Indiana Jones Rocked.

[CasioTech]

what a campy, stupid movie. I pray there will be no others. The story was alright but nobody wants to watch a 70 year old battle Russians and that stupid kid from all those stupid movies.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: Jeff7

Originally posted by: Passions
Isn't Indy immortal now? I thought once he poured the holy grail water on himself, he was immortal.

I think the effect only lasted as long as he stayed within some certain boundary.
So if you want to live forever, you'd have to stay in that crappy old place with the invisible bridge of faith, and the World's Largest Grail Collection.

I suppose you could get some contractors in though to spruce the place up a bit, and maybe get FIOS or something installed. You'd really need a good work-at-home job though.


Besides, what exactly would this "immortality" entail? Let's say he takes a direct hit from an RPG and is blasted into a chunky mist. Then what? Does the slurry come back together Terminator-style?

you'd have to live with that old-ass knight, too. I'm sure he's a barrel of laughs.

I'd prolly /wrist myself about 4 weeks into my eternal bliss.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile

Originally posted by: KingGheedora
Horrible movie. Let me recount the ways in which it sucked:

I just love how movies like this (from Liberal directors) enforce myopic American stereotypes of the rest of the world.

sorry. couldn't digest the rest of your post after this comment.

utter tripe, man.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: jjones

Originally posted by: Lifted
The worst of all the Indy movies. Not much in the way of bad guys, acting was bad but there wasn't much to do with the horrible script I guess. The movie just didn't flow and you never felt particularly scared or excited. The laughs were weak at best, I think I may have chuckled once, but it was probably forced.

Crusade - 10/10
Ark 9/10
Temple of Doom 6/10
Skull 4/10

I have no desire to ever see it again.

This pretty much sums it up for me except I would put Raiders above Crusade. I own the trilogy but won't be adding this crapfest to the collection. It was a stupid, weak plot with no character development, at best meagerly acted and numbly directed.

And I sure hope they don't plan on continuing the series with Shia LaDoof as the new Indiana Jones like they intimated at the end.

nah, Indy took his hat back, remember? as if it to say, "Don't step on my territory, punk-ass bitch!" If le-bouef actually put that hat on, then I would have gouged my own eyes out. They're done.

 

[sportage]

Too much effects and not enough creative plot.
Actually, this was just a film where they talked Ford into doing it
for much-o bucks to introduce a "new" Indy Jones (his son) and
thus the quest for more money.

This attempt at new continuation wont succeed.
No one has the personality of Ford, which is 90%
why the prev movies were hits.
Just sticking a new face in there will flop.
Besides, didn?t they already have an Indy Jones series
with a new kid that flopped some years ago?

Now... the crystal skull thing in itself could have made a nice
scifi flick, minus the Indy Jones stuff and pin head aliens.
But... they'd rather redo the old instead of something creative
and new.

Its all $$$, not quality in Hollywood today...
Sum-up <yawn>

 

[Polish3d]

Originally posted by: jjones

Originally posted by: Lifted
The worst of all the Indy movies. Not much in the way of bad guys, acting was bad but there wasn't much to do with the horrible script I guess. The movie just didn't flow and you never felt particularly scared or excited. The laughs were weak at best, I think I may have chuckled once, but it was probably forced.

Crusade - 10/10
Ark 9/10
Temple of Doom 6/10
Skull 4/10

I have no desire to ever see it again.

This pretty much sums it up for me except I would put Raiders above Crusade. I own the trilogy but won't be adding this crapfest to the collection. It was a stupid, weak plot with no character development, at best meagerly acted and numbly directed.
.

Same. They really could have done better and Lucas has been fucking up every masterpiece he's made with the cheesy goofy bs

 

[MrChad]

Meh, my wife and I thought it was ok. All the Indiana Jones movies are a bit campy and silly at times. I didn't have high expectations going in, but I thought it was a fun movie nonetheless.

 

[Delita]

Originally posted by: five40

Originally posted by: EvilYoda
I dunno, it'll take me a few days to digest what i just saw...aliens? seriously, that's the best you could come up with? I don't know if that sits well with me. First 1.5 hours = classic genius Indy. Last 30 minutes = oooooooh, look at what ILM can do.

Yeah I would agree. The first 1.5 hours was awesome. Over the top and a little cheesy but pretty much classic Indy. Once we had to see an alien it pretty much ruined the movie for me. I was like WTF?!!?

Indy:"Where are they going? Space?"
Ox:"The space inbetween space"
Me:<punches self in face>


Couldn't they just put the alien head on and a huge boulder falls on the russian chick and the movie ends? I mean hell that would have been 10x better than a spaceship coming out of the ground and "intern dimensional portals". It's damn Indiana Jones not stargate or some sci-fi movie.

This just made me think of the todash darkness.

 

[Beev]

I know I'm a little late to this thread, and this has probably been said by quite a few other people:

The alien stuff was an absolutely horrible plot. It ruined the entire movie for me. The action was great, and up until the last ~30 minutes I was loving the movie. Then they completely ruined it.

 

[Delita]

One thing that I think I missed in the movie was how they explained the skull from the alien they took from the warehouse. Was it just another inter dimensional being that wasn't part of the 13 or so that were missing the one skull. Because it did have the similar properties as the other (ie being magnetic).

 

[NuclearNed]

Count me in the ranks of the underwhelmed. Although like a lot of movies I might like it better the second time around. Here are the problems I had with the film, and how I might have corrected them:

SPOILERS AHEAD

(Note: L&S = Lucas & Spielberg)

Indy's age
Harrison Ford is older. Everybody is acutely aware of it, although he looks pretty good considering that he is nearly as old as my Dad. In the film, L&S should have lightly treated it early on, and then dropped the issue almost entirely. Maybe there could have been a running joke or two throughout the film, but that should have been it. As summertime escapism, what this story didn't need were constant reminders of everyone's ultimate doom, like the comment about how Henry Sr. and Marcus Brody were dead, and the speech about how they were at the age where life had started taking away more than it was giving. What a downer of a speech; I was depressed when it was over, which is exactly what a summertime movie isn't about.

Marion Ravenwood
What better way to remind us of Indy's age than to bring in an old girlfriend as part of the cast. The only reason Marion's character is even in this film is to confirm Mutt's parentage. Other than that, ask yourself if there is a single thing she did in this movie that helped the plot along in any way (hint: there isn't). L&S didn't give her a single line of interesting dialog, and she didn't provide anything important to the plot. There must be a million more creative ways to reveal who Mutt's dad is, and L&S went for the one that is the most mundane. Don't get me wrong, Marion also looks good for her age, and everyone remembers what a saucy piece of tail she was in 'Raiders', but in this movie she was just dead weight and a constant reminder that at her age she should be knitting sweaters. During one of L&S's script review meetings, her character should have been cut.

Mac
Mac is another character that should have been cut as he doesn't provide anything that makes the movie more interesting. He didn't provide a single line of memorable dialog. He didn't do anything to help the plot along other than drop those little homing devices that helped the Russians stay close on Indy's trail. His death (if that is what it was) was stupid and unrealistic for any character, no matter how greedy they might be. It was unbelievable that Indy would trust him after the initial doublecross. The only way that I see this character working is if he had perished in the early warehouse scene; this would have been a good way to refresh our memories of the 1950's mindset that said that anyone, even a close friend could be a commie spy in disguise...

Mutt
...which brings us to Mutt. I thought Mutt's character was interesting in the first half of the film, but then his parentage is revealed and from that point on he wasn't given a whole lot to do. From that point on, some time should have been devoted to building and redifining Mutt's & Indy's relationship, but it just didn't seem to happen. At the end of the movie, did Mutt treat Indy (or vice-versa) any differently than at the beginning of the movie? 'Crusade' had a touching moment or two between Henry Sr. and Henry Jr., but I didn't see anything like that here. Wouldn't you want to get to know the Dad (or son) that you didn't know you had?

What I think should have happened with Mutt's character would redefine a whole lot of the movie and make it a whole lot more interesting. Mutt's character should have remained mostly unchanged, except that it should have been combined with the Mac character in the following way: Mutt should have been the double agent. This would provide a several things: 1) it would have created the plot device that kept the Russians on Indy's trail 2) anybody, anybody can be a commie spy, and 3) it would provide Mutt a golden opportunity to "repent" and reconcile with Indy. I can easily imagine a scene at the end of the movie where Indy feels betrayed by his son, yet because of his fatherly love chooses to risk his life to save Mutt (who would otherwise die some gruesome death).

The Entourage
I go to see these movies to see Indiana Jones, and maybe a sidekick. What we have in this movie is Indiana Jones and Company. All the extra "good guy" characters are extra baggage that slow things to a crawl. Marion, Mac, and the Crazy Guy (whatever his name was) do nothing to make this movie more interesting. They should all have been cut from the script to make it more streamlined. Then the audience could focus on Indy, the comic relief sidekick, the bad guys, and the plot.

The Aliens
Unlike a lot of people, I think the concept of aliens in an Indiana Jones movie not only could work, but could work extremely well. The problem is in how the concept was executed. The sense of wonder that these movies usually have was shot in the foot early on. The plot's most amazing revelation is that aliens exist in Indy's world, and unfortunately this was revealed extremely early in the film in the warehouse scene when the alien corpse was shown. This proof of the existence of aliens should have totally been saved for one of the final scenes; up to that point, there should have been clues and hints that this was the case, but no actual revelations. L&S gave away their surprise too early and therefore didn't allow for any suspense to build.

Also, in keeping with the 1950's mindset, the aliens should have been hostile, and not some namby-pamby gatherers of knowledge. There were very few "saucer men" movies in the 50's where the aliens were benevolent. The backstory could be something about invaders that were miraculously overpowered by ancient South Americans, and sealed in a structure that was built to be their eternal prison. This would allow for an amazing confrontation scene at the end where the commies unwittingly loose the aliens, who would spectacularly destroy the commies before somehow Indy saves the day.

The Soundtrack
Back in the day, I used to like the soundtracks almost as much as the movie itself. That might be the reason that to me it seems like this soundtrack is completely recycled. I don't recall hearing a single theme that hadn't already been used in one of the previous 3 movies. I understand that this is a device used to remind me of the other movies, but that really isn't something I need. Most people understand that this is a sequel, and they've seen the other ones.

The Action Scenes
I don't have any suggestions for changes to the action scenes, but they are badly needed. I thought most of the action sequences were silly, ludicrous, and unbelievable, unlike the previous movies where they were silly, ludicrous, and yet I could somehow believe that they could actually happen. I blame this on over-reliance on CGI. In particular, the "ant" scene and the "Tarzan" scene were cringe-inducingly bad.

CGI animals
CGI dinosaurs work because I've never seen a real one, and anything that is even remotely well-done is believable as a result. But I've seen real prairie dogs, and I've seen real monkeys. Believe me when I say that I can tell the difference. Once again, this is just another component of this movie that destroys the suspension of disbelief.

...and finally, a plot change
The whole atomic bomb scene at the beginning didn't add much to the plot, other than to show off some cool CGI. Think about it: Indy escapes from the warehouse, there is an overnight break in the action, then he stumbles into the test site. From that standpoint, how does the atomic bomb scene have anything to do with the main plot?

What should have happened is this: near the end of the warehouse scene, the Americans arrive back on the scene with reinforcements and a battle ensues. Most of the Russians (especially the key ones) escape, but Indy is captured by the Americans. He is immediately suspected as having aided them, and thus is labelled anti-American (from the interogation scene, you get the feeling that L&S tried to establish something like this). He escapes from the Americans somehow, and spends the rest of the movie in a quest to clear his name (maybe by reacquiring whatever it was that the Russians stole). This would do a few things: 1) it would give Indy motivation for the rest of the movie, 2) it would add the Americans as another "hostile" force trying to "get" Indy, and 3) it would allow for a good wrapup at the very end where Indy is cleared (instead of the lame wedding scene).


Just some thoughts.

 

[Homerboy]

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: AnthroAndStargate

Originally posted by: EvilYoda
I dunno, it'll take me a few days to digest what i just saw...aliens? seriously, that's the best you could come up with? I don't know if that sits well with me. First 1.5 hours = classic genius Indy. Last 30 minutes = oooooooh, look at what ILM can do.

As much as I hate that myth it is a pervasive one among pseudoscience people - especially ones interested in archeology. I thought it was kinda cool - I mean we had the face melting nazis, why not interdimensonal stephen hawking type beings?

The speech on knowledge at the end clenched it though.

that's my problem with it. the first and third seemed to cover real archeology and mythology, stories that actually exist in the literature...for the most part. there was mroe substance in those stories.

this one was:

George Lucas fapping to 50's drag racing greasers and glossy shots

Speilberg and his damn aliens again. man...he loves his aliens....

entertaining, for sure...but more ridiculous than ToD, which is saying a lot...

That sums it up. Its not a "classic" Indy story like 1 and 3 based on (some) relevance to real-world archaeological theories/myths... its more a-kin to ToD which is entirely entertaining and ENTERTAINMENT and nothing more. Crystal Skull takes ToD to a whole new level.

It was a COMPLETELY entertaining movie though. You can't argue that.

 

[Svnla]

I saw this movie over the weekend and was disappointed.

It wasn't bad, it was just not as good as the first three movies. The plot, the acting, the story, the whole movie "Indy" experience wasn't there anymore. It seems like a whole other separate entity and not a part of the story.

It tried to be like National Treasure.

Oh another thing, the commie solders must be some of the worse shooters in the world and Mutt is a teenager yet he was able to go one on one by sword with the Colonel and don't let me start at the fight scence in the jungle..on top of the two vehicles.

 

[Homerboy]

I failed to mention the ONE thing that just really got my nerves and I simply couldn't even suspend belief for was the monkey-swinging crap with Mutt. I can swallow all the rest of it, but that stupid idea? That had to be hatched by Lucas.

 

[Atrail]

I did not like it at at all. It was a bad movie. If I was Speilberg I would have read the script and refused to direct it. Waste of time, I wish never saw the flick...

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: Svnla


Oh another thing, the commie solders must be some of the worse shooters in the world and Mutt is a teenager yet he was able to go one on one by sword with the Colonel and don't let me start at the fight scence in the jungle..on top of the two vehicles.

well, apparently he did spend time while he was in school fencing. And he handles a knife pretty well. so, at the very least, they established that he has a history with swordplay.

 

[AnthroAndStargate]

Originally posted by: Black88GTA
One of the things that bugged me was the nuclear blast scene - you see dummies on the street standing in place as their faces get melted off, and then the very next scene shows houses being flattened, pavement being ripped apart, and cars flying as the shock wave travels. :roll: The TV set in the house was on - why take the time / expense to run electricity to a prop town built way the hell out in the middle of nowhere for the sole purpose of nuclear weapon testing? And... why were they broadcasting an audible countdown for the nuclear blast over said empty prop town? Even if a few people were in there, they were doomed anyways (I'm sorry, but no way anyone survives in a friggin refrigerator).

LOL. It's funny because your analyzing so much and yet your analysis is wrong. If you knew a bit about the history of nuclear testing that was an homage to the old Civil Defense experiments they did in towns. They actually did run electricity to the town AND had loud speakers (just in case). They wanted EVERYTHING to be perfect so they could "test" (aka watch stuff blow up) the effects on a normal town. They needed the power to see how it would interact and what would happen tot he infrastructure, TVs. etc.

The fridge could have survived the blast but I doubt the person in side wouldn't have gotten all broken bones. Still its more believable then you give it credit for.

 

[Delita]

Originally posted by: AnthroAndStargate

Originally posted by: Black88GTA
One of the things that bugged me was the nuclear blast scene - you see dummies on the street standing in place as their faces get melted off, and then the very next scene shows houses being flattened, pavement being ripped apart, and cars flying as the shock wave travels. :roll: The TV set in the house was on - why take the time / expense to run electricity to a prop town built way the hell out in the middle of nowhere for the sole purpose of nuclear weapon testing? And... why were they broadcasting an audible countdown for the nuclear blast over said empty prop town? Even if a few people were in there, they were doomed anyways (I'm sorry, but no way anyone survives in a friggin refrigerator).

LOL. It's funny because your analyzing so much and yet your analysis is wrong. If you knew a bit about the history of nuclear testing that was an homage to the old Civil Defense experiments they did in towns. They actually did run electricity to the town AND had loud speakers (just in case). They wanted EVERYTHING to be perfect so they could "test" (aka watch stuff blow up) the effects on a normal town. They needed the power to see how it would interact and what would happen tot he infrastructure, TVs. etc.

The fridge could have survived the blast but I doubt the person in side wouldn't have gotten all broken bones. Still its more believable then you give it credit for.

Why did they run electricity but not water?

 

[UILanMan]

Originally posted by: NuclearNed
Count me in the ranks of the underwhelmed. Although like a lot of movies I might like it better the second time around. Here are the problems I had with the film, and how I might have corrected them:

<snip>

Just some thoughts.

Fantastic post - I found myself nodding repeatedly as I read it. I like your ideas about changes as well, those would have been great. If only they would have consulted you, huh?

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: NuclearNed
Count me in the ranks of the underwhelmed. Although like a lot of movies I might like it better the second time around. Here are the problems I had with the film, and how I might have corrected them:

SPOILERS AHEAD

(Note: L&S = Lucas & Spielberg)

Indy's age
Harrison Ford is older. Everybody is acutely aware of it, although he looks pretty good considering that he is nearly as old as my Dad. In the film, L&S should have lightly treated it early on, and then dropped the issue almost entirely. Maybe there could have been a running joke or two throughout the film, but that should have been it. As summertime escapism, what this story didn't need were constant reminders of everyone's ultimate doom, like the comment about how Henry Sr. and Marcus Brody were dead, and the speech about how they were at the age where life had started taking away more than it was giving. What a downer of a speech; I was depressed when it was over, which is exactly what a summertime movie isn't about.



Mutt
...which brings us to Mutt. I thought Mutt's character was interesting in the first half of the film, but then his parentage is revealed and from that point on he wasn't given a whole lot to do. From that point on, some time should have been devoted to building and redifining Mutt's & Indy's relationship, but it just didn't seem to happen. At the end of the movie, did Mutt treat Indy (or vice-versa) any differently than at the beginning of the movie? 'Crusade' had a touching moment or two between Henry Sr. and Henry Jr., but I didn't see anything like that here. Wouldn't you want to get to know the Dad (or son) that you didn't know you had?

What I think should have happened with Mutt's character would redefine a whole lot of the movie and make it a whole lot more interesting. Mutt's character should have remained mostly unchanged, except that it should have been combined with the Mac character in the following way: Mutt should have been the double agent. This would provide a several things: 1) it would have created the plot device that kept the Russians on Indy's trail 2) anybody, anybody can be a commie spy, and 3) it would provide Mutt a golden opportunity to "repent" and reconcile with Indy. I can easily imagine a scene at the end of the movie where Indy feels betrayed by his son, yet because of his fatherly love chooses to risk his life to save Mutt (who would otherwise die some gruesome death).

...and finally, a plot change
The whole atomic bomb scene at the beginning didn't add much to the plot, other than to show off some cool CGI. Think about it: Indy escapes from the warehouse, there is an overnight break in the action, then he stumbles into the test site. From that standpoint, how does the atomic bomb scene have anything to do with the main plot?

What should have happened is this: near the end of the warehouse scene, the Americans arrive back on the scene with reinforcements and a battle ensues. Most of the Russians (especially the key ones) escape, but Indy is captured by the Americans. He is immediately suspected as having aided them, and thus is labeled anti-American (from the interrogation scene, you get the feeling that L&S tried to establish something like this). He escapes from the Americans somehow, and spends the rest of the movie in a quest to clear his name (maybe by reacquiring whatever it was that the Russians stole). This would do a few things: 1) it would give Indy motivation for the rest of the movie, 2) it would add the Americans as another "hostile" force trying to "get" Indy, and 3) it would allow for a good wrapup at the very end where Indy is cleared (instead of the lame wedding scene).


Just some thoughts.

you make a lot of excellent points. I think these are the best.

There really is no point for Mutt in this film. The major reason that Last Crusade was so successful (far and away the best of the series, imo), is the chemistry b/w Indy and his pop. Also, Marcus and Henry Sr play very well together. The way Indy changes his advice (about going to school), once he discovers that this is his son , you expect a similar scene to the one in Last Crusade where Indy and his father are in the zeppelin. A nice, well-paced break in the action. You get dialogue about fatherly responsibility, regrets, concise reference to Indy's mother, and a pretty clear understanding of why Indy is the man that he is due to his father's influence. This is completely absent from this film, and highly needed. I owe it up to Lucas's demands that everything be shot in front of a blue screen, giving actors nothing to work with. From what I've read, actors consider him one of the worst directors to work with as he is cold and has difficulties interacting with people. Spielberg is extremely gifted in this sense, and it is fortunate that he was the one leading this ship. I only wish that he had more control over what type of effects to use, and a bit more discretion in vetting Lucas' screenplay. Having Mutt as the mole and putting Indy in a situation where he would be forced to save his life would have been nice touch.

The red scare element was clearly meant as a criticism for current US Administrative policy. I can understand that they wouldn't want to make this the focus of the film, and numb us to what we've seen every day over the last 8 years--and they shouldn't; as you've said, this is summer escapism--but by dropping this element in the first Act, they lose potential plot elements, depth, and some real motivation for Indy (all of which are seriously lacking). This would have worked much better if he was also running from the Americans and needing to clear his name

After thinking through it, I totally agree with the points about Marian. I loved seeing her again, and I think most people would, but she was completely under-utilized. She was a firebrand in Raiders, and while she did show a bit of that spunk in this one (the Waterfall, driving that jeep), she had none of the discretion and animosity towards Indy that she absolutely should have had. Seriously, this dude knocked her up, abandoned her just before a wedding, and hasn't spoken with her in what...26 years? She shouldn't want to see Indy. Getting him involved should be a regrettable act of desperation and necessity. Yet, as soon as she first appears, her words may hint at animosity, but her eyes tell a different story. Maybe it's the acting, but she's in love with him as soon as she sees him, and she shouldn't be.

 

[Electric Amish]

It was horrible.

 

[drbrock]

terrible, worse than national treasure 2

 

[Homerboy]

Originally posted by: drbrock
terrible, worse than national treasure 2

noting is worse than anything with Nic Cage in it.

 

[BALIstik916]

great leadup to a kind of lame ending...

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Was there ever a time that a regular home refrigerator would have been lead lined? I've never heard of such a thing, but then again I wasn't around in the 1950s.