Indy Joneses!

[DanielH]

I liked the new film, but not as much as Last crusade or Raiders. It beats Temple of doom hands down though, which is a piece of crap compared to the others.

Conclusion:
(indy films in order of how good they are)

1. Indiana Jones and the last crusade
2. Indiana Jones and the raiders of the lost ark
3. Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the crystal skull
4. Indiana Jones and the Temple of doom

[Pumaman]

Damn it, I knew that going back to see another Spielburg movie would be like going back to the ship's captain and asking him to please spank me with the Cat O'Nine Tails a few more times. And yet I did it anyway.

What is wrong with this man? EVERY SINGLE TIME, he makes a decent movie and then completely ruins it with the ending. I mean, frickking

Spoiler

UFO's and aliens

[close]

, and the unnecessary luvvey-duvvey bit afterwards. I agree it's not on the scale of AI or War of the Worlds, but even so ... it's enough to drive you mad!

As for the fridge,

Spoiler

why did he even bother getting in there? Surely back in those days people were taught to Duck and Cover...

[close]

[evenwolf]

What is wrong with this man? EVERY SINGLE TIME, he makes a decent movie and then completely ruins it with the ending. I mean, frickking

Spoiler

UFO's and aliens

[close]

CJ:

Spoiler

It wasn't Spielberg this time.   
One of the reasons he and Ford turned down previous Lucas scripts was because they were centered around aliens. This was Lucas compromising.   What a dick.   

[close]

As for the fridge,

Spoiler

why did he even bother getting in there? Surely back in those days people were taught to Duck and Cover...

[close]

Hahahha, "Quick Indy!   Find a grade school desk!"

[evenwolf]

Conclusion:
(indy films in order of how good they are)

1. Indiana Jones and the last crusade
2. Indiana Jones and the raiders of the lost ark
3. Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the crystal skull
4. Indiana Jones and the Temple of doom

Good list.   I'll agree since I think Crusades can be watched over and over.   Raiders is "the classic Indy film" but still taken in doses.   Whereas Doom is ridiculous.    "Doctor Jones! Indy! Doctor Jones!  Indy!"    I love Shortround but he and Willie yell Indiana's name every other half second.   Willie was the worst casting done in any of these movies, no wonder since Spielberg thought he'd go and marry her.

[LimpingFish]

All this hate for Temple of Doom. :'(

And monkeys.

Temple of Doom's biggest flaws were a weak/annoying female lead, a comedy sidekick, and a lack of Nazis. Other than that, I don't really see any problem with it.

The Last Crusade had similar flaws; a weak/bland female lead, a comedy sidekick (sometimes I just want to smack Sean Connery), and a denouement that seems oddly constructed and vague.

Rating Last Crusade above Raiders? Not that isn't a fine film, but I wouldn't. It lacks the punch of Raiders.

As McGuffins go, Temple of Doom's Sankara Stones are just as weak as The Crystal Skull, yet The Crystal Skull seems sillier. Especially in the context of the big reveal at the film's climax. I felt that the Holy Grail was underplayed in Last Crusade. But that's just me.

Only the Ark of the Covenant seemed awe-inspiring.

[evenwolf]

The Last Crusade had similar flaws; a weak/bland female lead, a comedy sidekick (sometimes I just want to smack Sean Connery), and a denouement that seems oddly constructed and vague.

While I agree, the difference between Crusade and Doom was the delivery.   Connery did great in that first scene where he and Indy are talking about 2 separate things, Indy's head and the ming vase.   I mean there's a lot of comedy gold in that movie.   "Marcus Brody is probably beaten you to the Grail already!"   Cut-  Marcus:  "Does anybody speak English!?"

The female lead in Crusade turns out to be a bad guy.   A lot fewer scenes as a love interest.   So I don't see much of a comparison with Willie.

During Doom, Indy is just so frustrated and distant.  There's really no charm in that movie that compares with the others.  And no college!   Just a stupid musical I can do without.   

[LimpingFish]

Oh, sure, Henry Jones Sr is far better than Short Round, but I just think they played up his bemused reactions a bit much.

As for Elsa Schneider, the problem is far more apparent. We, as in the viewer, feel nothing for her when she appears to be on Indy's side; the audience isn't endeared to her character, as she more or less appears cold and mannered from the offset. I feel that the impact of her betrayal is somewhat lessened because of this. In fact, I think her betrayal is somewhat telegraphed, because of, as you said, the lack of interaction between her and Indy. One of the few scenes where we might have begun to appreciate her character ("We're here to view the tapestries!") ultimately comes too late.

I think, with a stronger female character, evil or otherwise, the story would have benefited.

[Makeout Patrol]

I haven't seen this movie yet, so I guess I really don't have room to comment, but endings have sucked throughout this series. Raiders is by far the best one in the series, and it's almost like it doesn't even have an ending. Sure, it's a spectacle, and it's cool to see that one guy's face melt, but it makes no sense and doesn't fit in with anything that preceded it. I realize it's not an excuse for an unsatisfying ending, but it's hardly crapping all over the rest of the series. It's pulp entertainment, people need to enjoy it for what it is.

[Radiant]

Rating Last Crusade above Raiders? Not that isn't a fine film, but I wouldn't. It lacks the punch of Raiders.

Really? As I remember Raiders, there's simply a macguffin that keeps changing hands. Over and over and over again. Indy has it. The nazis steal it. Indy steals it back. Then the nazis steal it again. Indy uses it to obtain a second macguffin. Surprise, the nazis steal that too. And then guess what happens...

[evenwolf]

Rating Last Crusade above Raiders? Not that isn't a fine film, but I wouldn't. It lacks the punch of Raiders.

Really? As I remember Raiders, there's simply a macguffin that keeps changing hands. Over and over and over again. Indy has it. The nazis steal it. Indy steals it back. Then the nazis steal it again. Indy uses it to obtain a second macguffin. Surprise, the nazis steal that too. And then guess what happens...

Haha, Crusade isn't much different except that the MacGuffin cycles between:   Henry Jones Sr.,   the diary,   Marcus Brody, the map, the grail itself.....

[DanielH]

I love Shortround but he and Willie yell Indiana's name every other half second.   Willie was the worst casting done in any of these movies, no wonder since Spielberg thought he'd go and marry her.

I agree- Shortround was Okay, really, but I can't stand Willie. She's incredibly annoying- not just bad casting, she's a bad character, whoever came up with her character and thought 'that's fantastic character development' probably had a Lobotomy shortly beforehand. The character Willie ruins the entire movie for me. Rant over.

Disregard that, Temple of doom is the single greatest masterpiece ever to hit my eyes and I want to inject it into my veins. Only Film Directors are allowed to criticize films, so I'm retracting my statement and replacing it with a nicer one, just for Nacho's pleasure.

No, Disregard that.

[Nacho]

You seem to be a bit dare to criticise some aspects of Indy' s movies DanielH... This is crap, this guy must to have a lobotomy to do that... How may films have you directed, Daniel? Are you Sidney Pollack' s re-incarnation, or something?

[MrColossal]

One doesn't have to be a director to have an opinion on a movie.

[DanielH]

You seem to be a bit dare to criticise some aspects of Indy' s movies DanielH... This is crap, this guy must to have a lobotomy to do that... How may films have you directed, Daniel? Are you Sidney Pollack' s re-incarnation, or something?

: Apparently only masterful directors are allowed opinions. Hm. I'll edit my statement to please you, your majesty.

Disregard.

[Nacho]

Throwing opinions is ok. I never said DanielH wasn't  allowed to have an opinion, Eric, don' t change my words.

I just say that telling what he says to those who he says is "dare", specially considering that, unless the opposite is proven, his directing skills are 0.

Treat people who has mastered the art of directing films or telling tales like if they were shit, can only be made by someone who is extremelly better than the people that is being criticised.

I mean... Sir Laurence Olivier could be perfectly allowed to tell that Adam Sandler acts like crap.

My biggest goal in acting was doing an intro at school when I was 8. I think it would be "dare" for me to tell that Adam Sandler is crap.

Most of the opinions said here have been even more negative to Indy's saga, Spielberg, or some of the other members of the crew, but have been more polited and constructive. I am not saying that "no one except masterful directos can have opinions".

I am just saying that his way of telling what he says is dare.

EDIT: Forget it all... I just say Daniel' s age in his profile... It explains a lot of things...

[DanielH]

I'm sorry. I reacted like a git, and now I feel stupid  . I know what you mean Nacho, just forget it all.


But Adam Sandler is crap.

[Stupot]

Nacho, People are critics... have you never said anything like "this food tastes like shit" or "that book was boring"?
You would be perfectly entitled to say these things, as you are perfectly entitled to express your own opinion based on your own tastes.
You don't have to be a gourmet chef to annouce that you didn't enjoy your food.
Likewise you don't have to be an world-renowned author to express that you didn't enjoy a book.

And you don't have to have any directing skills say that you didn't enjoy a film.

People are always judging and criticising things... it's how we imporove and shape the world around us.

Allow Daniel his freedom of expression.

[MrColossal]

I don't think I changed your words in the slightest..

Why are you picking on Daniel? Then you just go ahead and publicly insult him for his listed age. Real mature.

I've not directed a movie in my life, I've acted in things my brother and I did for fun growing up and I've never written a script for a film. I am 27 years old.

Star Wars 1 - 3 are shitty films and George Lucas appears to be an idiot lately, what with not having anything to offer the world but crap and bad decisions.

Sadly some of this bled into the new Indy movie.

[Nacho]

Again... I am not picking on Daniel. I am not kidnapping his "freedom or expression". I just said that it' s been dare for him to said what he said the way he said. I haven' t said that it' s invalid, stupid, silly, or something like that, basically because I don' t think that what he said has been invalid/stupid or something like that.

After that, I though "Hey! Maybe he is young, and saying "that' s crap" it's his way to say "I think the film has flaws here, and here..."

So, I watched his Profile, and I realised that, effectivelly, he' s a teenager. So, his opinions are basically the same than mines, it' s only that he is expressing himself in the way that he and his mates do. I have no problem with that, I was also a teenager, I also expressed my opinions in that way when I had his age, so, that' s what I posted: "I' ve seen your profile. It explains a lot of things". And I asked everybody to forget the whole stuff. Because for me it' s ok.

So, if somebody wants to go on discussing with me if it' s dare for a 15 years old guy telling that Spielberg' s work (His critics were basically focused on "Temple of Doom") is shit, I can go on, because I keep my opinion. I don' t think that "dare" is "THE INSULT!11!" that can't be written here without being accused of going picking members or not allowing somebody to express his opinion. But I' d preffer we to stop because I consider this quite... silly...

And yes... Star Wars 1 and 2 were quite crappy... and Adam Sandler.

EDIT: Hey Daniel! No probs...  But (IMHO) you should preview if your audience is going to approve your comments, specially if they are going to be that strong, before throwing them.

I mean, it might be ok if you are in front of a soda, surounded of friends and you comment that Indy 2 is crap. I use to do commetaries like that. It might not be that ok if you are in forums were people saw Indy 2 when they were young (like I was when I saw it) and loved it, it might be offensive. And you could receive something as hard as "dare" as a reply.

[LimpingFish]

I saw Raiders during it's second or third run sometime in '83, if memory serves. I saw Temple and Crusade in '84 and '89 respectively. I have fond memories of seeing all three.

My older brother and I used to get the novelizations and comic book versions of almost every popular sci-fi/fantasy/adventure movie that came out in the eighties, and everything had novelizations or comic book adaptions in those days.

Everything from Dragonslayer to Biggles, by way of Flash Gordon and Krull!

I remember the Raiders novelization was written by Campbell Black, and I can almost remember who wrote the Temple of Doom one...

EDIT: James Kahn!