Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

I just saw Indiana Jones - didn't like it - flame me

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » The DU Lounge Donate to DU
 
dubeskin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-26-08 09:56 PM
Original message
I just saw Indiana Jones - didn't like it - flame me
So, I just posted this on my Myspace after seeing the movie at theaters. You can either read through the entire thing, or just say what you thought of the movie. In a nutshell, I didn't quite like it.

Now let me just preface this by saying that I'm not a huge Indiana Jones fan, and honestly, haven't watched all the movies. Likewise, I don't really like the Disneyland ride. Because of this, I didn't expect a thrill ride from this movie. I got what I expected. Perhaps the cheesiest of the series, the last line just re-affirmed my beliefs that I held before I sat down. "Knowledge was their treasure." Perhaps one of the most cliched lines and themes in the entertainment industry, it, in my opinion, is one of the few ways NOT to end a film. novel etc. Seeing the Lucas brand name on the film left me wondering "Is this going to be like Star Wars?" I was not surprised then when the movie began to take on an alien theme to it. Lucas hasn't produced anything worthwhile since the Star Wars movies of the 70s. Think what you want about Episodes 1, 2, and 3, but they were just too CG-oriented to be as good as the vintage 70s stuff. Note to directors: Don't let Lucas help out on films. The CG used in Crystal Skull was so noticeable, it distracted from the movie. For example, take when Shia LaBeouf is flying through the jungle canopy on the vines with the monkeys. That was unacceptable from Lucas Films to have such poor animation.

Similarly, the story was confused with itself. Crystal Skull feels like it's 4 movies crammed into 1, and tries to be all of them. It starts off dealing with the Soviets. Then it decides to change to talking about the ancient American civilizations, and then decides to go to extraterrestrials. Ultimately it made no sense, and felt like Lucas just began shouting ideas at a conference table, and Spielberg going "Yeah, that sounds good. Let's do that also." Then Spielberg is like "Hey, let's also decide to introduce Indy's son! That could be fun!"

Another part of the movie that irked me was the poor historical and scientific fact checking that obviously never took place. Let me start by saying that for as many Russians that were in America and overtook the army base is amazing. For the heightened Red Scare in the 50s, that many would have never been able to mobilize, nor would they have been able to overtake an army base, especially one testing nuclear weapons (which brings me back to how they could have launched with a story about the Soviets trying to get a nuclear warhead, but enough about possible story lines). Then, the scene where the Mayans come out of their little temple and try to attack the group, it was virtually a useless scene. The premise was never followed up with, and was just sort of like another "Let's do this, it will be cool!" kind of scene. And on that, the likelihood of such a large group surviving that long (2500+ years) in seclusion is very low. Another problem I saw was in the little Treasure Room. They commented about how there were treasures from all over the world, including some from Macedonia and Babylon. There are some factual errors here. Going by the suggested time frame of the alien arrival, that would put it at about 2000 BCE at latest, and probably 1500 BCE at earliest. Ancient Macedonia was not likely settled until around 200 BCE by the most conservative estimate, and is better said around 200 CE. That blows the hole that there were objects from there. Likewise, ancient Babylon cannot be considered a kingdom until 2300 BCE, and ultimately, until their classic period would begin, artifacts would not exactly appear until sometime around 1500 BCE. Seeing as how these would be around the same time, this is also extremely unlikely. Now on to science. Crystal is a naturally occurring substance in nature, and it's elements are the same ones found throughout the galaxy, and would be logical to find on another planet. However, the chance that an alien race's bones, if they had them, would be made of crystal is extremely doubtful. In fact, it is HIGHLY IMPROBABLE that in the event there is intelligent life on a distant planet, that their anatomical structure would be similar to ours, and yet look differently on the outside. I would have been enthralled to see a unique alien, something different than ever seen before. And yet Spielberg seems to have reverted back to his ET structure, copying the skeletal system of humans. Now, sort of on the alien thing. If aliens had come to Earth, they would have to be extremely intelligent as well as advanced. If they did decide to teach Earth's inhabitants, why would they teach how to farm and irrigate? If they were so advanced that they could make near-instantaneous intergalactic travel, why would they teach such primitive survival skills, and not introduce other technological advancements?

Now on to the technical quality. I thought it was pretty well done technically, but the CG was terribly done, and I would blacklist the company that did it, especially in an age in which it is so widely used, it SHOULD be flawless. In the scene in which Shia LeBeouf is first introduced, then they go to the restaurant was horrible. The framing was just absolutely dreadful. By incorporating the other table with the "Socs" at it, the scene became cluttered and confusing. I know, for one, me and my family all said that the other table was too distracting, which made me pay less attention to what was being said. Similarly, when Shia knocks down the ketchup and mustard, the next scene shows them back up again, and then it goes back and Indiana Jones is putting them back up again. Just a little thing that irked me. And if a long scene is going to be included with lots of dialog, it has to move along and not be distracting.

Finally on acting. You can certainly tell old Harrison is aging. If it wasn't noticeable from the stubble, he's getting weak, and his line delivery is as well. "Kid, you ain't on Tatooine anymore." He looked tired, and if this isn't his last movie, it will be one of his. Shia LaBeouf was good, as always, but he just seemed out of place. He was stellar in his performance, but it just felt awkward for him to be there. Something kept making me feel like Optimus Prime would appear at any moment and fight Megatron. Everyone else was alright. I felt like the accent of the Russian lady couldn't have been more faked, but oh well.

Now, granted, I know this is all a movie, a fiction movie at that. Don't send me an angry email telling me to pull the stick out of my ass. But I'm just saying, for a Lucas and Spielberg production, this should have been top quality. It was not. Which is why I give this movie 2 out of 4 Crystal Skulls, and on the James Scale, I would say rent it. Download it if you like or rent it, but don't see it in theaters. The lines are terrible, the wait is long, and you will be unimpressed. At least I got to spend the day with my family.

So, what did you all think?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
LucyParsons Donating Member (938 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-26-08 10:05 PM
Response to Original message
1. I saw it Thursday and found it entertaining, but I agree with your points
and would like to add: the ending was the one of the worst EVER, in any movie. And I don't mean the totally over the top bad-CGI alien spaceship takeoff. I mean the weddding. I mean, are you kidding me? Indiana Jones can't get married. Did Nora Ephron take over for the end, or what? WTF?!?!?! Sooooo sentimental, conventional, bleh :puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GoneOffShore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-26-08 10:11 PM
Original message
I can't wait to see it. . . . When it comes out on video.
Just watched a documentary - Helvetica - on the type face.

really good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Frank Cannon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 01:35 AM
Response to Original message
14. It's not worth the rental price
If you have a dollar theater nearby, see it there. If the dollar theater happens to be next door.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GoneOffShore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-26-08 10:11 PM
Response to Original message
2. I can't wait to see it. . . . When it comes out on video.
Just watched a documentary - Helvetica - on the type face.

really good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
XemaSab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-26-08 10:26 PM
Response to Original message
3. I haven't seen it and probably won't
I mean, back in 1980 they managed to make special effects using tiny models that looked okay, so there's no excuse for bad CG.

Bad CG ruins a film for me. x(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Straight Story Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-26-08 10:27 PM
Response to Original message
4. I'll flame you - you worthless dog, you should not even have a permit to type
oh wait, you meant about your thoughts on the movie. I just read the title and thought you wanted someone to flame you... :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adsos Letter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-26-08 10:47 PM
Response to Original message
5. I FLAME THEE...!!!
...but only in order to honor your request...consider thyself flamed, such as it is... :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cemaphonic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-26-08 11:08 PM
Response to Original message
6. On the subject of historical accuracy...
I love Raiders of the Lost Ark, but this has always bugged me. What the fuck was a huge Nazi military encampment doing in the suburbs of Cairo?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftyMom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-26-08 11:21 PM
Response to Original message
7. You were too kind.
The plotline was like two half-assed fanfic stories got married and had a profoundly retarded baby. The effects were terrible. Ford looked like he wanted to crawl in a hole and die rather than make the movie, and old enough that it was a possibility (the lady who plays his love interest has aged well, which probably didn't help the poor guy.) LeBouf is incredibly annoying throughout, and the "plot twist" with him being Indy's son could be spotted with the naked eye from orbit, it was so obvious. Half of the movie made no damn sense even in the context of it's own silliness- I'm still not sure what the hell the thing with the monkeys and Indy's kid swinging through the trees like Tarzan was all about- selling tie in toys, a scene in a related video game??? Why did thinking at her make the Russian lady catch fire? Why did that effect look so bad? Why did the Russian lady sound like Natasha from Rocky and Bullwinkle? Surely there are decent actresses in Eastern Europe who can use the work, but maybe they're all doing something less degrading, like scat porn. In the wedding scene at the end, I half expected the Imperial March to play, because Lucas can't even make a movie ripping himself off anymore.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
petronius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 01:08 AM
Response to Reply #7
11. So other than that, you're saying it was pretty good, right?
Fantastic review... :toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
midnight armadillo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:11 AM
Response to Reply #7
15. Amen!
I absolutely cannot fathom what's going on in the heads of the movie critics giving this turkey rave reviews.

I also didn't like the fight scenes where Indy takes on dozens of Russians. He's not a superhero - he usually vanquished his foes with cleverness, not brute strength. Oh, and the fight scenes were endless. They should have quit with movie #3, that one was lots of fun.

The only good scene was the shot of the Ark in the warehouse.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JTG of the PRB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-26-08 11:33 PM
Response to Original message
8. I won't flame you... HOWEVER...
You admitted you haven't seen all the movie, yet you called this one the cheesiest of the series? Doesn't sound like you're getting enough of the picture to be able to make that kind of judgment. Also, if you though this movie WASN'T a thrill ride, I'd love to see what you DO consider a "thrill ride" in a movie.

I won't deny it; I loved this movie. I've seen it twice, and I might go see it a third time. I will buy it, and I will watch it again in the future, just as I have watched all the other Indiana Jones movies. It's not everybody's cup of tea, and I understand that. We all have different likes and dislikes, and that's fine. It's all part of being human and having opinions and whatnot.

I don't quite understand the flaming this movie has been getting ever since it opened. Whether people forgot what Indiana Jones movies are like or if they set their expectations too high after 19 years, I'm not sure... I thought it was a very entertaining, very interesting movie. Then again, I really like all those sorts of mystical/extraterrestrial/action-adventure type movies anyway, so maybe I was just preconditioned to like it.

So, at least in my eyes, this was a very good, very entertaining movie, and it was worth every penny I spent on it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mike Daniels Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 08:15 AM
Response to Reply #8
19. I enjoyed it as well
Even though it obviously used homages to the prior films in parts the only "copy" that bothered me was the methods used to dispactch the both the Blanchett and Winstone characters.

Blanchett's demise was pretty much a variation on Belloque's death (destruction brought about by trying to channel knowledge) and Winstone's duplicitous character ultimately brought down by greed was an obvious copy on the Elsa character in "Last Crusade" right down to Indy trying to save him at the end. Given the different ways the primary villians and enforcers were killed off in the other movies I expected something a little more unique.

Other than that, it was an Indiana Jones movie - summer mind candy/popcorn action flick.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JTG of the PRB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 05:48 PM
Response to Reply #19
41. Those were the parts I didn't like so much about the movie.
Spalko's death was earned - she wanted to know everything and she got what she deserved - but I wish they'd been a little more creative about it. Melting faces/exploding heads and rapid aging are great ways to go. Stick to those lines instead of just vaporizing her. Not quite the gruesome death I was expecting.

As for Mac... I didn't like his character from the moment he first turned against Indy. I didn't like him throughout the rest of the movie, and I found myself hoping he'd get himself a gruesome death too, as opposed to just being too greedy and getting sucked up into a vortex. The deaths of the villains were a little uncreative, and that was what I found most disappointing in the movie.

Aside from those facts, it was exactly what an Indiana Jones movie should be - exciting, entertaining, adventuresome, and action-packed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flvegan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-26-08 11:36 PM
Response to Original message
9. What's Myspace?
You lost me at sentence one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bridgit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 12:49 AM
Response to Original message
10. I tired of re-living George Lucas' teen years over & over...
Blanchett was good I thought, but she's good in much of the work she does
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ivan Sputnik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 01:24 AM
Response to Original message
12. I thought it was at about the same
level of quality as the other I.J. movies, which I consider fun but not anything to be taken too seriously. It was better than Temple of Doom. I liked that H-bomb sequence, and the ants. Didn't like Shia's Tarzan scene. I'm glad I saw the film.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Frank Cannon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 01:34 AM
Response to Original message
13. No flames here. I thought it was infuriatingly bad.
I posted my negative review here a few days ago, and you would have thought I had just taken a crap in the punch bowl at a wedding.

I particularly agree about the horrible CGI. I just saw "Iron Man" for the second time, and I think that movie shows that there's just no excuse for that kind of shoddy work, particularly for a film that should be relying on story and characters more than special effects.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
midnight armadillo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:13 AM
Response to Reply #13
16. I saw IJATKOFCS instead of Iron Man
My wife just wasn't into Iron Man, knowing nothing about it (I tried - "Hey, he's a DIY superhero" but no dice).

What a waste of a movie date.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Frank Cannon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 06:22 AM
Response to Reply #16
18. Sadly, your wife would probably have enjoyed "Iron Man" much more
Edited on Tue May-27-08 06:22 AM by Frank Cannon
My wife doesn't particularly care for science-fiction or comic-book movies, and she really enjoyed "Iron Man". Like all the really well-made superhero movies, it doesn't require any prior knowledge or fandom of the character to buy into the story and have a good time.

Now, on the other hand, I DID have to promise her to go see "Sex and the City" with her when it comes out. I'm not sure how I came out on that deal.

But we both hated IJATKOTCS, for sure.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SemiCharmedQuark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:24 AM
Response to Original message
17. Oh good! I wandered into the lounge looking for an Indy thread.
I saw it at the drive in this weekend. I LOVE Indiana Jones and Blech! He survived a nuclear explosion in a fridge for pete's sake! No flames from me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DS1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 08:30 AM
Response to Original message
20. www.nukedthefridge.com
Jones 4 is so bad that nuking the fridge is the new jumping the shark

http://www.nukingthefridge.com/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sarge43 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 08:49 AM
Response to Reply #20
23. Like it.
However, that train left the station many years ago. I'm still wondering how Indy wasn't discovered on board that German sub he hitchhiked on from Egypt to some Med island, re IJATROTLA. Yeah, yeah it's a movie, but there is a difference between suspending disbelief and the idiot treatment.

For the record Indy wouldn't have had to worry about radiation meltdown. The blast and heat would have killed Our Hero much quicker than gamma rays which by the way go through planets let alone a few of mikes of lead.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kay1864 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 12:56 PM
Response to Reply #23
32. re: Indy and that sub...
IIRC a deleted scene would have shown that he rode on top of the sub the whole time (some plot contrivance kept the sub at periscope depth).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sarge43 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 01:27 PM
Response to Reply #32
36. Thanks for the info
This is what I mean by the idiot treatment. These handwavens insult the audience.

If writers propose an ordinary human being as the protag living in our reality as opposed to say the Matrix reality, then the protag has to live by the rules of our reality. There was no place to hide on the deck of that sub and the crew would have been on deck or at least on watch.

Much of Indiana Jones' appeal is he isn't a super being; he's smart and tough, but essentially ordinary. He has to cope with situations as the rest of us do and if he makes the wrong decision, he's hurt or dead. He can't put on The Ring and disappear.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
a kennedy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 08:39 AM
Response to Original message
21. My movie club is going to see it today.....
will let ya know, and I didn't read this thread......I will when I get back from the movie.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
charlie and algernon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 08:46 AM
Response to Original message
22. i HATED the priarie dogs
why the hell did Speilberg have to make CGI PRIARIE DOGS?! For a guy that made CGI dinosaurs look real 14 years ago, he dropped the ball big time with the priarie dogs. Hell, why not just get a couple real ones?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewJeffCT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 09:19 AM
Response to Original message
24. Thought it was decent, but not great
I agree that it seemed like they tried to fit two or three movies of material into one 100-110 minute movie.

And, the siafu ants in the movie are only found in Africa, not in South America. They can be dangerous, but a person won't be devoured in seconds when falling into their midst. I'm also pretty sure they're not that big. Little suckers are nasty, though. They soldier version have jaws so powerful that some people use them to close wounds - they put the ant on the skin, it bites and they cut off the body, leaving the head in place.

That Shia Lebouf was his son was obvious, especially when he said his mom’s name was Mary.

I did not have a big problem with the Soviets taking down the guards at the nuke site. It was not a whole base full of them – the guards at the gate were likely the only ones there so they could keep trespassers out.

I thought the two of them sinking in the dry sand was kind of lame.

And, aren’t scorpion stings pretty painful, even when not life-threatening?


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kay1864 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 01:04 PM
Response to Reply #24
33. I happened to look up scorpions....
because of the WalMart story, and also I was wondering about Indy's claim that only the little ones are lethal.

And I found out that with most of them the pain is on par with bee stings.

And I found out that size doesn't matter when it comes to scorpions--species does. One is nicknamed "the deathstalker" :scared:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewJeffCT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 05:15 PM
Response to Reply #33
39. Wal-Mart story?
I missed that one.

Perhaps Indy was referring to little scorpions in Peru, as opposed to big ones?

and, for scorpions - here is one for you. That is a human-sized silhouette:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LanternWaste Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 10:05 AM
Response to Original message
25. I enjoyed it and give it a 7.5 out of 10
Edited on Tue May-27-08 10:06 AM by LanternWaste
I enjoyed it. I thought the balance between camp and pathos re: Indy's age was deftly done and, against my own will, I found myself enjoying the character of Mutt.

I found it much more entertaining that numbers II and III, and was only slightly behind number I on the entertainment scale.

The action sequences were very well choreographed, and they seemed to keep the gross-out factor to a bare minimum.

The homage at the end to Close Encounters of the Third Kind was an added bonus to me (yet I realize that I seem to stand alone in that regard), as was the set location for the initial (and very exciting) action sequence being an homage to the first Indy movie.

There was a sense of both good, old-fashioned innocence to the movie which I found very refreshing-- a great counter to the staid, overly-tired, and generic Matrix-types of "there's always one more layer of evil to uncover" plots.

I enjoyed it all the more simply from being in the theater with an exuberant and enthusiastic audience, and getting caught up in their passion (as well as the smell of movie-style popcorn).

To me, the movie was ever so much better than the current crop of 'sports cars that turn into robots' or another 'hero in tights' movie that seem to be choking the creative life out of Hollywood.

On my own scale, I give Indiana Jones and the Temple of the Crystal Skull a very respectable 7.5 out of 10.

Edited: spelling
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jokerman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 10:28 AM
Response to Original message
26. I didn't like any of them.
The first one wasn't bad for a mindless action movie and had some cool stunts and effects for it's time but it never made me want to see more.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
skygazer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 10:51 AM
Response to Original message
27. I haven't seen it yet so I can't comment on particulars
But from the threads I've seen, it seems like people are expecting this movie to be something Indiana Jones movies never were - serious.

The whole idea of the movies has always been to sort of mimic the over-the-top dramatic serials of the 40's. As such, they don't worry about historical accuracy or even believable plot (the Nazis are after the Ark of the Covenant? C'mon!). They're about action, adventure, tongue-in-cheek humor and a larger-than-life hero. They've never tried to be anything else and to look for "real" accents, precision dating of ancient civilizations and a well-grounded and rational plot misses the whole point. They're just supposed to be fun.

Now, if it's not fun, then there is a problem.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LanternWaste Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 11:16 AM
Response to Reply #27
28. It's good, old-fashioned, thrill-a-minute, popcorn-munching, non-caloric fun.
"Now, if it's not fun, then there is a problem."

It's fun. It's good, old-fashioned, thrill-a-minute, popcorn-munching, non-caloric fun.

And I think you're right-- Indy movies should never be taken seriously, simply take them as a series of camp-filled action serials rolled into ninety minutes.

And if that's what we're expecting from this movie, rest assured that it delivers just that. It doesn't play on trendy cynicism nor cultural disaffectations. It's strength lies in a singular plot, and a rather linear POV-- and the archetypal Movie Hero (whom I think is becoming a rarity in Hollywood these days...)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mike Daniels Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 01:18 PM
Response to Reply #27
35. Precisely
Edited on Tue May-27-08 01:20 PM by Mike Daniels
The recent movie was supposed to be an homage to the old outer-space/Red Menace genre movies from the 50's.

I didn't realize until looking up the movie on Wikipedia that there are actual crystal skulls although it appears that the movie features the fabricated/wishful origin of the skulls vs. the reality that they were likely made in the 1800's and sold to gullible buyers as "antiquities from a lost civilization".

Of course, if the movie went with the "historically accurate" approach there wouldn't be a movie so....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JTG of the PRB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 05:56 PM
Response to Reply #27
42. You nailed it!
It's supposed to be fun, and every single Indiana Jones movie IS fun, including this latest installment. I enjoyed it, and I had fun watching it. I'm surprised that people have expected it to be serious and 100% historically accurate - NONE of the movies have been like that! Why would they start now? Sure, they might be bending the laws of physics a little bit with some of this stuff, but if it's entertaining, then why does it matter?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ceile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 11:37 AM
Response to Original message
29. Saw it this weekend and loved it!
But I'm a huge Indy fan. I own all the previous movies as well as some of the Young Indiana Jones'.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
northzax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 12:39 PM
Response to Original message
30. well, here's your problem: SPOILERS
you didn't see the rest of the movies. What this movie did well was serve as the fourth (and final) installment in some of the best popcorn movies ever made. It proved that Raiders wasn't a fluke, and made constant references (and was even chronilogically consistent) with the previous three films. yes, it's cheesy. that's the point. yes, it's campy, that's the point. evil is punished, greed is punished and the godd guys ride off into the sunset. it was perfectly consistent with that.

in every previous movie, the object of desire ends up killing the bad guy, so you knew straight up that whatever Cate Blanchette was looking for was going to kill her, you only need to know how. as soon as Mutt said his mother was "marion" you knew he was Indy's son, it's just a matter of how he finds out. do you know who Marion is? where she has appeared before? as soon as his friend turned traitor, you knew he would claim to be a double agent and then be killed (preferably by falling debris, while trying to steal relics. did you notice that the statue of Marcus stopped the commies at Yale? (which was apparently "Marshall"? Indy teaches at Marshall?) do you know who Marcus is? when Indy was in his classroom, do you get the references among the students? the bad CGI was supposed to be bad (you think ILM does sloppy work?) that's the whole point. the whole thing is an inside joke for the millions of people who saw the old movies.

as for realism or historical accuracy...please. so far this series has included the Ark of the Covenant, the Holy Grail and magic Shankara stones. you're concerned that Aliens aren't real enough? did you see the Ark in the corner of the warehouse at the beginning? in the thirties, people were worried about Nazis and fascinated with the Holy Land (which explains the Christian Relics) in the 50s, it was Aliens and Commies. eh, voila!

you can't think too much about these movies, that's not the point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kay1864 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 01:08 PM
Response to Reply #30
34. Marshall College is named after producer Frank Marshall, according to imdb
And IIRC Mutt says "Mary", not "Marion" (Marion would have been too obvious).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
northzax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 01:30 PM
Response to Reply #34
37. true, but everyone but Indy knew who it was
still, I was kinda expecting a nice rousing chant of "We Are Marshall" you konw?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
unpossibles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 12:52 PM
Response to Original message
31. Indiana Jones as Vagina Dentata myth
this is awesome:
http://jezebel.com/5011084/indiana-jones-and-the-vagtastic-voyage

I don't think I'm giving anything away by telling you that the climactic fight scene occurs in the recesses of a dank, sinister cave. I realized shortly after leaving the theater that every climactic Indiana Jones fight scene occurs in a cave, generally populated by Nazis, Russians, or some other group of anti-American miscreants. And we all know what those caves symbolize: vaginas! In fact, it seems like the Indiana Jones series is one, long, convoluted vagina dentata myth. Think about it: In the Last Crusade, Indiana Jones travels deep into the fertile crescent to find the Holy Grail; he goes through several underground lairs to find it, and while he's trying to run away, a giant crack opens in the ground. And don't even get me started on the infamous boulder scene in Raiders of the Lost Arc, wherein a big ol' rock comes rolling down a dark, narrow passageway after Indy has stolen a totemic treasure.

I'm not the only one who sees the Indy flicks as dentata dramas. According to one Mr. Cranky on his eponymous website, "The climax of Temple of Doom is the key. The offerings made to the female God include a human sacrifice lowered down a canal into a pit of red hot lava. When Kate Capshaw is tied to the contraption and lowered, Indy's Willie is threatened. His Willie's entrance into the canal equals death, and Indy will have none of that."

Mr. Cranky also points out that Temple of Doom highlights Indy's overwhelming fear of being emasculated. A thread that goes throughout the four films is Indy's fear of snakes. It seems that our big, conquering superhero is threatened by external, slithering phalluses! In the Crystal Skull, at one point, Shia LeBouf's character asks Indy to "grab onto his snake," to get Indy out of a pit of quicksand. Indy is not exactly thrilled about it.

In the Last Crusade, Indiana Jones gets that adorably virile scar beneath his lower lip from whipping himself as an inexperienced teen. Considering all that dentata evidence, I think he got the scar from some other, more sensually barbed exploration.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Phillycat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 02:29 PM
Response to Original message
38. I liked it.
It was an Indiana Jones movie. I don't understand why people expect it to be anything other than an Indiana Jones movie. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ronnykmarshall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 05:17 PM
Response to Original message
40. It's getting mixed reviews.
But it's busting ass at the box office.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Deja Q Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 06:02 PM
Response to Original message
43. If Roger Moore decides to stay and and make "The Living Daylights", I'll stop watching.
Wait, wrong franchise...

I loved "Raiders of the Lost Ark"

"Temple of Doom" was too serious in tone; too creepy at times too

"Last Crusade" by contrast was way too comedic in tone, but otherwise had a balance that "Temple" lacked.

Since this is the age of digging up buried media franchise relics (hah! Someone in the film industry must be Indy's real life brother), and given this is the day and age of CG effects over anything containing anything remotely substantial, I'm not bothering with "Crystal", much less the inevitable sequel called "Indiana Jones V - The Last Dig For Cheap Money".

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TK421 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 06:03 PM
Response to Original message
44. The movie sucked out loud....I can't even find anything I like in it
what about Mutt being the son of Indiana and Marian? How fucking contrived was that? Kind of reminds me of the whole Luke and Leia scenario in Star Wars ( originally, they were NOT meant to be brother and sister, but that changed later on ). And Mutt? What kind of name is that? Shia LeBeouf (sp)? did a good job with the script that he had, but I found the movie to be completely boring for the most part. The actors looked like they were lost during filming at times....

What a piece of shit
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-27-08 06:04 PM
Response to Original message
45. It had a lot to live up to
...And I don't entirely mean the previous films. Consider two decades of knock-offs, the creation of an entire genre that permeates film, TV, video games, commercials, etc.

I was let down. At the beginning, the scene with the random people in the souped-up car, there were a few masterfully created shots in mirrors and such that made me think, "Well, of course these guys know how to make a great-looking frame."

But little else spoke of the mastery in the rest of the filmmaking process I was expecting. It had the potential to be one of the greatest films ever made, given the firepower involved, and was just "OK." :(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 30th 2024, 10:24 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » The DU Lounge Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC