...and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (spoilers!)

New movies! Old movies! B-movies! Discuss discuss discuss!!!

How awesome is the new Indy film?

10
3
4%
9
9
12%
8
11
15%
7
16
21%
6
13
17%
5
7
9%
4
8
11%
3
2
3%
2
1
1%
1
2
3%
The Last Crusade was the LAST friggin' crusade, I ain't watchin' this!!!
0
No votes
Waiting for the Special Edition DVD with extended Cantina/Jabba's Palace scenes
3
4%
 
Total votes : 75

Postby Bob Samonkey on Tue May 27, 2008 2:20 am

Lord Voldemoo wrote:JUSTIFY THE MONKEYS! heheheheh


We dont have to be justified. We are just that cool. Sides, as proven by the movie, vine swinging is faster then driving...
User avatar
Bob Samonkey
Große Fäuste
 
Posts: 8982
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 9:49 pm
Location: Samonkey Island

Postby Lord Voldemoo on Tue May 27, 2008 2:21 am

Bob Poopflingius Maximus wrote:
Lord Voldemoo wrote:JUSTIFY THE MONKEYS! heheheheh


We dont have to be justified. We are just that cool. Sides, as proven by the movie, vine swinging is faster then driving...


you realize i'm just pissed because i don't have opposable thumbs....
Image
User avatar
Lord Voldemoo
He Who Shall Not Be Milked
 
Posts: 17641
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 1:18 pm
Location: Pasture next to the Red Barn

Postby Bob Samonkey on Tue May 27, 2008 2:48 am

I am sure your hooves can grab on to the vines. Come! Join the Pompadour Monkeys!!!
User avatar
Bob Samonkey
Große Fäuste
 
Posts: 8982
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 9:49 pm
Location: Samonkey Island

Postby RogueScribner on Tue May 27, 2008 2:59 am

Lord Voldemoo wrote:
The lovely farewells to Marcus Brody ( painting and statue and photo ) and Denholm Elliot, who would have been there if he could.


Really?? I'm shocked the Brody-lovers who have been lambasting Last Crusade aren't out in droves about their last little bit of comic relief at his expense chopping off the head of his statue. Even I thought that was actually kinda in bad taste...but maybe i was just being overly sensitive.


Um, what? :shock: :roll: :evil:
My eye isn't lazy; it's ambidextrous!
User avatar
RogueScribner
The Dork Avenger
 
Posts: 9609
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2005 3:52 am
Location: Melbourne, FL

Postby Pacino86845 on Tue May 27, 2008 3:52 am

Come on, if you think that's bad taste then you don't know what bad taste is!!! PWNT!!
User avatar
Pacino86845
EGYPTIAN LOVER
 
Posts: 14064
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 5:20 am

Postby magicmonkey on Tue May 27, 2008 5:22 am

Just when the Nazi's stopped moaning about Indy's previous outings (and probably the current one :twisted:), it seems that Communists now are offended. Still, at least they can complain... I guess George and Steve vetoed Denholm Elliots little cinematic tribute, oh, that was a tribute.
magicmonkey
I AM fucking Zen
 
Posts: 6032
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 8:26 am
Location: Shanghizzo

Postby Pacino86845 on Tue May 27, 2008 5:34 am

magicmonkey wrote:Just when the Nazi's stopped moaning about Indy's previous outings (and probably the current one :twisted:), it seems that Communists now are offended. Still, at least they can complain... I guess George and Steve vetoed Denholm Elliots little cinematic tribute, oh, that was a tribute.


I like how those critics distort reality...

Members of Russia's Communist Party are calling for a nationwide boycott of the new Indiana Jones movie, saying it aims to undermine communist ideology and distort history.


No shit?! You mean there WASN'T a person named Indiana Jones who was off saving the world from the Nazi plan for world domination via Ark of the Covenant and Holy Grail?! And there WASN'T a crystal skull either?

This "outrage" is what I would call a desperate cry by the long-forgotten to become relevant again... sorry Komrade, no one cares!
User avatar
Pacino86845
EGYPTIAN LOVER
 
Posts: 14064
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 5:20 am

Postby Lady Sheridan on Tue May 27, 2008 6:34 am

If only Stalin's sham science projects had been grounded in as much reality as a crystal skull!

I did raise an eyebrow at the obvious "COPY-PASTE-WORD REPLACEMENT" Lucas did when they said "Stalin has had her combing the world for arcane artifacts!" While he might have dug paranormal technology, most arcane artifacts would be too religious to interest the Communists. Opiate of the masses and all.

Sounds like they took a page from Iran.
User avatar
Lady Sheridan
RED
 
Posts: 5035
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 6:09 pm
Location: Croft Manor

Postby Zarles on Tue May 27, 2008 7:10 am

Why is everyone suddenly so obsessed with maintaining realism in Indy movies?
User avatar
Zarles
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 3773
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 9:52 am
Location: Bringing something to the table

Postby The Vicar on Tue May 27, 2008 7:32 am

Lady Sheridan wrote:
The Vicar wrote:Could it have been better? Jesus, couldn't everything? Does it fit nicely into the Indiana Jones Canon? In almost every way, yes.
And, in point of fact, you CAN use a boa constrictor to get yourself out of a sand trap. It's something Lucas/Speilberg borrowed from the old serials Indy was birthed by.


Old serials -- always bastions of factual accuracy...


I wasn't suggesting that because it's happened before in serials that it lends any scientific validity to using a snake as a lifeline. I was merely suggesting that the precedent was set in those old serials. Reality is disposable. This is fantasy.
.
........................................
Image
User avatar
The Vicar
Fear & Loathing in the Zone
 
Posts: 16179
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 10:21 am

Postby Simon Quinlank on Tue May 27, 2008 7:57 am

Zarles wrote:Why is everyone suddenly so obsessed with maintaining realism in Indy movies?

Because the Ark spirits/Grail water/mystical stones were so grounded in realism.


That and they're struggling for anything to constructively criticise it for.
I AM THE KING OF ALL HOBBIES
User avatar
Simon Quinlank
PRIMITIVE SCREWHEAD
 
Posts: 96
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2007 7:15 pm

Postby The Vicar on Tue May 27, 2008 8:44 am

Simon Quinlank wrote:
Zarles wrote:Why is everyone suddenly so obsessed with maintaining realism in Indy movies?

Because the Ark spirits/Grail water/mystical stones were so grounded in realism.


That and they're struggling for anything to constructively criticise it for.


8-) :wink:
.
........................................
Image
User avatar
The Vicar
Fear & Loathing in the Zone
 
Posts: 16179
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 10:21 am

Postby so sorry on Tue May 27, 2008 9:02 am

Zarles wrote:Why is everyone suddenly so obsessed with maintaining realism in Indy movies?


well, not "everyone" who is criticising Indy4 is crying over realism Zarles. And to be fair, it was probably obvious before you ever saw this movie that you were going to love it, so perhaps you may be a little obsessed with defending it.

As I said in my non-review: Indy4 bored me mightily, and when you are watching a movie that bores you, I think your tendancy is to think about what you are watching in a way you really shouldn't be thinking. For example: during the groan-inducing snake scene, I know damn well that I shouldn't care wether or not you really can use a snake as a rope, but fuck me if I wasn't thinking about how STUPID that concept was.
User avatar
so sorry
Deacon Blues
 
Posts: 15789
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 11:29 am

Postby RogueScribner on Tue May 27, 2008 9:28 am

Especially if, as LS mentions, Indy had his whip handy.
My eye isn't lazy; it's ambidextrous!
User avatar
RogueScribner
The Dork Avenger
 
Posts: 9609
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2005 3:52 am
Location: Melbourne, FL

Postby Hermanator X on Tue May 27, 2008 9:28 am

So how exactly did using a snake as a rope be the straw that broke the camels back?

Suspension of disbelief is very important when watching almost any movie you can name. Try as they might, they just dont reflect real life in the majority of cases.

In Raiders you have a fantastic opening featuring many booby traps. I love the sequence, but its absolutely ridiculous.
The big pit with sharp things at the bottom is only feasible thing that could possibly work.
Huge stone doors that slide slowly into place, in a maintenance free environment. (don't tell me im supposed to believe the tribesman maintain the gears and pulleys)
Spikes that jump out of the wall and impale you if you interrupt the sunlight/breeze coming through the window? Infrared motion sensors? Really?
Then you come to the room with pressure pads on the floor that fire poison blow darts using compressed air system if you step on them? (Or quite possibly tensioned bows, which have not perished in all their time of inactivity)

And that's the first ten minutes of probably my favorite/most re-watchable movie of all time.

You cant stop a mine cart using your feet. You cant snap off a flagpole to use as a jousting stick while traveling at speed on a motorbike.
You cant jump off a building with a fire hose tied around your waist without breaking your ribs and puncturing every vital organ on impact.
(Maybe we need a "You cant do that" thread im sure it would fill up quick smart.)

Granted its no "I hate snakes doc, I HATE EM!!" but it wasn't that bad.
...and so forth.
User avatar
Hermanator X
AIRWOLF
 
Posts: 2624
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2005 1:55 pm
Location: Kongsberg, Norway, This Town needs an enema

Postby Hermanator X on Tue May 27, 2008 9:30 am

RogueScribner wrote:Especially if, as LS mentions, Indy had his whip handy.


He had to keep his arms above the level of the sand or he would sink faster. Grabbing his whip may not have been possible.

Granted, Mutt could have unfurled his pompadore to grab onto, but that was as likely as Indy giving away his hat.
User avatar
Hermanator X
AIRWOLF
 
Posts: 2624
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2005 1:55 pm
Location: Kongsberg, Norway, This Town needs an enema

Postby The Vicar on Tue May 27, 2008 9:32 am

RogueScribner wrote:Especially if, as LS mentions, Indy had his whip handy.


He didn't.
.
........................................
Image
User avatar
The Vicar
Fear & Loathing in the Zone
 
Posts: 16179
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 10:21 am

Postby Seppuku on Tue May 27, 2008 9:34 am

RogueScribner wrote:Especially if, as LS mentions, Indy had his whip handy.


Unless that's an innuendo, I'm pretty sure he'd already abandoned it wrangling one of the bad guys.
Dale Tremont Presents...

Image
User avatar
Seppuku
SWINGING PLASTIC LION
 
Posts: 7872
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2005 2:52 am
Location: Limeyland

Postby RogueScribner on Tue May 27, 2008 9:35 am

Still, they're in a jungle, right? No tree branches handy? Using a snake seems a bit more silly than normal for this series.
My eye isn't lazy; it's ambidextrous!
User avatar
RogueScribner
The Dork Avenger
 
Posts: 9609
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2005 3:52 am
Location: Melbourne, FL

Postby so sorry on Tue May 27, 2008 9:36 am

The Vicar wrote:
RogueScribner wrote:Especially if, as LS mentions, Indy had his whip handy.


He didn't.


Yeah, I don't think he had the whip either.

Hermanator X wrote:So how exactly did using a snake as a rope be the straw that broke the camels back?


Its just an example Herm...I wasn't using it as the end-all be-all reason why Indy4 stunk.

But whatev, I'm not a hater. I love Raiders, and count it as one of the best movies ever made. The three following Indy flicks all pale in comparison, with Indy4 falling a distant fourth.
User avatar
so sorry
Deacon Blues
 
Posts: 15789
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 11:29 am

Postby havocSchultz on Tue May 27, 2008 9:36 am

Bah!

If Indy was a real bad ass, he'd have told the quicksand that it had "no ticket" and tossed it's sorry ass right out of the fucking jungle...

None of this waiting to be pulled out shit...
Indy doesn't wait to be pulled out of shit...
Indy dives into shit and then convinces the shit to help him out after...



Double Bah!!!
User avatar
havocSchultz
is full of stars...
 
Posts: 15695
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 9:46 am
Location: living amongst a hazy nothing...

Postby tapehead on Tue May 27, 2008 9:59 am

Hermanator X wrote:Suspension of disbelief is very important when watching almost any movie you can name. Try as they might, they just dont reflect real life in the majority of cases.


Oh please, don't lets fall back upon that old 'suspension of disbelief' chestnut.
User avatar
tapehead
BALLS!!!
 
Posts: 9427
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 2:13 pm
Location: OZ

Postby Vegeta on Tue May 27, 2008 10:09 am

RogueScribner wrote:Still, they're in a jungle, right? No tree branches handy? Using a snake seems a bit more silly than normal for this series.


I think a stick would of been a lot easier to find. Seems to me that whole scene was set up just for the joke, it just ended up looking ALF as all hell.
User avatar
Vegeta
PARAGON OF VACUITY
 
Posts: 6274
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 11:22 am
Location: U.S.S.A.

Postby The Ginger Man on Tue May 27, 2008 10:12 am

There were really only 3 things in the movie that I didn't understand/couldn't roll with.

1) Shia sword fighting. They were in the jeep. I went to the bathroom. I came back and Shia was straddling between two jeeps sword fighting. Uh.....did I miss something?

2) Shia swinging with the monkeys. I had no problem with the monkeys. In fact, the monkeys make sense to me. You want Shia to be hanging from vines and swinging like Tarzan, it makes sense for there to also be some monkeys. But when the hell did this kid learn to swing like that? Apparently when he learned how to sword fight...while I was in the bathroom.

3) The eff'n gophers! This made no sense in any conceivable way. Sword fighting and vine swinging...ok, you want Mutt to be an action hero. Fine. I get that. But why were there gophers? Is this what passes for comedy relief? Oh, look. A gopher. Start movie. Hey, another gopher. Continue movie. Wait, now there are like 10 gophers. Are the gophers going to attack the Russian? Are they going to warn Indy of an impending nuclear explosion? Are they going to do a goddamn thing?!?!?!

No, kids. They aren't. Snake ropes. Magnetic crystal deus ex machinas. Crazy professors who regain their sanity for exposition's sake. Aliens who aren't aliens. I can justify all of these things. But there's no reason I can think of that this movie needed 3 shots of gophers.
The Ginger Man
Hong Kong Drizzle
 
Posts: 2883
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 3:35 am

Postby TheBaxter on Tue May 27, 2008 10:13 am

i saw this friday morning. i'm not gonna even try to go back and read through this thread, so here are my thoughts:

i really really enjoyed everything that happened in america. i enjoyed the warehouse scene, and the cameo by the ark, and all of that. i REALLY loved the a-bomb test sequence (and if realism concerned me, the refrigerator escape would've stuck out as a sore thumb, but i thought it was great). i liked the motorcycle chase (but the part with brody's statue's head was pretty bad). the early scenes had lots of energy, lots of fun, lots of humor, everything i would've hoped for, and by this point i was honestly thinking this might end up my favorite of the sequels.

then they got to south america, and everything changed. i still liked the graveyard scene... but everything after that just went downhill. it was great to see karen allen again, but she was wasted. other than the one part of her driving over the cliff, her character didn't really have anything worthwhile to do. and considering their history, i thought she was way to quick to warm back up to indy. i wanted to see sparks between them like there were in her bar in Nepal in RotLA... if she was that pissed at him way back then, imagine how much more pissed she'd be at him now for leaving her at the altar.

but more than that, everything in the jungle was pretty dull. the jungle chase scene didn't really work as well as it could've, and once they reach the crystal skull city, i can barely even remember anything that happened that was slightly interesting. and then the finale, with the alien that looked like it was taken straight out of 'Fire In the Sky' and the spaceship taking off.... it was just overkill. i have no problem with the concept of aliens in an Indiana Jones movie, it's about as realistic or believable as all those Christian artifacts in the previous films. but the ending was the equivalent of, if in RotLA instead of the face-melting and spirits, they had Jesus himself come down and blow the nazi's heads off with a flamethrower. it just didn't have the mysteriousness and impact of those moments from raiders and last crusade.

so in the end, i think it's the weakest of the sequels. i still enjoyed it, but instead of going out as strongly as it started, it just sort of petered out before throwing in a ridiculous ending. it felt closest to last crusade (my favorite sequel) in tone, but not as fun or entertaining. ToD still stands out like a sore thumb, but despite the disastrous presence of kate capshaw, that film still managed to be slightly more entertaining, so i would have to rank it above KotCS.
Image
User avatar
TheBaxter
Carlos Danger
 
Posts: 19270
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 5:00 pm

Postby The Ginger Man on Tue May 27, 2008 10:18 am

Also, did anyone else find Karen Allen's acting to be exceptionally BAD? When she first appeared, it felt like I was watching a 70s variety show and she was the "special guest."

Marion walks out of the tent. Surprised to see her, the audience applauds, cheers. Announcer: "Ladies and gentlemen, Miss Karen Allen!" More applause. Karen blushes, acts humble, gently signals for the audience to quiet down. Cut to Harrison, he's smiling, breaking character. Cut back to Karen, she winks at the camera and goes about playing "special guest Karen Allen as Marion Ravenwood."

Ugh.
The Ginger Man
Hong Kong Drizzle
 
Posts: 2883
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 3:35 am

Postby TheBaxter on Tue May 27, 2008 10:18 am

The Ginger Man wrote:There were really only 3 things in the movie that I didn't understand/couldn't roll with.

1) Shia sword fighting. They were in the jeep. I went to the bathroom. I came back and Shia was straddling between two jeeps sword fighting. Uh.....did I miss something?


they set that up earlier, when shia was talking about not finishing school because of all the useless classes he had to take, one of which was fencing.

The Ginger Man wrote:2) Shia swinging with the monkeys. I had no problem with the monkeys. In fact, the monkeys make sense to me. You want Shia to be hanging from vines and swinging like Tarzan, it makes sense for there to also be some monkeys. But when the hell did this kid learn to swing like that? Apparently when he learned how to sword fight...while I was in the bathroom.


this didn't bother me as badly as i thought it would. at least he didn't do the tarzan yell like chewbacca.

The Ginger Man wrote:3) The eff'n gophers! This made no sense in any conceivable way. Sword fighting and vine swinging...ok, you want Mutt to be an action hero. Fine. I get that. But why were there gophers? Is this what passes for comedy relief? Oh, look. A gopher. Start movie. Hey, another gopher. Continue movie. Wait, now there are like 10 gophers. Are the gophers going to attack the Russian? Are they going to warn Indy of an impending nuclear explosion? Are they going to do a goddamn thing?!?!?!


they were prairie dogs.

although, how awesome would it have been if bill murray had shown up and blown them all up with some dynamite?
Image
User avatar
TheBaxter
Carlos Danger
 
Posts: 19270
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 5:00 pm

Postby Hermanator X on Tue May 27, 2008 10:19 am

tapehead wrote:
Hermanator X wrote:Suspension of disbelief is very important when watching almost any movie you can name. Try as they might, they just dont reflect real life in the majority of cases.


Oh please, don't lets fall back upon that old 'suspension of disbelief' chestnut.


Did you read any of the rest of the post backing that up? So what did you do for the bits you liked? The fact that they survive a desert trip with no food? No toilet breaks? Whats that if not suspension of disbelief?
User avatar
Hermanator X
AIRWOLF
 
Posts: 2624
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2005 1:55 pm
Location: Kongsberg, Norway, This Town needs an enema

Postby The Ginger Man on Tue May 27, 2008 10:25 am

@ The Baxter

Ok, I must have missed the fencing reference. And I'll admit, the vine swinging stuck out more b/c it immediately followed the sword fighting...it was this 1-2 punch of WTF?!?

Prairie Dogs...Gophers....whatever. If Bill Murray had shown up and exploded the little bastards, it would have made sense...kinda. Well, at least it would have been awesome. Then at the end, when Indy's hat blows off his head, he could wander into the church, pick it up, and set-up the greatest sequel of all time.
The Ginger Man
Hong Kong Drizzle
 
Posts: 2883
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 3:35 am

Postby TonyWilson on Tue May 27, 2008 10:56 am

Elitism is positing that your taste is equivalent to quality, you hate "Hamlet" does it make it "bad"? If you think so, you're one elite motherfucker.
User avatar
TonyWilson
No Less Liquid Than His Shadow
 
Posts: 9155
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 3:45 am
Location: A Drained Swimming Pool

Postby Vegeta on Tue May 27, 2008 10:58 am

For me my main problem is that KOTCS just shows the slow devolution of the Indiana Jones series. Raiders is probably one of the finest action/adventure films ever made. Is there a couple of humorous moments, yes, but mostly it's a straight ahead balls out action/adventure flick. TOD comes in with a bit more humor and a slightly more outlandish adventure. Some of the characters seem to be added for comic relief only. TLC seems straight down the middle action/comedy. Old characters that were serious in the first film are back as bumbling comic relief and the story though familiar, forgivably runs out of steam by the end. KOTCS seems to want to have a joke at every turn, if the creators were winking at us, it seems obvious that's all they were going for. Similair to TLC the story runs out of gas but not before taking a turn to the outlandish and plain silly at times.
User avatar
Vegeta
PARAGON OF VACUITY
 
Posts: 6274
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 11:22 am
Location: U.S.S.A.

Postby Maui on Tue May 27, 2008 11:01 am

The Ginger Man wrote:Also, did anyone else find Karen Allen's acting to be exceptionally BAD?


I wanted to see a little bit of her badassness (is that a word) that she played so perfectly in Raiders. Drinking people under the table, being cocky. I didn't see this. I know we are talking years later, but people just don't lose that over time. They still have that ballsiness.
User avatar
Maui
WoWie
 
Posts: 7611
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 10:19 pm

Postby havocSchultz on Tue May 27, 2008 11:05 am

Maui wrote:
The Ginger Man wrote:Also, did anyone else find Karen Allen's acting to be exceptionally BAD?


I wanted to see a little bit of her badassness (is that a word) that she played so perfectly in Raiders. Drinking people under the table, being cocky. I didn't see this. I know we are talking years later, but people just don't lose that over time. They still have that ballsiness.


She had it for a brief moment when she stormed/stumbled out of the tent...

she was yelling something like "Take your hands off me you Ruskie (or commie or something) sonofabitch..."
Or something along those lines...

I think the rest of the movie she was just excited to be working again...
User avatar
havocSchultz
is full of stars...
 
Posts: 15695
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 9:46 am
Location: living amongst a hazy nothing...

Postby Fried Gold on Tue May 27, 2008 11:11 am

The Ginger Man wrote:Also, did anyone else find Karen Allen's acting to be exceptionally BAD?

Yeah, thing's aren't looking good for Starman 2.
User avatar
Fried Gold
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 13930
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 12:28 pm
Location: ░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░

Postby Seppuku on Tue May 27, 2008 11:13 am

Her worst acting moment has gotta be right after the whole triple waterfall sequence, when she was so shaken up she refused to let go of the steering wheel (no longer attached to the jeep). Gurning like a lobotomy patient is about right. I'd have :roll: if I saw that in a school play, let alone an Indy movie.
Dale Tremont Presents...

Image
User avatar
Seppuku
SWINGING PLASTIC LION
 
Posts: 7872
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2005 2:52 am
Location: Limeyland

Postby Vegeta on Tue May 27, 2008 11:25 am

Seppuku wrote:Her worst acting moment has gotta be right after the whole triple waterfall sequence, when she was so shaken up she refused to let go of the steering wheel (no longer attached to the jeep). Gurning like a lobotomy patient is about right. I'd have :roll: if I saw that in a school play, let alone an Indy movie.

Yeah, that was pretty awful... :roll:
User avatar
Vegeta
PARAGON OF VACUITY
 
Posts: 6274
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 11:22 am
Location: U.S.S.A.

Postby Worst Part's Almost Over on Tue May 27, 2008 1:27 pm

Maui wrote:
The Ginger Man wrote:Also, did anyone else find Karen Allen's acting to be exceptionally BAD?


I wanted to see a little bit of her badassness (is that a word) that she played so perfectly in Raiders. Drinking people under the table, being cocky. I didn't see this. I know we are talking years later, but people just don't lose that over time. They still have that ballsiness.


I just wanted to see her with the same bloody accent she had in Raiders! :?
Image
User avatar
Worst Part's Almost Over
AIRWOLF
 
Posts: 1585
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2005 6:35 am

Postby MasterWhedon on Tue May 27, 2008 2:10 pm

Ugh. I was really, really disappointed with this movie, and I think I was 100% right with my early "this should not even be made" stance. Everything about this movie felt confused, muddled, phoned-in, and goddamn lazy. This is an Indiana Jones movie operating as Lowest Common Denominator.

My biggest complaint about this movie, aside from a script that never quite knows exactly what it wants to be, is that there was no restraint showed in its making. Sure, it's been 19 years since the last film was made and in that time technology has come along which allows you near-limitless possibilities in terms of what you can accomplish. If you want to make a movie that's big and fantastical and a blue screen extrvaganza, more power to you. But that's not Indiana Jones. The Indiana Jones movies were of a certain time and place, and while they may have used the height of special effects technology at the time, I don't think that justifies using the height of special effects technology today. Not when the first three movies line up next to each other so nicely as a gritty, real, unified world, and suddenly there's this extra chapter that's clean and artificial and utterly unrestrained in its ability to do anything. I had faith in Spielberg and his crew that they were going to take the necessary steps to make this fit into the series, and while they succeed on a very few levels, they fail spectacularly on so many more.

I've talked this over with friends this weekend, and while some of my criticisms are nitpicks and/or personal preference, I just don't think this movie works and it kills me to say that. I rewatched Raiders and Temple of Doom yesterday to wash the taste of of my mouth, and seeing how well those two succeed makes me even sadder to say Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is only a 5/10.
User avatar
MasterWhedon
KEEPER OF THE PURSE
 
Posts: 9473
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 9:07 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Postby Bob Samonkey on Tue May 27, 2008 2:47 pm

MasterWhedon wrote:Ugh. I was really, really disappointed with this movie, and I think I was 100% right with my early "this should not even be made" stance. Everything about this movie felt confused, muddled, phoned-in, and goddamn lazy. This is an Indiana Jones movie operating as Lowest Common Denominator.

My biggest complaint about this movie, aside from a script that never quite knows exactly what it wants to be, is that there was no restraint showed in its making. Sure, it's been 19 years since the last film was made and in that time technology has come along which allows you near-limitless possibilities in terms of what you can accomplish. If you want to make a movie that's big and fantastical and a blue screen extrvaganza, more power to you. But that's not Indiana Jones. The Indiana Jones movies were of a certain time and place, and while they may have used the height of special effects technology at the time, I don't think that justifies using the height of special effects technology today. Not when the first three movies line up next to each other so nicely as a gritty, real, unified world, and suddenly there's this extra chapter that's clean and artificial and utterly unrestrained in its ability to do anything. I had faith in Spielberg and his crew that they were going to take the necessary steps to make this fit into the series, and while they succeed on a very few levels, they fail spectacularly on so many more.

I've talked this over with friends this weekend, and while some of my criticisms are nitpicks and/or personal preference, I just don't think this movie works and it kills me to say that. I rewatched Raiders and Temple of Doom yesterday to wash the taste of of my mouth, and seeing how well those two succeed makes me even sadder to say Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is only a 5/10.


But what of the monkeys!!!
User avatar
Bob Samonkey
Große Fäuste
 
Posts: 8982
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 9:49 pm
Location: Samonkey Island

Postby MasterWhedon on Tue May 27, 2008 3:20 pm

Shh! I'm trying to forget the monkeys!!
User avatar
MasterWhedon
KEEPER OF THE PURSE
 
Posts: 9473
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 9:07 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Postby Fried Gold on Tue May 27, 2008 3:24 pm

Lady Sheridan wrote:Do you know one of the biggest plot problems for me?

The fact that the KGB's most notorious somehow managed to slip into the U.S. unnoticed.

Not as much of a plot discrepancy as you might think.

There are numerous counts of KGB infiltrators into what, for most of us, are considered secret US military strongholds.

Los Alamos, White Sands, Edwards, NASA....so Groom Lake isn't such a stretch to the imagination.
User avatar
Fried Gold
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 13930
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 12:28 pm
Location: ░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░

Postby caruso_stalker217 on Tue May 27, 2008 3:28 pm

TheBaxter wrote:ToD still stands out like a sore thumb, but despite the disastrous presence of kate capshaw, that film still managed to be slightly more entertaining, so i would have to rank it above KotCS.


Okay, I know I'm just an unrepentant TEMPLE OF DOOM lover and all, but I still think this Kate Capshaw stuff is bullshit. If you don't like the character that's cool, but there's nothing wrong with her performance. She played it exactly as it was supposed to be. Blame Lucas if you must. Or the whiny apologizer Spielberg. Leave the Capshaw out of it, man!

I agree with the rest of what you said though, with the CRYSTAL SKULL stuff that this thread is about.
Image
User avatar
caruso_stalker217
TOO AGED FOR THIS MALARKEY
 
Posts: 9922
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 6:03 pm
Location: Oregon, US of A

Postby caruso_stalker217 on Tue May 27, 2008 3:29 pm

Fried Gold wrote:
Lady Sheridan wrote:Do you know one of the biggest plot problems for me?

The fact that the KGB's most notorious somehow managed to slip into the U.S. unnoticed.

Not as much of a plot discrepancy as you might think.

There are numerous counts of KGB infiltrators into what, for most of us, are considered secret US military strongholds.

Los Alamos, White Sands, Edwards, NASA....so Groom Lake isn't such a stretch to the imagination.


They should've showed a scene where she bluffs her way through a security checkpoint by using a cultured Southern accent.
Image
User avatar
caruso_stalker217
TOO AGED FOR THIS MALARKEY
 
Posts: 9922
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 6:03 pm
Location: Oregon, US of A

Postby Lady Sheridan on Tue May 27, 2008 4:25 pm

Fried Gold wrote:
Lady Sheridan wrote:Do you know one of the biggest plot problems for me?

The fact that the KGB's most notorious somehow managed to slip into the U.S. unnoticed.

Not as much of a plot discrepancy as you might think.

There are numerous counts of KGB infiltrators into what, for most of us, are considered secret US military strongholds.

Los Alamos, White Sands, Edwards, NASA....so Groom Lake isn't such a stretch to the imagination.


Of course. One, two agents perhaps. Who *blend* in. If they had hinted, even in a line of dialogue, that Spalko was a master of disguise or secrecy, I'd give you that. If she had climbed out of the car wearing a normal outfit, I wouldn't have blinked an eye. But she climbs out wearing her trademark oh-so-eccentric uniform, yanking her gloves on and off, and you know she's a woman who doesn't believe in low key KGB work.
She came into the U.S. looking like that, sword and all.

All it would have taken for me to buy it was a change of costume, or even a line of exposition when they handed Indy her file. The fact that they didn't just says how sloppy the "world" of this movie was. I don't see that as a detail that would escape any of the previous movies.

All this talk of believability (papa, this isn't directed at you btw) -- there is a huge difference between *fantasy* like the Ark or Sankara Stones, and a plot hole. I've had a few lovers of the film say "If you believe the Ark, then you can believe this." But there is a world of difference. One works in the world established by the film. The other is just hoping you don't notice it. That's why Raiders, TOD, etc. works and KOTCS is getting criticized, then there isn't any point in further discussion.
User avatar
Lady Sheridan
RED
 
Posts: 5035
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 6:09 pm
Location: Croft Manor

Postby SilentBobX on Tue May 27, 2008 4:34 pm

Finally saw it over the weekend. It was good, and a nice addition to the mythology. Altho the ending of Last Crusade was a perfect ending to it.

All in all I'd give it a 7 out of 10.

Mahalo
Image
User avatar
SilentBobX
AIRWOLF
 
Posts: 1751
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 4:21 pm
Location: Nashville, TN

Postby Lord Voldemoo on Tue May 27, 2008 4:45 pm

The Vicar wrote:
Simon Quinlank wrote:
Zarles wrote:Why is everyone suddenly so obsessed with maintaining realism in Indy movies?

Because the Ark spirits/Grail water/mystical stones were so grounded in realism.


That and they're struggling for anything to constructively criticise it for.


8-) :wink:


HAHAHAHA, it's just one issue in a LONG list, if you bother reading the thread.
Image
User avatar
Lord Voldemoo
He Who Shall Not Be Milked
 
Posts: 17641
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 1:18 pm
Location: Pasture next to the Red Barn

Postby Nordling on Tue May 27, 2008 5:10 pm

It's not realism, but there was an actual guy under an actual truck in RAIDERS. There's nothing like that in SKULL, and it's sorely missed.
Image
User avatar
Nordling
AIRWOLF
 
Posts: 2092
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 8:39 am
Location: Missouri City, TX

Postby Maui on Tue May 27, 2008 5:13 pm

What about the action in the warehouse? The running across the beams in the ceiling. The swinging from the ceiling.

The motorcycle chase where the stuntman is crawling out of the car window back onto the bike.

That was pretty cool.
User avatar
Maui
WoWie
 
Posts: 7611
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 10:19 pm

Postby Vegeta on Tue May 27, 2008 5:17 pm

Maui wrote:What about the action in the warehouse? The running across the beams in the ceiling. The swinging from the ceiling.

The motorcycle chase where the stuntman is crawling out of the car window back onto the bike.

That was pretty cool.


I agree, that was probably one of the coolest shots in the entire film. Way better than anything in the entire jungle jeep chase.
User avatar
Vegeta
PARAGON OF VACUITY
 
Posts: 6274
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 11:22 am
Location: U.S.S.A.

Postby Lord Voldemoo on Tue May 27, 2008 5:18 pm

Vegeta wrote:
Maui wrote:What about the action in the warehouse? The running across the beams in the ceiling. The swinging from the ceiling.

The motorcycle chase where the stuntman is crawling out of the car window back onto the bike.

That was pretty cool.


I agree, that was probably one of the coolest shots in the entire film. Way better than anything in the entire jungle jeep chase.


Yup!! i remember thinking that if the whole movie was as fun as the warehouse scene that it could be great!

unfortunately... :P :P :P
Image
User avatar
Lord Voldemoo
He Who Shall Not Be Milked
 
Posts: 17641
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 1:18 pm
Location: Pasture next to the Red Barn

PreviousNext

Return to Movie Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 0 guests

cron