whole different place.

That's what the problem is, why bother changing the formula when that is what made the first three what they are? I hate this man, I wish he would just stop ing everything up!

[Harmsway]

That's what the problem is, why bother changing the formula when that is what made the first three what they are?

Because it's repetitive. KINGDOM's #1 problem wasn't that it wasn't enough like the originals, it's that it wasn't distinct enough. It just felt like a retread. Lucas is right... if these films are going to continue, they need to go to new places.

There was the opportunity for a really exciting, interesting Indy sequel with KINGDOM, but it wasn't taken.

[[dark]]

KINGDOM's #1 problem wasn't that it wasn't enough like the originals, it's that it wasn't distinct enough. It just felt like a retread. Lucas is right... if these films are going to continue, they need to go to new places.

Absolutely.

That's my big issue with all these 80s and 90s franchise ressurrections. There needs to be a valid reason for bringing these characters back. Retreading previous adventures generally doesn't cut it. It reeks of money-hunting, rather than an artistic desire to continue these characters' stories.

Indy's return didn't add anything new (other than CGI), whereas, say, Rocky Balboa's did (or so I'm led to believe; I never saw the film). John McClane's comeback was an entertaining update, but didn't particularly add anything to the saga. And I'll be disappointed if Mulder and Scully's return gives us more of the same.

But back to Indy - any concerns over Harrison Ford's age will surely rear their head again, should a fifth film go ahead, and possibly be justified. Unless the character focus shifts toward Mutt. But that would be, er, lame.

There was the opportunity for a really exciting, interesting Indy sequel with KINGDOM, but it wasn't taken.

Exactly. It's disappointing. The "comeback films" become more of a footnote to the series, rather than a new addition.