Indiana Jones - I believe this is worthy of its own thread.

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
There seems to be two camps here

one camp wants to have their Indy big screen experience
and tend to like the film and are glad we got this installment


the other camp
is evaluating this on the same scorecard they would with any current release
and quite honestly it dose not deserve a passing grade


these two camps have different perspectives
and I don't think we have to agree
> for the world to be right :shrug:
 
Last edited:
I saw it today, too and gotta echo the same sentiments about the script. A lot of it was a hell of fun and worth the ride. I thought the action set pieces were some of the best/most inventive in the whole series (the bike chase, the Area 51 fight, even the jungle fight) so I'll just list what I didn't like:

- Shia and the CG Monkeys
- 3 waterfalls
- Mac / Marion / Oxley being incredibly underwritten
- CG gophers? What the fuck? This isn't Caddyshack 3
- Shia getting smacked in the nuts repeatedly during the rapier fight

This could've also been called How Harrison Ford Got His Groove Back. Seriously, what the hell has he been doing for 10+ years?

I'd put it firmly between Temple of Doom and Last Crusade though.





pretty much, yeah.

just saw it. enjoyed it. could have been better, but could have been a hell of a lot worse. i loved the beginning, and i loved putting Indy in that weird suburbia mock-up -- a great visual contrast, let's us know the word has changed since the 1930s. but then what is conceivably a great conceit -- 1950s, communist paranoia, Marion reunion -- is totally wasted, and i'm not sure what for or where it went. much like the Star Wars movies, i feel there's something pretty great in here, it's just been lost.

the jungle chase was great, the ants were fantastic, and i loved the alien connection -- makes sense now that God is dead and science lives.

but, did anyone notice how toned-down the violence was in this one? the OT were semi-sadistic, Indy gave as good as he got, and there were always bloody ends and violent deaths and bone-crunching action. this? it barely rates a PG-13, imho. but it also makes the whole thing, like Star Wars, more unattainable, less lived-in, and thus less plausible.

i think i'll see it again. anyone who doesn't get a kick out of some of it does need to chill out and relax, but no, it's not a great movie.

so it is.

:shrug:
 
I'm starting to find the "if you did not enjoy this there is something wrong with you" comments condescending and insulting. I really really REALLY wanted to like this film. I own the Original Trilogy and thing that Raiders is the 2nd best action film of all time. I am a big Spielberg fan despite some of the shit he takes from posters here. I am also an admirer of Lucas, and appreciate Ford's career. I saw this on opening weekend not to rip it, but to hopefully like it.

All that being said, I'm just not going to give it a free pass or pretend that I really liked it. And if you did like it, I'm not questioning that at all, taste is subjective.

It's not about "could it have been better", as no movie is perfect. Simply stated, I left the theater underwhelmed and a tad disappointed. No part of me desires to see it again, and that more than anything tells me how I feel about it.

You're talking to a guy who loves Tombstone, enjoys Dune and still thinks Flash Gordon is a fun movie. All 3 of those films are a bit of a mess, a tad absurd and not what you'd call "great" films, but I like them still. I simply did not like Indy IV, I did not get a kick out of it, it was not all that good or fun. I wish it were.
 
Ooh, good one.

I love both, though, and think it's a close race for which is best. They have one great common denominator in Ford. :)

Empire wins out due to the cliffhanger/revelation at the end.....that was a pre-internet bombshell that blew the 9 year old me away.

Do you happen to have a favorite action flick, Crarky?
 
Hmm ... probably Raiders. I really, really like the X-Men movies (at least the first two; the third one I just liked, with no "really"), but that's more "comic book flick" than "action flick."
 
Terminator 2 bitches.


;)

I was telling YLB that one of the things that prevents me from ever permanently leaving Interference, for now at least, is waiting for the lead-up to and then your review of Avatar. I feel that either way, whether it is awesome, or horrible, you're going to die after seeing it.
 
I was telling YLB that one of the things that prevents me from ever permanently leaving Interference, for now at least, is waiting for the lead-up to and then your review of Avatar. I feel that either way, whether it is awesome, or horrible, you're going to die after seeing it.

This is definitely confirmed.

An action movie talk and no mention of Die Hard yet? I'm disappointed, folks.
 
Top 10 action-adventure pictures of all-time:

#1. Raiders of the Lost Ark
#2. Terminator 2: Judgement Day
#3. Titanic
#4. Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom
#5. Revenge of the Sith/Empire Strikes Back
#6. ALIENS
#7. Die Hard
#8. Sisterhood of the Travelling Pants
#9. Lethal Weapon
#10. The opening scene of Scream where Drew Barrymore bites the dust.
 
and i loved putting Indy in that weird suburbia mock-up -- a great visual contrast, let's us know the word has changed since the 1930s.

...... and i loved the alien connection -- makes sense now that God is dead and science lives.



:hmm: Interesting thoughts. I have a feeling that repeated viewings may bring out additional depth. It's a shame that the meat and potatoes part of the film isn't quite up to par enough to carry a lot of people to want to see it more. There's a blog/article on cnn.com right now in which the author wonders what marvels Lawrence Kasdan could've done with this story. :drool:

I think that a hint of letdown was probably intended and inherent in the idea of "Indiana Jones and the End of the '50s." He's such an iconic figure, a stereotype of a hero from the now-distant past who doesn't quite fit into the modern day. As a reviewer noted, the '60s would've eaten Indiana Jones alive.

There are hints of this notion throughout the film---the ones you mentioned, the ones I mentioned earlier about Indy becoming like his dad---and I'm sure more may become more apparent on repeated viewings. But again, I think the clincher would've been to successfully show Indy as a dying breed while retaining the majority of his flair all the same. They accomplished this at times--but perhaps not quite as well as we'd all hoped.
 
I always prefered it when Arnie killed people in his films rather than just shooting them in the kneecaps. And I'd throw in The Matrix too.
 
Saw this over the weekend. It was good, not great. I thought the action sequences were pretty good. The jokes were flat and not funny at all. I think I laughed a couple of times at the banter between Indy and Mutt in the second half of the film, but other than that, some parts made me cringe.

It was entertaining, though, which was what I wanted. But it's definitely not as good as any of the first three.
 
As I said, though, it's not that I didn't enjoy the movie. One thing I particularly liked was how Indy showed signs of becoming so much like his father. The look of disdain as Marcus Brody's head fell off the statue; the reading advice to the student during the library motorcycle chase; the quicksand lecture; and the abrupt change in attitude toward Mutt once he found out he was his son---all very Henry Jones, Sr. and very funny to see.

"This is intolerable!" - Indy, when running away from Soviets into the quicksand pit.

That one line made the movie for me.
 
We took the kids and watched this yesterday. Not having read all 25 pages of this thread, I don't know who I'm goiong to dis/agree with, but I was sorely disappointed in the film.

Very bad CGI, and very poorly edited in general. I really expected more from spielberg/lucas, and can't understand why they didn't put their all in to polishing the movie up for us. I found it choppy and just low-budget feeling. Maybe they were going for that feeling so it wouldn't stand out so much from the first 3 films, which obviously were made before they had the current technology? I'd like to give them the benefit of the doubt, but of course the movie DOES stand out from the other 3 in terms of story line if nothing else. Indy+aliens?? :no:


At the end when Cate keeps saying "I want to know", I was definitely reminded of xfiles and Mulder's "I want to believe" poster, lol.

My 14 and 11 year old sons both enjoyed the movie, 16 year old thought it was OK, 6 year old said she was scared at the end. And I don't blame her. That wedding scene? scary indeed!! :crazy:
 
Agreed on the Matrix. I think the 2nd Matrix film, while a worse movie overall, had some truly great action sequences.

The action sequences are what really disappointed me the most in Reloaded. To me there was just no sense of tension or drama in them whatsoever:

The Burley Brawl - Neo fighting loads of CG Smiths and just flying off at the end without a proper finish
Neo vs Oracle's guardian - fell flat for me as Neo didn't even try and hit him from what I remember at the cinema, he just parried the whole time (the "I know kung-fu" scene is similar in the first but had the advantage of being something new)
The Freeway Chase - this was better, but let down by too many show-off camera moves (I remember a shot with Morpheus and the twins on top of a truck irking me) and ruined by Neo flying in and saving them all at the end
Trinity's opening scene - much better, but too short

Compare those to the bathroom scrap, subway fight and ending chase from the first film and they all pale in comparison. By making Neo a superhero (stopping bullets with a "talk to the hand" gesture?!) all dramatic tension is lost and even though you know he would win anyway because it's a movie, there was still a feeling of him barely succeeding against the odds in the original. Plus, the government building scenes (lobby right through to helicopter) still take my breath away like they did in the cinema.

Maybe I should revisit Reloaded and Revolutions because sometimes a second viewing can do wonders, but I've never felt inclined to do so yet. And sorry to rant like that, it's just even though they're technically fantastic they're just emotionally dead to me.
 
Goddam, I forgot about the Matrix.

Monkeyskin, are you saying that you've only seen Reloaded once? And it was back in the theater? And you can still recount details from the action sequences? That is very impressive.

I remember those sequences in detail because I saw Reloaded 4 times in the theater, bought it on DVD the day it came it, and have probably revisited it around a dozen times since I've owned it.

This might turn into a rant, too, but whatever. When I first saw Reloaded in the theater on the Friday it came out...I was a sophomore in high school and it blew my mind. I thought it was the best action movie I'd ever seen. I thought it was perfect. The car chase is breathtaking...the closing act involving the Architect is awesome...Smith rocks "Smith will suffice"...I love the Morpheus speech to the Zion orgy "100 YEAAAARS!!!"...the first encounter with the Merovingian is hilarious and my friends and I still quote it to this day...

And at the end as Neo reached in to Trinitys heart to save her.....he says...

"I love you too damn much"

I think for about two months after I saw it I walked around my high school saying that to every girl I passed in the hallway.

And now, after years of thinking about it I realize that the original is far superior and just straight up a better movie. Anyway, yeah, the Matrix rules.
 
I was telling YLB that one of the things that prevents me from ever permanently leaving Interference, for now at least, is waiting for the lead-up to and then your review of Avatar. I feel that either way, whether it is awesome, or horrible, you're going to die after seeing it.


Here's a sneak peek into the future: HORRIBLE.
 
Also, I don't know if you can count the sci-fi films as "action/adventure". If that's the case, why not include Westerns and War films as well?
 
Back
Top Bottom