It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
I asked this question a few weeks back. Though I may, or may not, or may have mentioned 'hate boners'.
I don't see why people need to clutch their pearls. So someone has chosen to judge a film without seeing it. So what? Take a deep breath, and move on.
I answered that, but I guess you skim my replies.
Yet you can critique him. Isn't that like the Drinker critiquing Indy without seeing it? I am guessing you will have a justification for yours and rip him for his. LOL!
Uh, I said “I don’t watch his stuff”, not that I’ve never seen any of his stuff ever. If you used your critical thinking skills you could have surmised that.
I realize that he's been ripped for changing his opinion on movies once he's seen them. Many reviewers respond to trailers and provide a thought on what they think is coming. This is folly that I wouldn't engage in, but then I don't have to pump out content for YouTube. I take his views on trailers with a grain of salt. I appreciate that he admits when he got it wrong, or if a movie turns out to be better than he thought based on the trailer.
We seem to have drifted off topic, so to put it back to DoD. I look forward to seeing how a new director brings a new vision to the character. On a recent re-watch of Doom I had forgotten how some of the angles and camera work was so excellent at story telling. I always melt when I see Short Round mimic Indy at the village. I also love the trek to the palace on elephants. Beautiful shots of the land! I wonder if Dod will have any of that scope!
Neither does he, though. Unless you’re recognising that he makes this content just for money, therefore a lot of these views are made in bad faith.
And his attitude to slating films he hasn’t seen yet is what we’re talking about in this discussion about Dial of Destiny, because he hasn’t seen it. If you recognise that a pinch of salt has be taken (putting it very mildly!) in those cases, I’m not sure why we’re defending him here.
It’s a very odd take on it. I wonder why you need to clutch your pearls over some people pointing out that a guy on YouTube is a grifter. Just read it and move on.
It’s funny how quickly those who watch him move to insulting or questioning the motives of anyone who doesn’t like him, rather than just arguing his merits.
It’s the same cinematographer as Ford vs Ferrari, which I thought was a very handsome movie, so fingers crossed.
Weirdly I did think West Side Story was rather stunning looking and would happily have had the cinematographer of that one do Indy, but of course he did and it arguably didn’t come out as well. Looks much better in the new 4K version, also just released on Disney+ though.
No, I saw your post. You have watched his stuff, as in past tense, you no longer do. I just don't see the point in all this culture war fighting. Hypothetically speaking, if someone on a video platform takes a trailer and some clips, and then decides that the male hero is now subservient to a female in his own film, and that turns out not to be the case, isn't the egg on their face when the film is released enough? At the end of the day, my attitude is don't like it, don't watch it. This is not aimed at you @MakeshiftPython, but I don't see the point in spending so much energy on youtube talking about things you don't like. But then, the same goes for people who watch those videos. I didn't see SP on the big screen, because I didn't like the direction of the Craig era. I saw NTTD on the big screen, because it was going to be the last one. Same goes for Doctor Who, I watched the first 3 episodes of Jodie Whittakers first series, I didn't like it, so I dropped out. Only dropping back in for her final episode.
There is no need, because that isn't what pearl clutching is.
That is an odd take on it, I agree. You read my posts and think i'm a fan of his. Your post did send me rushing over to Youtube to check my subscriptions list. Nope, he's not there. I am aware of him, and have watched some of his vidoes. But like other Youtubers, I can agree or disagree with him depending on the topic.
And neither is what has been happening here, so I'm glad we agree.
You're certainly criticising those who don't like him. If criticising a piece of media because of the values it displays is verboten or 'pearl clutching', then what is the value in his videos? Because that's literally all he does: he criticises things. Quite often getting big 'hate boners' for them too, and encouraging a really much larger 'circle jerk' amongst his followers than anything going on here. I find it ironic that any criticism of him is shouted down as, apparently, judging things without watching them is bad, watching any part of things you don't like is sadomasochistic, any form of coarseness is uncalled for, and 'hate boners' are terrible; all of which to me seem like his calling cards.
We're also very specifically discussing an individual video of his where he tells a great big whopping lie about the movie, then cherry picks only the worst comments from selected reviews in order to support his story about Star Wars etc. A couple of us happen to disagree with that video. I'm not sure what's wrong with saying that.
Yes I think that's more than likely what will happen. No one who would say it will accept they were wrong, just as they didn't with Nomi, they'll just move onto the next movie and say how awful it is there's a woman in that one.
I was surprised how Nomi didn't win a single encounter with Bond- I think it was actually a failing of the movie. A bit like with Anya or Wai Lin, you need the antagonist female lead to get the upper hand on Bond in a couple of earlier skirmishes in order for him to win out in the end. But she messes up every time: she was a bit pointless, really.
Judging by the trailers I think it looks like they've got that bit of Helena right: I'm guessing the NYC bit is reasonably early in the film and it looks like she takes something from Indy (I haven't read any spoilers at all- that's all in the trailer) and presumably he gives chase for whatever reason.
Going by the car chase of DoD, I'm getting that same vibe. PWB is all talk, but Indy not only keeps up with the chase but rightfully admonishes her.
Sure, but that's an instant victory for Bond- she only gets the upper hand for ten seconds before he's won it back and wins the skirmish. Unlike Wai Lin getting away scott-free at the printworks, Anya blowing the dust into Bond's face and nicking the microfilm etc.
Even in their first meeting in his house, her job is to warn him off getting involved, but she completely fails and does the complete opposite: he had already decided not to get involved but her turning up convinces him that he should.
Yeah. Plus also Indy is not the same as Bond: part of the enjoyment of watching Indy is that he does mess up quite frequently, or gets through on the skin of his teeth or through sheer perseverance. Indy should get criticised and shown up by his sidekick.
But one of the failings of Crystal Skull, which it looks like this film doesn't replicate, is that Indy became just one of too many people, all travelling around in a big gang. To the extent that in the big jungle chase set piece, he was just one of the people involved in the fighting, rather than it being an Indiana Jones set piece. It looks like in this one he (hopefully) pretty much remains the star of his own movie- or he shares a bit of action with one sidekick, which is much more standard Indy fare.
No, i'm not. I'm questioning, the mindset of watching anyone on Youtube, talking about them so much, and then claiming not to watch their videos. We have had this exchange before, at least twice, off the top of my head. So you are well aware of where I am coming from.
As I said, he isn't on my subscriber list, so... and I run a dead (SEE tiny) youtube channel myself, so I don't want to go provoking larger channels, especially is they have a loyal fanbase that could swamp my own channel. It's not for me to say what the value of his videos is. I can agree with him on some things, and not on others.
What does that mean exactly?
The truth will out. I just don't see the point in a culture war fight over a film. If someone is lying over the ending, they'll have egg on their face when the film is released.
We had moved on, but as this keeps coming back: yes, you asked the question before and you got answers then, and the post you quoted got answered too, so I'm not sure why the question keeps getting asked.
As I already questioned, the idea of criticising the mindset of talking so much about something without watching it can easily be aimed at this man, a video of whom criticising this Indiana Jones movie without having seen it, was posted in this thread. Why one can be pointed out but not the other seems strange.
Well they won't have egg on their face: as we're saying it'll just be forgotten about and the next film with a woman in will be being criticised by then.
Yes we don't see the point in a culture war fight over a film either, that's why we said as much about his videos which try to stoke them up in order to earn him money. We don't like that, we said that we don't like that; that's the answer to your question, maybe we should all move on as you suggested.
The only way to get out of this loop is when one of the players decides to quit and not go for the proverbial last word. In the meantime, I hope this thread isn't bleeding interested members, as so many already have. :-/
In the meantime, let's have a look at some interesting Indy pieces, shall we?
Yeah, i'm sure those covers were inspired by them.
It would make sense for Marvel to start another series, if the movie is successful.
You'd think some comics company would want to license IJ, but I'm not sure if the comics world is very healthy at the moment.
Tony Stella, the amazing poster artist, has given a glimpse of the unused International poster art for DoD on his Twitter as it's being packed away, presumably to Lucasfilm's archive. It looks even more stunning than the main poster:
A new clip:
It's sad to know this is accurate to what people think about the movie.
At this point, i hope the movie turns out to be a massive success so those people can shut their mouths for once.
No reactions on the clip from the film then? I think it's a lovely little clip.
Not very inventive, echoes of Venice from the third film which isn't necessarily bad, but I found the shot choices uninspired, like cutting to a wide when they fall rather slowly in the water instead of a more energetic camera choice. I'm nitpicking. I don't want an experiment, but I don't want to be bored. This looks better than 4, but otherwise my head is empty.