Indiana Jones

1193194195197199

Comments

  • Posts: 1,340
    Look, I don't know what you're talking about. What I'm saying is that they could do something more similar to ROTLA.

    You don't need Aliens or bad CGI.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    Look, I don't know what you're talking about. What I'm saying is that they could do something more similar to ROTLA.

    You don't need Aliens or bad CGI.

    And there move the goal posts.

    Listen, Deke, I'm not gonna go on and on, about this here. Especially since you're shuffling goalposts around.

    You can reach out to me via PM, although it's clear you won't (I've offered three times today, and several times before), since you need an audience.

    My god, contact me and I'll give you my cell and we can have a video call, but stop cluttering this thread as you leapfrog from one thing to the other.

    In fact, if you want a video call, that'd be best since I can keep you focused and we can tackle one issue at a time.

    If you don't wanna do this, then just, move on from me, man. We've hit the point of stupidity and ridiculousness.

    But, if you seriously want to have a discussion, then PM me, and we'll arrange a video call (I'll send you a zoom link).

  • edited July 4 Posts: 1,340
    The lack of budget is not an issue. Dr No was a low budget movie, NSNA has more action than Goldfinger... That's not an issue at all.

    In fact, one of the problems with the new Indiana Jones movies is that they have too much budget. They can't capture the tone of the old ones for that reason.

    Remember this.

    I have nothing more to add on the subject. I said this from the beginning.

    Have a nice day. No hard feelings
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou, but I now hear a new dog barkin'
    Posts: 9,028
    Wow, people...forty-some years after the NSNA/Octopussy contest, you're still getting excited about this! As for myself, I realize I find NSNA superior maybe mainly because I never saw TB before it, so I never had the urge to consider it blasphemy. And I still find it at least more entertaining, though not necessarily a "better movie" than the original. But most of all, I think it is just a spoof of the Connery Bond, yet far more Bondesque than the relatively dismal Octopussy.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,216
    I really enjoyed Dial Of Destiny. In retrospect it was about as necessary as Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull, but I'll always take more Indy over no Indy.

    Same goes for NSNA, though that is an inferior film on nearly every single level and one that I do not enjoy as much as Dial Of Destiny (if the comparison even matters).
    More Bond over less Bond, every time.
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou, but I now hear a new dog barkin'
    Posts: 9,028
    I really enjoyed Dial Of Destiny. In retrospect it was about as necessary as Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull, but I'll always take more Indy over no Indy.

    Same goes for NSNA, though that is an inferior film on nearly every single level and one that I do not enjoy as much as Dial Of Destiny (if the comparison even matters).
    More Bond over less Bond, every time.

    It's never been expressed any better than this.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,795
    I really enjoyed Dial Of Destiny. In retrospect it was about as necessary as Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull, but I'll always take more Indy over no Indy.

    Same goes for NSNA, though that is an inferior film on nearly every single level and one that I do not enjoy as much as Dial Of Destiny (if the comparison even matters).
    More Bond over less Bond, every time.

    Absolutely!!! There are no bad Indy or Bond movies only ones you love or don't. Well, okay, Moonraker....
  • Posts: 1,340
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    Wow, people...forty-some years after the NSNA/Octopussy contest, you're still getting excited about this! As for myself, I realize I find NSNA superior maybe mainly because I never saw TB before it, so I never had the urge to consider it blasphemy. And I still find it at least more entertaining, though not necessarily a "better movie" than the original. But most of all, I think it is just a spoof of the Connery Bond, yet far more Bondesque than the relatively dismal Octopussy.

    I like Octopussy enough but it's a Moore movie. NSNA is Goldfinger-esque and I'm not going to pretend now that I don't like the first James Bond movies.

    Is NSNA perfect? No, but It does many things the right way. It is a good comeback and a good send off, better than YOLT and DAF.

    I don't hate the last Indiana Jones movies but they can't do their job. They can't update the formula.
  • BennyBenny Shaken not stirredAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 15,135
    Sorry to stay off topic, but NSNA is a Moore Bond film in disguise with Sean Connery.

    Back to Indy, DoD is a much better film than its predecessor.
    At least the feel of DoD was better and had a better story. I thought it was a decent end for Indy, but in truth LC was the better end for the character.
  • edited July 5 Posts: 1,340
    Benny wrote: »
    Sorry to stay off topic, but NSNA is a Moore Bond film in disguise with Sean Connery.

    Back to Indy, DoD is a much better film than its predecessor.
    At least the feel of DoD was better and had a better story. I thought it was a decent end for Indy, but in truth LC was the better end for the character.

    It's more like...the Guy Hamilton's movies. The post-TSPWLM movies are quite different.

    The tone is like an alternative sequel to Goldfinger, something that DAF tried to be.

  • BennyBenny Shaken not stirredAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 15,135
    The jokes in NSNA are far more frequent than any other Connery film, much more like the Moore films.
    Worse still they’re rehashed jokes from Porridge.
  • Posts: 1,340
    Benny wrote: »
    The jokes in NSNA are far more frequent than any other Connery film, much more like the Moore films.
    Worse still they’re rehashed jokes from Porridge.

    Nah, DAF exists.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    edited July 5 Posts: 24,179
    Benny wrote: »
    The jokes in NSNA are far more frequent than any other Connery film, much more like the Moore films.
    Worse still they’re rehashed jokes from Porridge.

    Correct. Also: pee jokes, and Bond going "oooooh" while diving off a cliff atop a horse. I'll take OP's gorilla suit over that any day.
    Benny wrote: »
    Back to Indy, DoD is a much better film than its predecessor.
    At least the feel of DoD was better and had a better story. I thought it was a decent end for Indy, but in truth LC was the better end for the character.

    I agree. While I don't hate KOTKS, it bet hard on Shia -- whom I generally really like! -- pulling off the Mutt character, and that character simply didn't click with me. PWB, on the other hand, did. Seeing her and Indy on their journey together put a smile on my face.
  • Posts: 1,340
    Well, we had a Moore's movie that year and it was quite different. ;)

    You guys are so funny...
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    edited July 5 Posts: 4,629
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    Benny wrote: »
    The jokes in NSNA are far more frequent than any other Connery film, much more like the Moore films.
    Worse still they’re rehashed jokes from Porridge.

    Correct. Also: pee jokes, and Bond going "oooooh" while diving off a cliff atop a horse. I'll take OP's gorilla suit over that any day.
    Benny wrote: »
    Back to Indy, DoD is a much better film than its predecessor.
    At least the feel of DoD was better and had a better story. I thought it was a decent end for Indy, but in truth LC was the better end for the character.

    I agree. While I don't hate KOTKS, it bet hard on Shia -- whom I generally really like! -- pulling off the Mutt character, and that character simply didn't click with me. PWB, on the other hand, did. Seeing her and Indy on their journey together put a smile on my face.

    Yes, Shia blew it in real life with his comments about Spielberg. PWB was fun, I wish that Marion, Short Round and Sallah would have been on the journey with them. Would have been a more satisfying conclusion for the world of Indiana Jones. I actually hope that PWB gets to write a book on both Indy and Helena, either together or separate stories.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,183
    Mutt wasn’t a great character but I never saw him as a detriment and I thought Shia really did the best he could with a character that became useless halfway. I will say though that I think Ford and Shia had strong chemistry during the first half of the film when it was just focused on the two. But then the movie kept piling more and more characters and the balance wasn’t as good as THE LAST CRUSADE, which also piled in characters in that movie but we never lost the focus on the dynamic between Indy and Henry Sr. Those two stood above all else, whereas Shia got lost in the process.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,179
    Mutt wasn’t a great character but I never saw him as a detriment and I thought Shia really did the best he could with a character that became useless halfway. I will say though that I think Ford and Shia had strong chemistry during the first half of the film when it was just focused on the two. But then the movie kept piling more and more characters and the balance wasn’t as good as THE LAST CRUSADE, which also piled in characters in that movie but we never lost the focus on the dynamic between Indy and Henry Sr. Those two stood above all else, whereas Shia got lost in the process.

    Also, the moment in TLC when Henry Sr. thinks Indy is gone is exceptionally powerful. We know that Indy isn't dead, but that doesn't take anything away from Connery's acting. And when Indy shows up again, and Henry says, "I thought I'd lost you, boy," I can't help myself. Tears form in my eyes, instantly. Nothing in Skull came close to this intensely emotional scene. Absolutely nothing. The Mutt/Indy relationship never mirrors the Indy/Henry relationship. Many missed opportunities, if you ask me.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    edited July 5 Posts: 4,629
    Mutt wasn’t a great character but I never saw him as a detriment and I thought Shia really did the best he could with a character that became useless halfway. I will say though that I think Ford and Shia had strong chemistry during the first half of the film when it was just focused on the two. But then the movie kept piling more and more characters and the balance wasn’t as good as THE LAST CRUSADE, which also piled in characters in that movie but we never lost the focus on the dynamic between Indy and Henry Sr. Those two stood above all else, whereas Shia got lost in the process.

    That’s fair. I think that might be why he bad mouthed the movie. It was a mixture of his ego and the final quality of the movie. When you bad mouth Spielberg, you don’t recover easily. I hope PWB doesn’t make the same mistake! Honestly, the first half of Crystal Skull is great, in my opinion. Particularly the warehouse fight scene.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,382
    Mutt wasn’t a great character but I never saw him as a detriment and I thought Shia really did the best he could with a character that became useless halfway. I will say though that I think Ford and Shia had strong chemistry during the first half of the film when it was just focused on the two. But then the movie kept piling more and more characters and the balance wasn’t as good as THE LAST CRUSADE, which also piled in characters in that movie but we never lost the focus on the dynamic between Indy and Henry Sr. Those two stood above all else, whereas Shia got lost in the process.

    They also just hadn't worked out what story they wanted to tell with Indy and his son. With Crusade they had a pretty simple but very strong story of illumination between the two of them, with the wonderful "Indiana, give me your hand" moment at the end, but with Mutt they just never had a clear story they wanted to tell. They meet, pretty much get on well, find out they're related, continue to get on pretty well. It's not a story.

    Indy and Helena, on the other hand, have a much more interesting relationship which actually grows from her effectively conning and stealing from him, to the point you (well, I) believe her when she's crying and trying to save him on that hillside at the climax. DOD has its issues, but in terms of telling a story about the characters I think it does a fantastic job and stands alongside the original in that respect.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,423
    The problem with Mutt was that there was no prior relationship with Indiana. So unlike Henry Sr. and Indiana these two didn't know each other. They didn't even know they were related till towards the end of the film.

    It's too bad that Shia wasn't on good terms, having his character in DOD might have helped add to the story and have an arc for him. Like Garfield appearing in No Way Home allowed his Peter to get an arc of some kind and be redeemed.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,629
    thedove wrote: »
    The problem with Mutt was that there was no prior relationship with Indiana. So unlike Henry Sr. and Indiana these two didn't know each other. They didn't even know they were related till towards the end of the film.

    It's too bad that Shia wasn't on good terms, having his character in DOD might have helped add to the story and have an arc for him. Like Garfield appearing in No Way Home allowed his Peter to get an arc of some kind and be redeemed.

    Garfield was in No Way Home? Just when I thought the MCU couldn’t stop with the pop culture references, lol.

    Seriously, though, there is a good movie in Indy 4, some minor things would need to be changed.

    I joke about Andrew Garfield by the way.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,795
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    Mutt wasn’t a great character but I never saw him as a detriment and I thought Shia really did the best he could with a character that became useless halfway. I will say though that I think Ford and Shia had strong chemistry during the first half of the film when it was just focused on the two. But then the movie kept piling more and more characters and the balance wasn’t as good as THE LAST CRUSADE, which also piled in characters in that movie but we never lost the focus on the dynamic between Indy and Henry Sr. Those two stood above all else, whereas Shia got lost in the process.

    Also, the moment in TLC when Henry Sr. thinks Indy is gone is exceptionally powerful. We know that Indy isn't dead, but that doesn't take anything away from Connery's acting. And when Indy shows up again, and Henry says, "I thought I'd lost you, boy," I can't help myself. Tears form in my eyes, instantly. Nothing in Skull came close to this intensely emotional scene. Absolutely nothing. The Mutt/Indy relationship never mirrors the Indy/Henry relationship. Many missed opportunities, if you ask me.

    IMHO, those first three were unbelievably good. KOTCS was just a fun re-visit. DOD was where s**t got real. Not so much fun (and definitely NOT the best movie), but realistically aging Indy. I am amazed they did it at all, much less that they were able to tell such a serious tale of a once great & adventurous man living life just counting down the days to his end. And then finding a momentary purpose again, and THEN finding the ultimate reason to really be back. It still shakes me to my core thinking about it. Only a cameo by Short Round would have made it better.... someday DOD will widely be considered an excellent film. *Remembers the reviews for Blade Runner in 1982*
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,382
    Tend to agree: DOD will be rediscovered at some point. It's an excellent bookend to a great character, and respects his age as well.
  • Posts: 1,340
    mtm wrote: »
    Tend to agree: DOD will be rediscovered at some point. It's an excellent bookend to a great character, and respects his age as well.

    They have to discover it soon because CGI ages quickly. Xena: Warrior Princess looks better than this.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,382
    It doesn’t, no.
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    edited July 6 Posts: 1,711
    I was really impressed with DOD. I'm a little weird about Indy I guess, because I really enjoy the films, but I'm not that invested in it as a franchise, so I sort of just enjoy all five movies more or less equally.

    But the last two movies, and really, Crystal Skull in particular, I think have to be enjoyed if only for Harrison Ford's performance. I can't think of any other occasion where an actor (twice!) returned to a part after an extended break and perfectly recaptured the character while accounting for all the time that had passed in the performance. You'd think Harrison had been playing Indy in his free time between 1989 and 2008, and then again for the past 15 years. It's incredible work.

    He clearly has a special love of the character, because I didn't get that vibe with Deckard and Han.
  • Posts: 1,490
    mtm wrote: »
    Tend to agree: DOD will be rediscovered at some point. It's an excellent bookend to a great character, and respects his age as well.

    I agree.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    ColonelSun wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Tend to agree: DOD will be rediscovered at some point. It's an excellent bookend to a great character, and respects his age as well.

    I agree.

    💯 … it’s a quality flick and a great book end to the series.
Sign In or Register to comment.