cheno
Conductor
Posts: 1,012
|
Post by cheno on May 22, 2008 23:32:08 GMT -8
I'm afriad it's just so out there and over the top that I had a really hard time suspending my disbelief with this one, Clark. To me, this has more in common with the Mummy and National Treasure movies than with classic Indy. I'm trying to think of an element in this movie that is less believable than any other element in the previous three and can't come up with one.
|
|
|
Post by christopher on May 23, 2008 6:01:52 GMT -8
Indeed. That mine cart chase in Temple of Doom has to the be the least believable (not to mention least exciting and most poorly shot) action sequence of Spielberg's career.
|
|
|
Post by Jens Dietrich on May 23, 2008 7:01:57 GMT -8
I'm trying to think of an element in this movie that is less believable than any other element in the previous three and can't come up with one. Oh! Hey! I can help with that! How about the whole series of scenes where they're having a truck chase inside the warehouse, Indy and the Russki get thrown clear, he accidentially hits the button that launches the experimental jet car, they somehow get on it, blast across the desert as fucking cartoony CGI beavers look on, and somehow end up at a nuclear test site JUST AS A TEST IS ABOUT TO COMMENCE, he gets in a fridge, there's a nuclear blast, the fridge gets thrown hundreds of feet through the air, Indy emerges unscathed. Yeah, that one. It's like a damn Looney Tunes cartoon. Also, the three waterfalls. The Tarzan-swings. The Goddamn ALIENS!
|
|
|
Post by indy2003 on May 23, 2008 7:02:23 GMT -8
Still a bit incoherent, but some extended thoughts... no worries, it's more or less spoiler-free.
There is no film franchise that I treasure more than the Indiana Jones series. Yes, there are certainly better films. I have much greater admiration and respect for films by great directors like Orson Welles and Ingmar Bergman. But there is no series of films that makes me happier than the Indiana Jones movies. Every time I'm in need of a smile, "Raiders of the Lost Ark" is near the top of my list of films I turn to. I also treasure the sequels, "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom" and "Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade", though neither quite manages to feel as remarkable as "Raiders". Still, I love the whole series. I was nervous when I heard that another Indy film was being planned... let's not forget what producer George Lucas did to the "Star Wars" series over the course of the past decade. Reviews for "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" have been decidedly mixed, with many critics saying that the series doesn't quite have the spark that it used to. Well, I've finally seen the movie, and here's my take.
I loved "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull". I loved every second of it, every frame, every moment. Does the movie have flaws and problems? I'm sure it does, but the first time around, I didn't even notice them. The movie was so busy filling me with joy and happiness that I didn't have time to nitpick or make complaints. I'm sure that after four or five more viewings, I'll begin to acknowledge the minor weaknesses the movie may have. But again, I don't suppose that will matter too much. As with the other Indiana Jones films, or movies like "The Big Lebowski", I'm so in love with the movie that whether or not I respect it doesn't even matter.
I know that I'm supposed to be a good film critic, and be objective about these things. I suppose I could attempt to put together a serious analysis of the film... but frankly, I'd just be faking it. This movie brought out the fanboy in me like no movie since... well, since the last time I watched one of the Indiana Jones movies. There will be plenty of time for analysis and dissection later on, but at the moment I'm still basking in the film's warm and joyous glow. So let me just tell you what I loved about the film.
- I loved Harrison Ford as Indiana Jones. There is actor better suited for the role, and there is no role better suited for the actor. After years of performances that Ford seemed bored with or uninterested in, there's finally a sparkle in his eye again. It's obvious that he loves playing Indy.
- I loved the wildly outlandish plot, which draws it's inspiration from the wildly outlandish science fiction films of the 1950s.
- I loved the remarkable action sequences. Steven Spielberg starts the ball rolling slowly, and it gradually picks up speed as the movie progresses. The action here is fearlessly outlandish, you would probably mock it and scoff at it if it weren't so incredibly exciting.
- I loved the supporting cast. Cate Blanchett plays the lead villain, and represents the most enjoyable bad guy... or in this case, bad girl... in the entire franchise. John Hurt is splendid in a small supporting role, and seems to be hiding his own private joke. Ray Winstone has turned bad manners into an art form, and here seems to be doing a reprisal of his wonderful turn in "Ripley's Game". Even young heartthrob Shia Lebeouf is solid in the role of Mutt, a young wannabe rebel who accompanies Indy on the journey. Though I love the entire cast, special mention must be made of Karen Allen, who reprises her role as Marion Ravenwood. It's wonderful to have Marion back, and the sparkling warmth that Allen brings to this movie makes you wonder why she hasn't been getting regular work all these years. Finally, here is a movie that recognizes that there always has been (and always will be) only one woman for Indiana Jones.
- I loved the way the movie managed to includes dozens of subtle nods to the original films, while simultaneously avoiding that "sequel disease" of simply re-hashing well-loved moments.
- I loved the score by composer John Williams, who returns with a tremendous effort after a three-year break from the world of cinema.
- I loved the cinematography by Janusz Kamisnki, who works with Spielberg to create a movie that is always a fascinating pleasure to look at, no matter what may be taking place onscreen.
- I love the fact that director Steven Spielberg seems to have rediscovered his youth. Ever since Spielberg entered his "serious" period in the early 1990s, his occasional entertaiment-driven films have lacked the magical sparkle of his early work. Finally, here is a movie made with all the enthusiastic zeal that made Spielberg's early work (including the other Indy films) so very special.
So, to conclude, I loved everything about the movie. You will probably see better films this year, and you will see more important films this year... but if you're like me, you will not see a more entertaining movie this year. I can't wait to see it again... and again... and again... and again. Recommended without reservation. Rating: **** (out of four)
|
|
|
Post by General Silliness on May 23, 2008 11:33:52 GMT -8
i wanted to say thanks to lucas and spielberg, thanks for bringing back my favorite hero.But it ended up being thanks like in "no, thanks".The script is complete bullshit.
|
|
cheno
Conductor
Posts: 1,012
|
Post by cheno on May 23, 2008 11:34:57 GMT -8
I'm trying to think of an element in this movie that is less believable than any other element in the previous three and can't come up with one. Oh! Hey! I can help with that! How about the whole series of scenes where they're having a truck chase inside the warehouse, Indy and the Russki get thrown clear, he accidentially hits the button that launches the experimental jet car, they somehow get on it, blast across the desert as fucking cartoony CGI beavers look on, and somehow end up at a nuclear test site JUST AS A TEST IS ABOUT TO COMMENCE, he gets in a fridge, there's a nuclear blast, the fridge gets thrown hundreds of feet through the air, Indy emerges unscathed. Yeah, that one. It's like a damn Looney Tunes cartoon. Also, the three waterfalls. The Tarzan-swings. The Goddamn ALIENS! Ok, so those are less believable than a guy's face melting off in the first one, a completely impossible mine chase and a guy pulling out people's hearts in the second one, and an invisible bridge leading to a 700 year old man right after Indy falls off a freakin' cliff in a car and still manages to climb back up said cliff? Really? Give me a break.
|
|
|
Post by Joseph Bat on May 23, 2008 18:18:00 GMT -8
Indy has always been fantasy-reality.
I don't think the problem with the film is believability, but rather the subject matter is some of the problem. There are many flaws to the film, which I don't have the interest to write about.
Joe
|
|
|
Post by Jens Dietrich on May 23, 2008 23:30:27 GMT -8
Ok, so those are less believable than a guy's face melting off in the first one, a completely impossible mine chase and a guy pulling out people's hearts in the second one, and an invisible bridge leading to a 700 year old man right after Indy falls off a freakin' cliff in a car and still manages to climb back up said cliff? Really? Give me a break. Oh yeah, cite the supernatural elements of those films when I'm talking purely about the down-to-earth adventure action scenes. Smart. The mine car chase is stupid, and admittedly I never liked Temple of Doom, but at least it didn't have obviously CGI gophers making cartoony faces. And no, there will be no break given. Are you seriously telling me that you wouldn't have a problem with Indy 5 if it featured robots? Or superheroes? The mythology of the first three movies and the TV series is based on judeo-christian and hindu beliefs and now suddenly we are just expected to buy that oh there's also aliens? From another dimension? Don't be an idiot.
|
|
cheno
Conductor
Posts: 1,012
|
Post by cheno on May 23, 2008 23:54:28 GMT -8
Ok, so those are less believable than a guy's face melting off in the first one, a completely impossible mine chase and a guy pulling out people's hearts in the second one, and an invisible bridge leading to a 700 year old man right after Indy falls off a freakin' cliff in a car and still manages to climb back up said cliff? Really? Give me a break. Oh yeah, cite the supernatural elements of those films when I'm talking purely about the down-to-earth adventure action scenes. Smart. The mine car chase is stupid, and admittedly I never liked Temple of Doom, but at least it didn't have obviously CGI gophers making cartoony faces. And no, there will be no break given. Are you seriously telling me that you wouldn't have a problem with Indy 5 if it featured robots? Or superheroes? The mythology of the first three movies and the TV series is based on judeo-christian and hindu beliefs and now suddenly we are just expected to buy that oh there's also aliens? From another dimension? Don't be an idiot. Dude, you can't criticize me for only focusing on certain parts if you ignore the cliff dive, which is probably the most obvious example. I know you think you get special standards when expressing your opinion, but you really don't.
|
|
|
Post by Jockolantern on May 24, 2008 0:06:19 GMT -8
I know you think you get special standards when expressing your opinion... Jens in a nutshell. Thank God.
|
|
|
Post by Jockolantern on May 24, 2008 0:08:44 GMT -8
To take this thread in a slighly different direction, what are your personal favorite Indy films, from best to worst? No reasons need be given, I'm just curious to see the variety of shapes the lists take. Thus, I shall start:
The Last Crusade Temple of Doom Raiders of the Lost Ark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Kingdom of the Crystal Skull
|
|
|
Post by Jens Dietrich on May 24, 2008 0:11:51 GMT -8
Dude, you can't criticize me for only focusing on certain parts if you ignore the cliff dive, which is probably the most obvious example. To be honest, I don't remember the cliff dive much, so I didn't feel qualified to comment. I can only assume you're referring to the scene where the tank goes off the cliff in Last Crusade, and Indy manages to somehow jump off it and hang on to a small tree on the side of the cliff... is that how it went down? Because unless my memory deceives me, that was hardly more ridiculous than any of the action in Crystal Skull. I'm not deliberately ignoring you, I honestly just don't recall that being a particularly "obvious example". Correct me if I'm wrong. I know you think you get special standards when expressing your opinion, but you really don't. I have no idea where you get this "special standards" shit from.
|
|
cheno
Conductor
Posts: 1,012
|
Post by cheno on May 24, 2008 0:12:35 GMT -8
Raiders Last Crusade Crystal Skull Temple of Doom
|
|
|
Post by Jens Dietrich on May 24, 2008 0:15:02 GMT -8
Raiders Last Crusade Temple of Doom The Mummy King Solomon's Mines
Crystal Skull
|
|
cheno
Conductor
Posts: 1,012
|
Post by cheno on May 24, 2008 0:20:43 GMT -8
So... what I'm getting is that the reason why this fourth movie isn't as believable a film is because it has the wrong kind of supernatural elements? Ok...
And no tree was shown in the film. He just falls off the cliff and up he comes. Good as new.
As for the special standards, I think I'll just let your words speak for themselves...
|
|