Indiana Jones 4

Just got back....

Well, I was disappointed to say the least.
Anyone who thought that they pushed the realm of realism in the last Die Hard movie have not seen anything yet!

Maybe I just wasn't ready for what kind of movie this was going to be. Extremely over the top.

I also found a fair amount of the dialogue to be really cheesy. Especially in the beginning.

Oh well.

Mike
 
I think if there is one thing that disappointed me most about this film it was the filmmaking technique. I don't know that the story wasn't necessarily good enough, but the way they went about making it just didn't feel right.

I just watched the old trilogy over the last 3 days and the whole thing is pretty tight....cinematography, direction, choreography.....etc. They feel of the same mold.

Spielberg used to storyboard everything but as he got more confident in his abilities he tossed that aside. So now in this Indy its the new Spielberg...the one who shows up on set with no plan and figures things out as he goes. Because of that nothing feels classic...or crisp...or as good as it should be. Its just...ehhh..

And Kaminskis cinematography is plain disappointing. I thought he was going to make an effort to match Slocome...even slightly, but I guess not. Lots of diffused, highlight-laced shiz that doesnt match the old trilogy at all. Most of the sets in this are lit so poorly its more obviously studio than the old films...and that was the 80's.

Then theres the CG.....all those practical effects from the old trilogy feel 100% more real to me.

Spielberg is showing his age...and hes getting complacent. He talks alot of jive about shooting on film, but he'd be better off worrying more about how he makes the film than what he shoots it on.

Its not a bad film though...its just not as good as I would have hoped.
 
Just got back from seeing it, and was very disappointed. Not only was it unrealistic to the point of silliness, the "plot" went from way too complicated to way too simple. There were several new characters introduced that Indy was supposed to have known for years, yet that sentiment was totally lost.

The story itself was very much a formula-based one, taking successful parts from each of the prior films and reusing them. And the ending... well I won't ruin it, but it is so out of the box of the other three films that half of the people reading would think I'm making it up if I spoiled it.

I think the worst part was that Harrison Ford took a backseat for most of the film, with a good amount of the action not even involving Indiana Jones (who, to my dismay, was only actually referred to as Indy twice in the film...)

I was a big fan of the first three. This one I'd recommend waiting for the DVD, which you should borrow from a friend rather than paying to rent...
 
i liked it. the part of it that i DIDN'T like was the stupid monkey part... awful. just awful.

the rest of the movie was great. not really as great as the original's, but still a good movie.

POSSIBLE SPOILER???

anyone notice the ark of the covenant in the film?
 
Half of me wants to love it. The other half wants to HATE IT. I actually LIKE the story probably not like most people. I don't think it's bad story for an Indiana Jones movie. But, damn. The direction of this film was really really bad. I like speilberg, but it didn't even seem like he was trying at all. Dare I say it would have been handled better in the hands of someone else that has more love. I'm not saying speilberg has no love for doctor jones... maybe I'm tottally wrong about his involvement maybe lucas pushed him aside. I think that is wishful thinking at best. Speilberg, I had hoped would of deliver and I feel like I'm doing a 180 in this thread. Get rid of Kaminski, I have no DP experience and those outdoor scenes were horrible. Everything felt so artifical...

I'll be damned if I didn't enjoy the movie, because I did. However, I just don't feel like it was handled very well. Perhaps with repeat viewing I can expect things and won't be so damned surprised when things happen.

But cmon speilberg, what were you thinking!
 
Watch the movie last night as well. I thought the Premiere was in English, but the showed the German version... ;) this might have been a loss a bit.... but anyway

Honestly I was disappointed as well.

Weston, it's really interesting what you are saying about Spielberg's directing style. Makes sense to me somehow, did you read that or is this an assumption.

Most of the time the lighting was ... sorry for that ... but awful. I didn't like it at all. I am not much into lighting, but it didn't feel well done for me.

Overall this kind of "indy charme" was missing. Only a few innocent jokes, the charming, the way situations were solved. These things made the old movies for me.
In the new one I could see attempts of that, but everything did not work out as good...

So when I left I was pretty sad. I had been expecting more, also from the story, which made me really ... uah, I don't know, it was just too hard to grasp for me.

But I did like the joke with the hat at the end! :)
Of course there is more good to say about the movie, it's just like, I had expecting way more than I saw...
 
Capt Quirk said:
Sounds just like the first one! It should be good!
Click to expand...
Not even close! The first one is a masterpiece IMHO. This one is nothing like it.






Here's an example of what I'm talking about. Spoiler below....





[MAJOR SPOILER]

Indy survives a ground zero atomic bomb detonation by climbing into a lead lined fridge. The blast lays waste to the entire mock-town and blows him about a mile away from the original site.

He exits the fridge unscathed.

[/Spoiler]






This happens early on and really sets the tone for the rest of the action.

Granted, from that point on I knew what I was in for.


Mike
 
LOL, that sounds about right. This was one of the things that started to happen in the second one, where they jump out of an airplane on a raft...f*cking stupid stupid stupid ****.
 
Mark Harris said:
LOL, that sounds about right. This was one of the things that started to happen in the second one, where they jump out of an airplane on a raft...f*cking stupid stupid stupid shi*.
Click to expand...
Bingo! A big part of the reason why I really dislike the second one.

I really thought they had figured that out and pulled off a good movie in the third installment. I guess that's why I was a little shocked by this one. I believed they had learned their lesson.



If you LOVED the The Temple of Doom this one is right up your alley. :thumbsup:
 
Good, not great.

I agree about the comments regarding cinematography. A change in the area would have made the film feel more like an Indy film.

Perhaps I'm too nostalgic, but being able to sit in a theater again and see the man with the fedora and whip and hear the Raiders March one more time put a smile on my face. If they had asked me I probably would have said "Just leave the trilogy alone guys." I mean the ride into the sunset at the end of Last Crusade is just about the perfect ending to the series as a whole. Why mess with it? But I didn't hate Crystal Skulls as much as other people do or will. It's the weakest of the series, but given how much I like all of the Indy films, that's pretty good company to be the weakest of.
 
Pretty interesting article here about how Lucas and Speilberg sort of bump heads on the film. http://www.nydailynews.com/entertai...steven_spielberg_and_harrison_ford_talk_.html

I will check it out Tonight. I think some of the reasons people are a bit disapointed is the hype built around it and part of that is nobody's fault. Because a franchise such as this, will take on a hype all it's own... like a machine, in turn people expect the greatest thing of all, when an actuality it's just a regular(maybe decent film).

But I know as filmmakers, we sometimes find it hard to watch films as audiences and not as filmmakers.

But I will check it out and give my review.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top