2519 replies to this topic

[Mr Teddy Bear]

It severely damages the character and franchise to end things with such a whimper instead of a bang. Imagine if ROCKY BALBOA had been as pisspoor as ROCKY V - Stallone would have had to change his name and go into hiding because of the embarrassment.

I hate to be blunt, but if Rocky Balboa was on the same quality level as Rocky V, nobody would've cared, as is the case now. Might be different in the US, but there would've been no public outcry about a film most people had no time for in the first place.

Some twenty years in development, INDY 4 was probably the most eagerly-anticipated film of all time.

Every big upcoming film is the most 'eagerly-anticipated film of all time.'TM (darn, how do I do that thing properly?)

And I see no evidence that the ire for it will fade over time or that it will somehow go up in people's estimation. There will be no OHMSS-ish re-evaluation of this flick. People won't realise they were "wrong" about it.

I agree. What I predict will happen is the memories of the pitiful "Oh my child hood raped!" internet filth will subdue and the public opinion will remain the same. That is, they will see it as a disappointing, but enjoyable effort. Harmless as Harmsway said.

Edited by Mr Teddy Bear, 27 January 2009 - 10:22 AM.

[Judo chop]

I agree.

It’ll become the GODFATHER III of Indy, over the years garnering a kind of a ‘WTF was the point?’ response from the diehard fans, if it hasn’t already. People will continue to talk about the magnificence of RAIDERS, a few will throw in CRUSADE alongside it, and most will talk about KOTCS the way they talk about TEMPLE, waving it away with their hand as an afterthought.

“Nah… not too good. Raiders was the best.”

[Harmsway]

It severely damages the character and franchise to end things with such a whimper instead of a bang.

Was LAST CRUSADE that much of an improvement?

And I see no evidence that the ire for it will fade over time or that it will somehow go up in people's estimation. There will be no OHMSS-ish re-evaluation of this flick. People won't realise they were "wrong" about it.

That's not what I'm suggesting. I'm suggesting that people won't care about it (which is almost more damning than what you're suggesting, I daresay). It'll be the fourth little film that everybody's apathetic to, remembering as the one that's "not that good," and that will be that.

You speak as if we all agree that Rocky Balboa is a great film! I would describe that as 'harmless' too: nice to see and there's nothing wrong with it, but it's merely an epilogue to a story that had already finished.

Indeed.

What I predict will happen is the memories of the pitiful "Oh my child hood raped!" internet filth will subdue and the public opinion will remain the same. That is, they will see it as a disappointing, but enjoyable effort. Harmless as Harmsway said.

People will continue to talk about the magnificence of RAIDERS, a few will throw in CRUSADE alongside it, and most will talk about KOTCS the way they talk about TEMPLE, waving it away with their hand as an afterthought.

Exactly.

[DLibrasnow]

Great news. The Indiana Jones movies will all be available in high definition on Blu-ray disc sometime in 2009.

Sources:

Indiana Jones original trilogy to come to Blu-ray in 2009

Cover art for Indiana Jones trilogy on Blu-ray

[Harmsway]

Let's hope the Blu-Ray of RAIDERS doesn't feature the glaring CGI touch-up that was part of the High Definition television broadcast of the trilogy from not too long ago. Ugh.

[Turn]

Great news. The Indiana Jones movies will all be available in high definition on Blu-ray disc sometime in 2009.

Sources:

Indiana Jones original trilogy to come to Blu-ray in 2009

Cover art for Indiana Jones trilogy on Blu-ray

That is great news. Indy is one of the series I've most wanted to upgrade to in Blu-ray. I guess that means I'll have to take Crystal Skull along with it.

Let's hope the Blu-Ray of RAIDERS doesn't feature the glaring CGI touch-up that was part of the High Definition television broadcast of the trilogy from not too long ago. Ugh.

Remember these are George's movies and not for the fans. He'll do what he likes with them.

[Harmsway]

Remember these are George's movies and not for the fans.

Well, they're as much Spielberg's movies as they are George's (and in an interview, Spielberg actually claimed that they were ultimately more his than George's). I'm kind of surprised Spielberg's letting him toy with the flicks like that.

He'll do what he likes with them.

Sure, but I reserve the right to complain about it.

[DLibrasnow]

Remember these are George's movies and not for the fans.

Well, they're as much Spielberg's movies as they are George's (and in an interview, Spielberg actually claimed that they were ultimately more his than George's). I'm kind of surprised Spielberg's letting him toy with the flicks like that.

Sure, and for all Spielberg's claims that they were going to do as many in the camera (ie old-style) effects as possible in KOTCS, there sure seemed to be a lot of CGI in the movie I saw.

Still, I'll be snapping up these original trilogy Blu-rays the day they hit the streets.

[Harmsway]

Sure, and for all Spielberg's claims that they were going to do as many in the camera (ie old-style) effects as possible in KOTCS, there sure seemed to be a lot of CGI in the movie I saw.

The special effects folks for KINGDOM commented that Spielberg's attitudes towards special effects changed significantly once he actually got down to shooting and started gravitating towards more CGI effects because it allowed his on-set whims to be indulged pretty easily.

When you get down to it, KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL really was a slap-dash production. The script was in a constant state of late rewrites, and plenty of stuff was being changed on set. Spielberg even stated that he didn't immaculately storyboard it like the previous Indy films. It's clear watching the docs on the DVD that Spielberg's heart wasn't really in it (and is shockingly none too complimentary in his comments about Lucas).

I do think that INDY IV would have been in much better shape had they made INDIANA JONES AND THE CITY OF THE GODS back in '02/'03, as Spielberg really wanted to do. He was incredibly excited for that one, hyping it up as the "Best since RAIDERS!" and such. A lot changed in his attitude towards the project over the next four or so years, and it's clear from his comments about KINGDOM that he wasn't too bowled over by making it.

Oh well. Missed opportunity.

[marktmurphy]

Let's hope the Blu-Ray of RAIDERS doesn't feature the glaring CGI touch-up that was part of the High Definition television broadcast of the trilogy from not too long ago. Ugh.

Ooh I didn't hear about that; what an odd thing to do. The original shot is pretty rubbish but I wouldn't have bothered doing it again.

Blu Ray, though- that's exciting.

[Safari Suit]

I can't really see the difference. The truck falls slower?

[marktmurphy]

I can't really see the difference. The truck falls slower?

It's a completely different rockface (done in CGI I suppose although youtube makes it a bit too murky to see) and the camera descends with the jeep rather than just panning down (watch the road at the top as the camera moves down).
Perhaps the original matte looked ropey in hi def and they had to redo it? But got overexcited, obviously.

Will the end warehouse shot look okay? I saw an ILM book a few years which had the warehouse painting printed out and it really is surprisingly crude; just paint daubs in places.

[sharpshooter]

Let's hope the Blu-Ray of RAIDERS doesn't feature the glaring CGI touch-up that was part of the High Definition television broadcast of the trilogy from not too long ago. Ugh.

Agreed. Let's keep films (especially greats like Raiders) as they are!

[Turn]

When you get down to it, KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL really was a slap-dash production. The script was in a constant state of late rewrites, and plenty of stuff was being changed on set. Spielberg even stated that he didn't immaculately storyboard it like the previous Indy films. It's clear watching the docs on the DVD that Spielberg's heart wasn't really in it (and is shockingly none too complimentary in his comments about Lucas).

I do think that INDY IV would have been in much better shape had they made INDIANA JONES AND THE CITY OF THE GODS back in '02/'03, as Spielberg really wanted to do. He was incredibly excited for that one, hyping it up as the "Best since RAIDERS!" and such. A lot changed in his attitude towards the project over the next four or so years, and it's clear from his comments about KINGDOM that he wasn't too bowled over by making it.

Oh well. Missed opportunity.

This is what disappoints me so much about Kingdom. It feels like it's going through the motions and attempting to be crowd-pleasing without the magic that Spielberg brought to the original trilogy.

I still can't believe it took 19 years to come up with that.

[Harmsway]

It feels like it's going through the motions and attempting to be crowd-pleasing without the magic that Spielberg brought to the original trilogy.

It was going through the motions, pure and simple. Even with the same flimsy screenplay, a flick on the level of the two RAIDERS sequels could have been delivered if Spielberg really showed up and did his stuff.

I still can't believe it took 19 years to come up with that.

It's not that shocking when you consider that the script development was 15 or so years of constant battle over the screenplay. I'm amazed that the film got made at all, and the only reason it got made was because the players involved said, "Okay, we'll just compromise and get on with it."

And frankly, it's not like TEMPLE or CRUSADE would have fared much better had they come out in KINGDOM's place. Heck, TEMPLE received a rougher ride on release than KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL did. The Indiana Jones franchise has always been spotty. I can imagine more or less the same KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL coming out in 1991 pretty easily.

As I've said before, there was a time when INDY IV would probably have been great fun. Not anything brilliant, but a good time at the movies. And that was in 2002/3, when Spielberg was on board full-throttle and had a zany, but fun, screenplay to work from.

[Jim]

I agree.

It’ll become the GODFATHER III of Indy, over the years garnering a kind of a ‘WTF was the point?’ response from the diehard fans, if it hasn’t already. People will continue to talk about the magnificence of RAIDERS, a few will throw in CRUSADE alongside it, and most will talk about KOTCS the way they talk about TEMPLE, waving it away with their hand as an afterthought.

“Nah… not too good. Raiders was the best.”

Agreed. Just some film. Still strikes me as a pointless exercise but it's not something I feel offended by.

[Safari Suit]

Heck, TEMPLE received a rougher ride on release than KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL did.

Indeed. Someone on AICN (I think) made an interesting, but impossible to verify, observation that in 1984 "ver kids" loved Temple but the adults thought it was rubbish. Now those kids have grown up and they still love Temple but they couldn't stand Kingdom. Their kids, however, seem to love it. Maybe in 2025 when Indiana Jones and the Steel Wheels of the Great Beyond comes out the circle will have turned once more.

Though I personally genuinely believe that for all their faults both Temple and Crusade were much better, or at least much more enjoyable, films than Kingdom.

[marktmurphy]

There is more magic and wit in both Crusade and Temple, yeah. I personally think that the three Indys are all absolutely fantastic: compare them to each other and you can see a difference in quality, but compare them to any other action/adventure in the same vein and they stand head and shoulders above all of them. Skull ain't quite up there but it's decent enough to be part of the same series.
I watched the opening 20 mins of Skull again last night, and it has a quality to it that just makes me excited- it's very, very nicely made. Oddly I think it looks even better on DVD: the cinema screens I saw it on weren't bright enough and it has a very bright, even washed-out look to it, which when shown on a dark cinema screen makes it seem contrastless and pallid. Watching Skull makes me want another one: partly because it's got that watchable fun quality, and partly because there's clearly a potential there which isn't fully realised. I want Spielberg back.

[Turn]

Indeed. Someone on AICN (I think) made an interesting, but impossible to verify, observation that in 1984 "ver kids" loved Temple but the adults thought it was rubbish. Now those kids have grown up and they still love Temple but they couldn't stand Kingdom. Their kids, however, seem to love it. Maybe in 2025 when Indiana Jones and the Steel Wheels of the Great Beyond comes out the circle will have turned once more.

Though I personally genuinely believe that for all their faults both Temple and Crusade were much better, or at least much more enjoyable, films than Kingdom.

I was one of those kids. I was 17 when TOD came out. I went on opening day (surprisingly there weren't that many people there) and I left it thinking it was better than Raiders. I wasn't as excited the second time I saw it years later due more to the Willie Scott whining, but it's an Indiana Jones movie, he's the focus and the ride is great when you focus on that.

There is more magic and wit in both Crusade and Temple, yeah. I personally think that the three Indys are all absolutely fantastic: compare them to each other and you can see a difference in quality, but compare them to any other action/adventure in the same vein and they stand head and shoulders above all of them. Skull ain't quite up there but it's decent enough to be part of the same series.
I watched the opening 20 mins of Skull again last night, and it has a quality to it that just makes me excited- it's very, very nicely made. Oddly I think it looks even better on DVD: the cinema screens I saw it on weren't bright enough and it has a very bright, even washed-out look to it, which when shown on a dark cinema screen makes it seem contrastless and pallid. Watching Skull makes me want another one: partly because it's got that watchable fun quality, and partly because there's clearly a potential there which isn't fully realised. I want Spielberg back.

Agree completely about the original Indy trilogy standing above any other action series. It was these filmmakers at the top of their game. Having accomplished that, I guess Kingdom wa bound to have a bit of a letdown.

When I get the Blu-ray collection I will give Kingdom another spin and maybe I can glean some more excitment out of it. I watched nearly all of it when it came out on DVD a few months back and was less enthused than when I saw it in the cinema.

[Loomis]

I watched the opening 20 mins of Skull again last night, and it has a quality to it that just makes me excited- it's very, very nicely made.

Yeah, it starts very nicely, I'll give it that. Spielberg always seems to do killer first twenty/thirty minutes. It's rare to find one of his flicks that isn't a real grabber for the first reel or so.

[JimmyBond]

Am I the only one that didnt care too much for the opening? I love it up until they enter the wharehouse, and I enjoy it when he's escaping from the Russians, but the whole time he's leading them around looking for the Alien? I just find that slow and tedious, it takes forever to get to the action.

I should probably see the movie again, I saw it once in theaters and loved it, then saw it on DVD and felt it was pretty mediocre, probably just because I believed the hype I was giving myself after seeing it for the first time. Perhaps a third viewing will put it on middle ground.

[Mr Teddy Bear]

Am I the only one that didnt care too much for the opening? I love it up until they enter the wharehouse, and I enjoy it when he's escaping from the Russians, but the whole time he's leading them around looking for the Alien? I just find that slow and tedious, it takes forever to get to the action.

I feel the same. It's just the 3 or 4 minutes in the warehouse itself that drag the first act down a notch, which is still great IMO. The whole time I'm sitting there waiting for all the shenanigans we saw from the trailer to start, like Indy not taking a hit from the ten machine guns firing at him.

[Shadow Syndicate]

Shortround>Mutt. That's all I can say

"No time for rove Doctah Jones!"

And I can honestly say I was creeped out during Temple of Doom. And Indy is just way more of a bad in it. Indy hardly throws any punches in Crystal Skull, let alone fire his gun

[marktmurphy]

Am I the only one that didnt care too much for the opening? I love it up until they enter the wharehouse, and I enjoy it when he's escaping from the Russians, but the whole time he's leading them around looking for the Alien? I just find that slow and tedious, it takes forever to get to the action.

I feel the same. It's just the 3 or 4 minutes in the warehouse itself that drag the first act down a notch, which is still great IMO. The whole time I'm sitting there waiting for all the shenanigans we saw from the trailer to start, like Indy not taking a hit from the ten machine guns firing at him.

Isn't that a bit like complaining that we have to sit through all the boring temple stuff in Raiders before we get to the fun rolling boulder part? You've got to have the build-up in order for the pay-off to, er, pay off.

[Harmsway]

Isn't that a bit like complaining that we have to sit through all the boring temple stuff in Raiders before we get to the fun rolling boulder part? You've got to have the build-up in order for the pay-off to, er, pay off.

To an extent, but I have to confess that I don't really like the build-up here. The temple stuff in RAIDERS was fascinating to watch, with booby traps, etc. Indy walking around tossing gunpowder about in a warehouse isn't quite on the same level.

But I do think it's silly to complain about. It's a brief few harmless moments, and as soon as Indy starts his escape, it's a cracklin' good time up through the Doomtown bit.

[Judo chop]

Isn't that a bit like complaining that we have to sit through all the boring temple stuff in Raiders before we get to the fun rolling boulder part? You've got to have the build-up in order for the pay-off to, er, pay off.

To an extent, but I have to confess that I don't really like the build-up here. The temple stuff in RAIDERS was fascinating to watch, with booby traps, etc. Indy walking around tossing gunpowder about in a warehouse isn't quite on the same level.

But I do think it's silly to complain about. It's a brief few harmless moments, and as soon as Indy starts his escape, it's a cracklin' good time up through the Doomtown bit.

Harmy. From memory it’s the best action sequence of the film, but do you really think anything in KINGDOM reaches cracklin’ status?

(Unless we’re counting the cracklin’ of my retinas during the outdoor shots.)

Never mind, I suppose. I’ve expressed my opinion of this one enough and I don't really feel the need to get all nitpicky. It’s just that your descriptor surprised me.

[Harmsway]

Harmy. From memory it’s the best action sequence of the film, but do you really think anything in KINGDOM reaches cracklin’ status?

The Doomtown bit, sure.

Everything else, probably not.

[Mr Teddy Bear]

Am I the only one that didnt care too much for the opening? I love it up until they enter the wharehouse, and I enjoy it when he's escaping from the Russians, but the whole time he's leading them around looking for the Alien? I just find that slow and tedious, it takes forever to get to the action.

I feel the same. It's just the 3 or 4 minutes in the warehouse itself that drag the first act down a notch, which is still great IMO. The whole time I'm sitting there waiting for all the shenanigans we saw from the trailer to start, like Indy not taking a hit from the ten machine guns firing at him.

Isn't that a bit like complaining that we have to sit through all the boring temple stuff in Raiders before we get to the fun rolling boulder part? You've got to have the build-up in order for the pay-off to, er, pay off.

The temple stuff in Raiders wasn't boring though, was it?

[marktmurphy]

Isn't that a bit like complaining that we have to sit through all the boring temple stuff in Raiders before we get to the fun rolling boulder part? You've got to have the build-up in order for the pay-off to, er, pay off.

To an extent, but I have to confess that I don't really like the build-up here. The temple stuff in RAIDERS was fascinating to watch, with booby traps, etc. Indy walking around tossing gunpowder about in a warehouse isn't quite on the same level.

On repeated viewings no, but for the first time it's effective enough. It's not as being captured by Russians and using impossibly magnetized flying gunpowder to find the corpse of an alien in a military base is something that happens to me every day, anyway! I certainly wouldn't call it boring. Once we've seen it once and know what's happening it doesn't have as much tension or excitment as the Idol's Temple, but it's built on intrigue; which obviously dissapates once we know what's going to happen.

But I do think it's silly to complain about. It's a brief few harmless moments, and as soon as Indy starts his escape, it's a cracklin' good time up through the Doomtown bit.

Definitely- I think it's even more exciting once we're in Doomtown. That's a great idea for an action sequence. sadly it's the last time that Indy's in real scary peril in the whole film, but it's a cracking twenty minutes.

[Mr Teddy Bear]

LucasArts have released some information about the new Indy game:

http://www.theraider...mes.php?id=1021

It looks more horrible than I would've guessed. I mean, it looks graphically worse than Emperor's Tomb, a 6 year old PS2 game. Truly shoddy work there.

However, a bright spot is that it seems you can unlock the full version of Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis within the game! That alone may make it worth it after a price drop.

Edited by Mr Teddy Bear, 04 February 2009 - 04:11 AM.