GatorDeb

She wrote Juno and has the coolest name ever.

wm lopez

I went in expecting not to like the movie with the reviews saying it was like LAST CRUSADE. But I liked it and thought Kate Blanchet's character was good. And Ford's Indy for 60 years old was tough unlike Connery's winy, annoying performance. Ford brought his tough, macho "A" game to this movie at least for 60 years old. And did anyone notice that the scene where they show in the trailer where Indy is in the warehouse and he swings by his whip into the jeep you could almost see that there is a cable holding him.
But in the movie on the big screen I could not see any of that it looked like he was swinging without a harness.

Shannon Nutt

That's because, unlike the previous films, the crew never ventured outside the United States for locations on this one. The most exotic shooting location they went to was Hawaii (for the Amazon stuff)...the rest was shot in New Mexico (Area 51), Connecticut (college stuff) and locales around California, including the Universal backlot.

FiveO

That makes sense.

It was rough watching some of the scenes becaue you could tell the lighting was fake and that the sound stage was the venue.

I enjoyed parts of the movie. Just overall I thought it was weak. Unfortunately I'll be buying it on DVD/Blu-Ray as the completist that I am

mhg83

Spoonys 3 part Rant on Indy 4 (Warning: Tons of Spoilers)

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/HQW5rWMGqbg&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/HQW5rWMGqbg&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/OipUKkawkx4&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/OipUKkawkx4&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Et-SSZHfT-o&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Et-SSZHfT-o&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

maingon

you cant complain on this one, the sets were fanatastic looking, watching Raiders of the Lost ark, the intro doesnt feel any way realistic looking probably the most "set" looking in all the indy flicks . Which is fine for these fun goofy movies.

I still dont see the hate for this flick, come on people its a indiana Jones flick. They are all alittle too goofy but its fun. Everything here felt like a Indiana Jones flick. expect for about 5 minutes with the alien stuff. Other then that its one of the most fun movies I have seen in a long time. Better then any Adventure type of flick that has came out in a long long long time.

kevin75

holy crap that guy with the videos really needs to unclench. i watched about half of the first clip where he is ranting against the number of crystal skulls (which i understood perfectly) and quit after that. he acts like he was expecting the best film in the history of cinema.

MBoyd

Somebody watch the whole thing and tell me if his mom comes through the door and asks what he's doing.

parker63

I just wonder if this movie will get repeat business after this weekend? You know, after all of the "well, regardless of what people say, I've got to see it for myself" tickets are sold.

Did I think it was fun? Yeah, sort of. I liked the opening Paramount slide transition to the molehill...that was pretty funny. I think this movie played more like a comedy or parody of the last three films than anything else. You have to admit, it did get pretty silly more than a few times. It was OK, but I wouldn't pay to see it again.

I didn't really see the point of Ray Winstone's character at all by the end of the movie. It was almost like somebody owed him a favor, and they wrote him into the film. Unless they just needed someone to leave the red flashing "bread crumb" trail for the Russians to follow.

I took the strategy of going into it not expecting much at all, and I think that's what made it work for me. As I was watching it, I think the thing that was hardest for me personally was seeing Indy look so, how else can I say it...old.

It sort of reminded me of really liking the Laurel & Hardy comedies from the 1930's, when they were in their prime, and then seeing them in one of their final films from the late 40's early 50's period...just not that funny, and they just looked tired, and their heart wasn't really in it. Or going to see your favorite band from the 70's or 80's doing a show today...fun to see them again for the nostalgia, but a little sad because it just wasn't/isn't the same. What else was I expecting? Nothing really, it's reality, but it was still a little tough to accept.

In the end, it was OK, but I just wish they hadn't waited so long to make it.

TomOpus

I would absolutely hate to be anywhere close to that guy in a movie theater.

Save Ferris

but
The movie was pretty hollow. Felt like a made for TV parody or 'tribute' to old harry but not like the others.

The Bus

Like I mentioned before, last time I had seen Raiders of the Lost Ark was probably twenty years ago. I just finished watching it and can say without a doubt that people are seeing this movie through rose-colored glasses. Not in that it's not a great film: it is. But the new IJ is being unfairly judged when both movies had almost as many ridiculous premises. I still think the original trilogy was, well, let's say crafted with more care. But anyone that loathes this movie and loves the first three needs to get their head checked.

Dr Mabuse

i would just like to say that i loathe this movie and loved the first three...

wait a minute...

Wolf359

There it is again....seems to be a pretty common thing to insult people that don't like it. I love the first three and while I didn't LOATHE this movie, it is miles and miles away from being remotely as well made, well written, or exciting as the first three.

TheAllPurposeNothing

Thank you for summing up what I was going to say much more succinctly.

Two things to add:

First: The involvement of aliens are not out of place in the context of the series at all. The series was meant as a throw-back to movie serials, many of which involved alien subplots (Flash Gordon, Buck Rogers, Phantom Empire). They were short on character, high on preposterousness (if that's a word) and rarely adhering to a single genre. It actually fits in very neatly.

And the second: The one thing Raiders has over this (and the other two Indy flicks) is the writing (dialogue more character than plot driven). If the early 80's Lawrence Kasdan had written this with the same plot, a lot of you would be talking differently. But no one writes that kind of dialogue anymore (including Kasdan). Hell, I'm still 100% sure that Raiders would only be a marginal success financially and critically if released today. At best, it would be a cult hit. What people asked of their movies is 1981 is not the same as what they expect today.

Ronnie Dobbs

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/hab-0t-uUFM&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/hab-0t-uUFM&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

JIF

+1

It's a C+ at best. I think most people here are giving high marks for nostalgia sake and not the film itself.

JIF

+1

mdc3000

Who's harry? Anyhow, in regards to your spoiler question

lopper

Roger Ebert said in his blog, "The movie isn't a throwback to the Saturday serials of the 1930s and 1940s. It's what they would have been if they could have been."

I think that if more people went into the film with this quote in their heads, they'd enjoy the movie a whole lot more. I know that it helped me to just sit back and enjoy the ride without picking the flick apart.

Depression

I don't entirely buy the arguement that Aliens aren't anymore far fetched than the previous movies.

Some of the things in the first three were indeed "out there" but they were still somewhat grounded in our world. Meaning whether you believe in Christianity or not, the religion is still a huge part of our history.

Aliens on the other hand, we know nothing about. Anything is just speculation. Which makes it a lot harder to swallow.

TheAllPurposeNothing

Only Raiders was based in ancient Hebrew beliefs. Last Crusade was tied to Christianity. TOD was tied to Indian (esp. Thugee) beliefs as its basis.
And KOTCS was tied into Mayan and other early native belief systems which did incorporate the idea of extraterrestrial life within their religions. Hence, grounding it in "our world."

Therefore, just as easy to swallow, IMHO.

The Bus

I haven't rewatched Temple or Crusade, but I agree with what you're saying. Watching Raiders it was interesting how much Spielberg developed the icon of Indiana: his silhouette appears many times. I feel like those little touches were missing from the new film. I'm not saying you have to like this film. Just understand that at its core it is not really that different from the first three.

hapgilmore

Saw this yesterday...loved it, don't understand all the hate. It was a solid popcorn flick, highly entertaining and fun.

maingon

i agree. Reading peoples commits on here you wonder if they remember the original 3 movies, Theres alot you could pick apart there. and if you enjoyed them I don't see why you didn't enjoy this, felt very much like the others. The effects were great. I just watched

Well you could say that about temple of Doom, Every single moment the the girl Wilhelmina 'Willie' Scott was on screen, moment when they were sleeping in the jungle and all the animals. etc. I dont see it being any more of a comedy then Raiders of the lost ark? Explain? all movies have tons of humor, nothings really taken seriously. All the indy moves did get pretty silly more then a few times.



This did too, and the sets here were pretty amazing compared to the other flicks, The other flicks that used some pretty bad Matte paintings especially the warehouse were everything is stored, watch the original flick, one of the worst matte paintings. The famous opening in the original flick always felt like a set, so did many other scenes in the original flick.
check this picture out does that look real and alive?
http://www.imdb.com/media/rm1508415744/tt0082971




How can you say
"What an awful, awful film. I see the occasional bad movie, but very rarely do I leave the theater thinking, "I wish I hadn't seen that." The movie failed on every level. " I can see not liking it that much but how is it awful? etc? then you must not like the other 3 because the tone and action of the other movies are not much different then this one. Did this movie have problems with the end with the alien yeah, but everything else was excellent, and the problems here were pretty much apparent in all the other movies.

Visual effects werent bad they were pretty good, the ants in alot of the shots looked excellent and realistic. some wide shots of them attacking people maybe but overall looked excellent. the original 3 had some bad effects and matte paintings too, so you hate them too.

"overall look of the film is flat out ugly"

only in some shots was did it have the light blooming but other then that it didnt look any different the other movies.

"Am I the only one that thinks computer effects are getting worse as the years go by?"

Ah no, How can you say that, this Indy Flick was a little stylized but it captured the time and feeling. But how can you say computer effects are getting worse. So you think Transformers etc had BAD visuals?


"They could have cast Nick Cage in the lead and called it National Treasure 3. It's that bad. "

umm no

"Look out for the computer generated ants! Careful, don't go near the computer genereted cliff! Oh no, don't get hit by the debris from that computer generated explosion!"

You could use this complaint in pretty much every movie, of course they could of used real ants in those scenes, that would of worked. come on....


I just thought the last post was trying to criticized everything, i dont see huge problems where the movie is awful or wish I didnt see it, It was an excellent flick that did have problems but was still a very fun movie.