2519 replies to this topic

[DamnCoffee]

2:36 on the last video. He makes an hilarious, yet valid point.

[Loomis]

He's very funny, but to criticise the cartoonish and unbelievable aspects of CRYSTAL SKULL is to miss the point. The reason it's a bad film is because it's incredibly dull. That's it. That's the only thing that's wrong with it. Unfortunately, the dullness is so deep and so absolute that it kills the whole thing.

This guy goes on about how much he loves TEMPLE OF DOOM, but why isn't he criticising it for, say, the inflatable life raft sequence? (And did those things even exist in the early 1930s?) If CRYSTAL SKULL is silly and full of physics- and logic-defying things that don't make sense, so are the other movies. And, hell, so they should be - it's a key part of the goofy, eye-rolling charm of Indy Jones.

I mean, I think he's absolutely right that CRYSTAL SKULL is a complete piece of that isn't even worth watching, but I don't follow his reasoning.

[Matt_13]

Funny as hell, but I agree with Loomis. It wasn't the plot or the characters that were the problems. It was the cheap look and poor script. Hopefully the next effort is something of a redemption.

[DamnCoffee]

Connery to return to 'Indiana Jones'?

Studio bosses are reportedly hoping that Sean Connery will return to the Indiana Jones franchise for the next film.

The 79-year-old veteran actor previously rejected the opportunity to reprise his role in the last instalment of the series, Indiana Jones And The Kingdom Of the Crystal Skull.

However, producers working on the fifth film of the hugely successful franchise are believed to be considering the idea of tempting Connery back with a major role in the new project, Contactmusic reports.

A source said: "Steven Spielberg has been working on a script with George Lucas and there is an element of the story that could see Sean returning. Anything is possible in these movies and if Sean wants to return he will become central to the new story."

Earlier this week, Harrison Ford revealed that he would be happy to reprise his lead role in the franchise, as long as the script was "good enough".

Brilliant news. Now, if this is the case, Indiana Jones V will be a prequel, which means no Shia and no Marion! Brilliant.

[DamnCoffee]

Indiana Jones IV is on in the background, and I've picked up on something rather interesting.


After Indy goes on leave, he walks to the trainstation, a slow Raiders March playing. He walks to the train, turns round and gives a really saddened look. He ponders for a moment then gets on the train. It's as if it was Harrison Ford and John Williams' way of apologising to the audience. Because after that moment, Mutt appears and the whole movie goes downhill.



I mean listen to that! It's beautiful.

[Harmsway]

Brilliant news.

The source is ContactMusic, so it isn't news.

[Tybre]

Now, if this is the case, Indiana Jones V will be a prequel, which means no Shia and no Marion! Brilliant.

Aww, I was kind of hoping for Zombie Jones Sr.

[JimmyBond]

So Indiana Jones 4 paid homage to Alien flicks, would that mean Indy 5 is paying homage to zombie films?

[The Ghost Who Walks]

Connery to return to 'Indiana Jones'?

Studio bosses are reportedly hoping that Sean Connery will return to the Indiana Jones franchise for the next film.

The 79-year-old veteran actor previously rejected the opportunity to reprise his role in the last instalment of the series, Indiana Jones And The Kingdom Of the Crystal Skull.

However, producers working on the fifth film of the hugely successful franchise are believed to be considering the idea of tempting Connery back with a major role in the new project, Contactmusic reports.

A source said: "Steven Spielberg has been working on a script with George Lucas and there is an element of the story that could see Sean returning. Anything is possible in these movies and if Sean wants to return he will become central to the new story."

Earlier this week, Harrison Ford revealed that he would be happy to reprise his lead role in the franchise, as long as the script was "good enough".

Brilliant news. Now, if this is the case, Indiana Jones V will be a prequel, which means no Shia and no Marion! Brilliant.

I personally think this is as likely as seeing Connery playing Bond again. In a second remake of Thunderball. Directed by Elvis.

Wouldn't even be nice if it was true. Leave him dead, the last thing we need for Indy 5 is yet another member for "Team Indy". Having so many characters following Indy contributed to my dislike of the fourth film (I felt very sorry for John Hurt. What an awful "character" they give him!).

[marktmurphy]

Yes exactly, and I'd be really disappointed in Sean if he did it. If you're going to come back, do it with an important and grown-up film: no more comic book adventure stuff. I love Indy but I'd be worried if that's the film he wants as the curtain to close on his career with.

[The Ghost Who Walks]

Yes exactly, and I'd be really disappointed in Sean if he did it. If you're going to come back, do it with an important and grown-up film: no more comic book adventure stuff. I love Indy but I'd be worried if that's the film he wants as the curtain to close on his career with.

Well, any Indiana Jones movie would be a better close to such a distinguished career than League of Extraordinary Gentlemen.

[marktmurphy]

When you're knocking on 80 it's not really better enough to justify months of work on a draughty old movie set, though. Obviously any Indy movie is streets ahead of LXG, yes; but it's still not the right sort of thing.

[The Ghost Who Walks]

You're probably right about that.

I think it's kind of fitting that his second-last acting credit (on IMDb, anyway) is the From Russia With Love game. He rose to fame with Bond, "went out" with Bond.

[JimmyBond]

Having so many characters following Indy contributed to my dislike of the fourth film (I felt very sorry for John Hurt. What an awful "character" they give him!).

That was my criticism of the film as well. I actually enjoyed the film when it was just Mutt and Indy. Up until the point Indy is captured by the Russians at the camp it was a pretty fun film, in my opinion. Heck even having Marion back was neat, but then they had Mac and John Hurt following them around too. That was the point when it got a tad too crowded, especially considering that Mac didnt contribute anything to the movie, it was almost like they wanted to have an actor of Ray Winstone's calibur but couldnt figure out what to do with him (the double agent routine was ok, but then when he turned out to be a triple agent I rolled my eyes).

[The Ghost Who Walks]

Having so many characters following Indy contributed to my dislike of the fourth film (I felt very sorry for John Hurt. What an awful "character" they give him!).

That was my criticism of the film as well. I actually enjoyed the film when it was just Mutt and Indy. Up until the point Indy is captured by the Russians at the camp it was a pretty fun film, in my opinion.

Agreed completely. The whole movie went downhill very quickly after that.

[Harmsway]

Oxley and Mac could have very easily been streamlined out of the film. Neither, really, made much of a positive contribution in any way shape, or form.

It's my thinking that Indy should never be moving about with more than two allies at a time. A trio is fine. Any more is a crowd.

[Judo chop]

I like it just fine when he moves from ally to ally. It’s the ‘with’ that causes the problem.

In RAIDERS (the film by which all Indy films rightly are, and will ever be, judged) even after Marion appears in order to be his “goddamned partner”, he and she were not really bound together for that much time. They appear together for a few good solid character moments, but then she gets promptly whisked away and Indy’s left to adventure on his own.

And even when she is present with Indy during the action (Well of Souls), it's Indy having to compensate for her presence. Not to mention those moments provide some fun character moments as well. RAIDERS allies Marion and Sallah are just great characters.

I believe that's what was attempted with bringing on Connery's as Jones Sr. It's just a little too hokey to work as well. Same goes for 'Mutt'. Indy family was a bad idea.

[Tybre]

I always liked Senior, but then I've not seen a single pre-Skull movie since I was 13 or 14, and haven't seen an Indy movie since Skull. Mind may have changed.

[Harmsway]

I like it just fine when he moves from ally to ally. It’s the ‘with’ that causes the problem.

Sometimes. I don't mind the trio dynamic--in concept at least--in TEMPLE OF DOOM.

But I agree, it's better when these allies aren't around the whole time, and swap off rather than mob. Marion's off-stage for a large part of RAIDERS, and Sallah only appears for the Egyptian section. Thus things never escalate into a buddy affair (also notice that Indy's often a one-man show in RAIDERS' action sequences, something that's less true of the three sequels).

[JimmyBond]

I think the dynamic works in Temple because both Short Round and Willie Scott are given plenty of characterization. We really get to know both characters in the first half of the film, and that's why when it turns into a nonstop action affair in the second half we care for them (at least that's true in my case).

Last Crusade does falter a bit in this regard because Marcus Brody and Sallah arent really given much to do in said film. Both are used primarily for comic relief, but fortanetely they never really get in the way of the father/son theme the film is playing for.

Back to Skull, I think Mutt get's some great characterization at the start of the film but as more and more character's are introduced he gets lost in the shuffle. Marion barely gets by thanks to her backstory from Raiders, and poor John Hurt and Ray Winstone get lost in the shuffle. What a waste.

[Mr. Blofeld]

Who knew that, in 1951, Raiders was already playing on screens?

[DamnCoffee]

3:45...




Oh and...

[JimmyBond]

So Karen Allen's coming back? I just hope her character is better utilized.

If I see a huge cast for this film as was in the last, I'm not going to have very high expectations...let Indy adventure alone for a while, or limit his amount of sidekicks to one.

[DamnCoffee]

I'd rather Indiana Jones 5 and 6 (If it's made) to be prequels to KOTSC.

I'd prefer a fresh start, with no Mutt and no Marion. Bring George McHale back, 'cause Winstone was a great actor, and had great chemistry with Ford, but he was criminally underused in Skull.

[Harmsway]

A prequel would be good. A sequel could work, too, provided Marion and Mutt were either written out of it, or had mere cameo appearances.

Though who am I kidding? Spielberg won't stand for having them out of things in the sequel, and we'll end up with yet another huge ensemble stuffed with unnecessary characters, all of which are underdeveloped and used primarily as a means to fill the film with unfunny humor.

[Loomis]

Spielberg won't stand for having them out of things in the sequel, and we'll end up with yet another huge ensemble stuffed with unnecessary characters, all of which are underdeveloped and used primarily as a means to fill the film with unfunny humor.

And the reason to look forward to it is....?

[Harmsway]

Spielberg won't stand for having them out of things in the sequel, and we'll end up with yet another huge ensemble stuffed with unnecessary characters, all of which are underdeveloped and used primarily as a means to fill the film with unfunny humor.

And the reason to look forward to it is....?

For the handful of bright spots, those few moments of Indiana Jones magic that shine through, which may or may not be in greater supply than they were in KINGDOM. Otherwise--unless Spielberg surprises me, and he may well do so--there's not much to anticipate.

[Loomis]

Well, I'm pinning my hopes on MAD MAX: FURY ROAD instead.

[Harmsway]

Well, I'm pinning my hopes on MAD MAX: FURY ROAD instead.

If the very promising Tom Hardy takes the lead, I just might, too.

[Loomis]

I haven't seen the geezer in anything, although BRONSON is on my rental list and I eagerly await its arrival. Any recommendations?