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
Definitely took me by surprise.
You either die a hero or you live long enough to see yourself become the sidekick.
Chesley Sullenberger had an uneventful life before and after his heroic achievement, which lasted something like 15 minutes. If you put it at the start of the movie, nothing can top that, and people would leave the room after this climax. So, they turned the story into a trial movie, where Sully faced people hostile to him beyond any rationality (they can't even wait for a couple of hours before Airbus provides them with their own simulation), while in real life it was a routine audition, where Sully's version was never really challenged. But it allows the story to put the reenactment of Sully's stunt within the final minutes, just before the "verdict".
For Robert Oppenheimer, the obvious climax is Project Manhattan, which happens at the middle of his life. Likewise, nothing could top Trinity in his life. Sure, the 1954 hearings are a shameful moment in the history of the United States of America, but so is the entire Red Scare, and it is all backstage manoeuvring in Oppenheimer's case.
So, Nolan builds the structure of the film around two parallels series of hearings, one about Oppenheimer, one about Lewis Strauss, which allows him to pepper some of the most verbose stuff in the beginning and to move the buildup to Trinity in the final hour. But at least Nolan didn't screw up Trinity.
Haha!
I think that’s just a consequence of the Indy franchise having been stagnant for so many years. CRYSTAL SKULL came out at the perfect time for nostalgia, and a lot of GenXers brought in their families to go see that film. Maybe if they had struck when the iron was hot and did DIAL OF DESTINY in 2011/2012, it might have done better then.
I think if Spielberg had actually been firm about THE LAST CRUSADE being his final directing gig and it was handed to other directors at the time, we would have gotten an Indy 4 and 5 during the 90s.
The only difference between 1977 Lucas and 1999 Lucas was that the former was just another filmmaker, whereas the latter was the head of a multi-million dollar production company and seen by some as an authentic American genius, being encouraged by his peers and employees to express his vision with minimal feedback because they all believed in him. But that’s how you get the prequels.
So, theoretically, if Lucas had hired a filmmaker for Indy 4 in the 90s, could that filmmaker have curbed some of those bad instincts as Spielberg had? I’d say if that theoretical filmmaker voiced their opinions as strongly as Spielberg, then yes. Worse case scenario is that it’s someone who buys into Lucas being a visionary and carries that out with minimal feedback.
But that’s all woulda/coulda/shoulda.
I do agree that they probably should have bitten the bullet and let someone else take over in the 90s though. It happened eventually and it produced a very decent film.
Yeah it was during the time Ford guest appeared in Young Indy in 1993 that Lucas then got idea of doing a 1950s set adventure that harkened back to B movies of that era. Trouble is that all three (Lucas, Spielberg, and Ford) had to come to an agreement on a script or no movie would be made, and that kept the movie in development hell for over a decade.
Of course, it’s slightly different with Indy, as it was from the start a partnership with Spielberg, but any prospective director would have been daunted with the task of filling 80s Steven Spielberg’s shoes while Lucas would micromanage everything as he was used to be surrounded by yes-men. Spielberg was one of the few voices who could keep him in check for Indy, it wouldn’t have worked with a new guy.
Yes good point, there were a couple of scripts in the mid-90s weren't there.
Thank you.It seems there are some people here who are so in love with Indiana Jones,that they can’t face reality or tolerate any criticism.The movie is a massive box office flop.That’s not an opinion,it’s a fact.YouTubers didn’t make that up,they are reporting on it because a lot of the mainstream media ( who are shilling for Disney ) do not.
As it happens,I thought the movie was merely ok.I didn’t hate it,but I believe Ford should have quit after Last Crusade as that was the perfect send off for his character and the simple fact is that he was too old in DOD to convincingly play an action hero ( to the extent he spent the last 20 mins of the film mostly sitting down.
The funny thing is, when you look back at some of his movies from the 90s up to a couple of years ago, it's hard not to think 'yep, he could still have played Indy at that age'! :) Even looking back at Skull now, he looks oddly young. It seems quite weird that there was so much talk about him being too old for it then.
Yeah. For example, in Air Force he was so heroic, one could feel Indy all over him.
You missed the best film of the year so far.