cptjeff: I really don't get why people objected to the last one so strongly. Yeah, it was unrealistic as hell. Okay, now rewatch the original three. Were any of them particularly believable?

They're not supposed to be realistic. They're supposed to be based on mid century pulp novels with widely exaggerated stories, where facts were suspended when they didn't serve the story. You suspend disbelief, and they entertain. IMO, the fourth fit pretty well in that context.

Knock it if you want, but really, you're acting like the people who analyze the validity of Star Trek by pointing out that the technology doesn't exist. It's just an incredibly vapid exercise.

Trolling or not, here's the answer.

I won't take credit for this thought...go check out "Red Letter Media" on youtube.

But basically, Indiana Jones was popular becuase men wanted to be him and women wanted to be with him. He was a teacher by day....a world traveling nazi killer by night. He went on the adventures we all wished we could and he always got the hot girl. He went to exotic places and found buried treasure...


Watching Harrison ford as a geriatric in "the movie that doesn't exist" ...isn't any that... He's old, he's washed up, he's settling down with an ex-girlfriend from an earlier movie...That's not exciting, that not interesting...all the stuff that made indiann jones fun back in the 80 was missing.

Indiana Jones and the Quest for More Fiber!

I don't know why the last one gets such a hard time from people, it wasn't great, but it wasn't that bad either. Of course I saw it on dvd for a buck, maybe if I had spent $10 on a movie ticket I'd feel different about it.

Rev. Skarekroe: buntz: I didn't like Crystal Skull because Indy was unnecessary. He went along for the ride, but if the Russians got the skull on their own and took it to the temple, on their own, it would have had the same result.

/in fact, if Indy let the Nazis have the Ark, chances are he could have ended WWII before it started, assuming Hitler took a peek inside first

Hm... Actually, even in Last Crusade if the Nazis had found the Grail on their own the result would've been the same - they try to remove the Grail from the temple, it collapses on top of them.

In fact, the only movie where Indy's presence actually makes that much of a difference is Temple of Doom because he rescues the children and saves the village.

*facepalm*

In Raiders, to Indy finding the Ark was a matter of making one of the greatest archeological finds in history, and not depriving the Nazis of a super weapon. It wasn't until the very end that Indy realized the power was real. Besides, the outcome was unknown and he just couldn't take a chance of it falling into the hands of the Nazis. Plus, when he found out Belloq was helping the Nazis, they just became an added incentive to get it first.

In Temple, pointed out, he recovered the stone and rescued the children.

In Last Crusade, it was first and foremost about finding and rescuing his dad. The restoration of their relationship was the real quest, not the grail.

I would imagine that if they made a 4th movie involving a crystal skull, that it would certainly be about rescuing someone and then making the discovery first.

Mugato: mrtoadswildride: But basically, Indiana Jones was popular becuase men wanted to be him and women wanted to be with him. He was a teacher by day....a world traveling nazi killer by night. He went on the adventures we all wished we could and he always got the hot girl. He went to exotic places and found buried treasure...


Watching Harrison ford as a geriatric in "the movie that doesn't exist" ...isn't any that... He's old, he's washed up, he's settling down with an ex-girlfriend from an earlier movie...That's not exciting, that not interesting...all the stuff that made indiann jones fun back in the 80 was missing.

God would you guys stop parroting that guy? That's farking stupid.


What, the Red Letter Media guy? Why? He's fantastic at breaking movies down and exploring their strengths and weaknesses.

As for that particular criticism... I already posted plenty of my own criticisms upthread, but that one is pretty much on the nose too. What's so "farking stupid" about it?

Also because there hasn't been a place where this would be even remotely appropriate:

I saw "Random Hearts" on Netflix a few weeks ago. Solid 3 of 5 stars. Not the greatest movie, yet I enjoyed it.

Fark Braintrust comments: "Lucas this, Lucas that, Lucas the other..."

Opening credits of Crystal Skull... "A STEVEN SPEILBERG FILM."

I didn't like how Sallah and Brody went from intelligent, three dimensional characters in Raiders to caricatures in Last Crusade.

Watch the initial scene of Indy and Sallah talking around his dinner table in Raiders. He was a serious and legitimate character. And Brody was, at the very least, a proper English college professor.

They were both bumbling in Crusade.

/ALWAYS bothered me!
//was also clear they wrote Crystal Skull with Connery in mind. He passed so they had to invent another old man character
///ALSO clear someone wrote the original "National Treasure" as a 4th Indiana Jones movie and they passed. National Treasure would have been a FANTASTIC Indiana Jones movie, kerjiggered for the 50s, minus the computer stuff.

The problem w/ CS isn't the aliens, it isn't the nuke/fridge, it isn't even Shia or swinging on vines.

The problem is it was made too damn late. CS was doomed to failure because we all had too damn much time to grow up and for our tastes in movies to change.

Personally I enjoyed it, but I've not yet lost that youthful exuberance that lets me see a movie and enjoy it, rather than feel the need to critique it.

Disgruntled Goat: Fark Braintrust comments: "Lucas this, Lucas that, Lucas the other..."

Opening credits of Crystal Skull... "A STEVEN SPEILBERG FILM."

Spielberg may have directed the Indiana Jones films, but they're Lucas' projects. He had final word. Spielberg never wanted to do the aliens, but Lucas insisted. Spielberg wanted to shoot the Frank Darabont script, which had no Mutt Williams and Marion Ravenwood was a much more prominent character, but Lucas vetoed it. Having said that, both of them have separately taken credit (accepted the blame?) for nuking the fridge. No clue whose idea was Mutt swinging on vines with CGI monkeys. I recommend watching Tintin where Spielberg directs a similar spanning-the-globe action adventure, but is collaborating with Peter Jackson instead of Lucas.

buntz: I didn't like how Sallah and Brody went from intelligent, three dimensional characters in Raiders to caricatures in Last Crusade.

Watch the initial scene of Indy and Sallah talking around his dinner table in Raiders. He was a serious and legitimate character. And Brody was, at the very least, a proper English college professor.

They were both bumbling in Crusade.

Worst of all, Indy becoming a bit of a doofus himself with the Scottish interior decorater bit. I find that scene more painful than anything in KOTCS.

/at least it's Mutt swinging on those vines and not Indy
//I didn't like his character anyway

Indiana Jones and the Bottomless Cup of Coffee and the Newspaper at Denny's When You Know He's Not Going to Order Any Food and Will Leave an 8 Cent Tip


in 3-D

As an aside, if you're an adventure VG nerd and also enjoy Indy, the LucasArts Indy game from ~1993, Indy and the Fate of Atlantis, is pretty awesome and could've easily been another flick. Check that out if you want some Indiana Jones goodness... even the not-Harrison Ford VA for Indy is pretty good.

There needs to be 3 things that happen to make this next movie watchable:

1. Joe Johnston needs to be involved in some capacity.

2. They need to use more retro effects, models and the like.

3. Indy needs to be divorced.

/2 out of the 3 is ok

Mugato: gunga galunga: Spielberg may have directed the Indiana Jones films, but they're Lucas' projects. He had final word. Spielberg never wanted to do the aliens, but Lucas insisted. Spielberg wanted to shoot the Frank Darabont script, which had no Mutt Williams and Marion Ravenwood was a much more prominent character, but Lucas vetoed it. Having said that, both of them have separately taken credit (accepted the blame?) for nuking the fridge. No clue whose idea was Mutt swinging on vines with CGI monkeys. I recommend watching Tintin where Spielberg directs a similar spanning-the-globe action adventure, but is collaborating with Peter Jackson instead of Lucas.

The story aside, the director is in charge of what's on the screen. CGI prairie dogs, monkeys, ect were all Spielberg.

I don't absolve Spielberg entirely. Ultimately, I think he's outgrown the material. The first three movies, varying degrees of quality aside, he was still a child-at-heart. KOTCS, he's a adult trying to act like a kid again, but it can never be the same. At least that's my theory about the prairie dogs and the monkeys.

The only good recent Spielberg film/short:

Link

gunga galunga: Mugato: gunga galunga: Spielberg may have directed the Indiana Jones films, but they're Lucas' projects. He had final word. Spielberg never wanted to do the aliens, but Lucas insisted. Spielberg wanted to shoot the Frank Darabont script, which had no Mutt Williams and Marion Ravenwood was a much more prominent character, but Lucas vetoed it. Having said that, both of them have separately taken credit (accepted the blame?) for nuking the fridge. No clue whose idea was Mutt swinging on vines with CGI monkeys. I recommend watching Tintin where Spielberg directs a similar spanning-the-globe action adventure, but is collaborating with Peter Jackson instead of Lucas.

The story aside, the director is in charge of what's on the screen. CGI prairie dogs, monkeys, ect were all Spielberg.

I don't absolve Spielberg entirely. Ultimately, I think he's outgrown the material. The first three movies, varying degrees of quality aside, he was still a child-at-heart. KOTCS, he's a adult trying to act like a kid again, but it can never be the same. At least that's my theory about the prairie dogs and the monkeys.


That movie had Lucas smeared all over it. It reeked of George Lucas' fetid taint.

Not that I'm letting Spielberg off the hook, he SHOULD have put his foot down a thousand times in that movie, or he should have insisted on an Allan Smithee credit, but it clearly had Lucas smeared over every inch of that movie. The aforementioned CGI gopher was sooooooooo Lucas. He loves putting in little CGI crap like that. Remember the CGI crap he added to the original Star Wars trilogy a few years ago?

optikeye: cptjeff: They're not supposed to be realistic. They're supposed to be based on mid century pulp novels with widely exaggerated stories, where facts were suspended when they didn't serve the story. You suspend disbelief, and they entertain. IMO, the fourth fit pretty well in that context.

You don't get it...the complaint isn't that it was unrealistic. The problem was it sucked.

It needed more aliens, and monkeys.

mrtoadswildride: Watching Harrison ford as a geriatric in "the movie that doesn't exist" ...isn't any that... He's old, he's washed up, he's settling down with an ex-girlfriend from an earlier movie...That's not exciting, that not interesting...all the stuff that made indiann jones fun back in the 80 was missing.

My problem with Ford is that he's obviously not having fun. You watch the original movies and even when he's having punch-ups with Nazis, he keeps the tone light.

KOTCS isn't a problem because of the fridge scene. The fridge scene is perfectly fine. It's that it has no joy, the pacing is up and down, the interaction of characters is all over the place and the CG looks wrong. You watch 1 & 3 and the characters actually look in danger and part of that is because they're actually there.

With several grams of psylicybin mushrooms, the 4th one is actually pretty awesome.

The temple lifting off sort of makes sense at that point.

farkeruk: mrtoadswildride: Watching Harrison ford as a geriatric in "the movie that doesn't exist" ...isn't any that... He's old, he's washed up, he's settling down with an ex-girlfriend from an earlier movie...That's not exciting, that not interesting...all the stuff that made indiann jones fun back in the 80 was missing.

My problem with Ford is that he's obviously not having fun. You watch the original movies and even when he's having punch-ups with Nazis, he keeps the tone light.

KOTCS isn't a problem because of the fridge scene. The fridge scene is perfectly fine. It's that it has no joy, the pacing is up and down, the interaction of characters is all over the place and the CG looks wrong. You watch 1 & 3 and the characters actually look in danger and part of that is because they're actually there.

This, except the fridge scene did suck and was not perfectly fine.

Snatch Bandergrip
>>> OnlyM3: Snatch Bandergrip
>>> Obligatory, and as usual, right on the money
>>> /Pizza roll
>>> Oh fark them. They blather on for 10 minutes in that review on how great
>>> shi-le-bu**fu*k is a great natural actor.
>>> All credibility....... gone.

???

They?

Red letter media's Indiana Jones 4 review.

Also, Plinkett gives LaBeef a pass, but he hardly praises him.

Watch it again if you want, the review basically takes a time-out and spends several minutes bullet pointing how good they think la puff's scenes were (Diner, etc...) then iirc the exact quote was "he ( la puff ) is a great, natural actor".

Giving him a pass for that horrid work would have been bad enough. Praising him as a great actor... asinine.

The more time I spend on here the more I want to see a movie directed by J.J. Abrams that stars Shia LaBeouf directing a porno with Justin Bieber sporting an 8 inch cock, farking Selena Gomez with full frontal nudity for both characters and see it make $250 million dollars.

Just because Fark would hate it.

I guess I may be one of the few who enjoyed Indy 4. I often found myself smiling when watching it. It was like seeing an old friend after several years.

Yes, it had it's weaknesses, such as not enough whip action, but I still enjoyed it.

I think they should ditch Ford, he's too old. Replace him with Dennis Quaid. He's got the look and I think he would make a great Indy.

Mugato: PapaChester: I used to feel so negative like everyone else. American media viewers have become so dumb now, and many of us have become so cynical that I now support George Lucas in all of his wild-eyed endeavors.

Eff that self loathing "American viewers" shiat. Other countries eat our movies with a spoon.

THIS!!!

Mugato: mrtoadswildride: But basically, Indiana Jones was popular becuase men wanted to be him and women wanted to be with him. He was a teacher by day....a world traveling nazi killer by night. He went on the adventures we all wished we could and he always got the hot girl. He went to exotic places and found buried treasure...


Watching Harrison ford as a geriatric in "the movie that doesn't exist" ...isn't any that... He's old, he's washed up, he's settling down with an ex-girlfriend from an earlier movie...That's not exciting, that not interesting...all the stuff that made indiann jones fun back in the 80 was missing.

God would you guys stop parroting that guy? That's farking stupid.


I think the red letter guy was right on...but also My personal dislike was becuase it felt like this was another star wars prequel...where each scene exists solely to get you to the next CGI action scene.


First it was the fridge scene, then it's motorcycle chase scene, then it's the chase through the jungle scene, then it's sword on two cars fight scene, then it's the ants eating the person, then it's the boat going over the cliff...and so on...until its the magical alien scene...

like every scene is just lucas going, "man wouldnt' it be neat if jones did this?"