Indiana Jones 4

I said something I shouldn't have, tried to delete it. Now it is telling me I have to include atleast 4 characters to delete this so here they are.

IRON MAN, INDIANA JONES, LONIE BECKMAN, CHIP DOUGLAS.
 
Last edited:
After my last post I realized this is the Indy 4 post so I thought I'd share my thoughts on the film.

Didn't hate it, but didn't like it much either. I was entertained by certain scenes. I thought Harrison Ford was spot on as Indy. The script seemed to be the main problem. 1st hour of the film was the best. 2nd hour of the movie felt like a bad dream, especially with a babblin' John Hurt. They wasted the opportunity of having Ray Winstone in the film. Cate Blanchet was one of the best things about the film. I did really enjoy the warehouse scene and the motorcycle chase. The part of the film that felt like it captured the spirit of the original three films the most was the end of the motorcycle chase, in the library. The kid at the table asks Dr. Jones a question. Indy answers and gives the advice about how real archaeologists don't just sit in the library but get out into the field. Then he rides off with Mutt as if nothing out of the ordinary happened. Classic Indy humor.

Some other annoyances:

1. Indy never fired his trademark revolver.

2. As others have said already, the fridge scene was bullsh**. Nuking the Fridge is the new Jumping the Shark phrase.

3. They violated a cardinal rule of the Indy series. No opening adventure sequence that is un-related to the main plot. This is part of the charm of the whole series. You get a separate little short film as a bonus to the main film. It is fine if they introduce a character or minor detail like they did in Raiders with Belloq.

Spielberg's directing was consistent with the rest of the series except for the cg effects. I didn't mind the slightly different cinematography style as I thought it worked for Indiana Jones.

I was extremely skeptical until the first trailer came out. When I saw that I was stunned as to how much of the classic feel was in the trailer. After seeing the film it feels like they put the best stuff in the trailer, most of which is in the first 25 minutes of the film.
 
...as long as the fan film producer doesn't make or attempt to make any money from the fan film, then no problem...
Click to expand...

This I would have no problem with. They'd get sued and shut down, but at least it shows some initiative beyond spending alot of time and resources on something they'll never own.
 
just for reference the kids that made the shot for shot remake of raiders are now shopping around their own adventure film that may actually get picked up and be made into a real bonafide film.
 
There is some initiative. How many other fan film makers are doing the same thing? How many set out with that purpose in mind?
 
David Jimerson said:
A fan film is a perfectly legit way to learn filmmaking.
Click to expand...


I absolutely agree. However at the level of some of these films, they are beyond basic learning and should be making their own stuff.


Blaine said:
And just as important, they are actually out there DOING it!
Click to expand...

And out there wasting alot of time and money on something they wont own.
 
Okay. Good for them. I hope they enjoy themselves. I'm just agreeing with what Batutta said. Feel free to disagree. I will exercise my right to find fan films futile.
 
GageFX said:
Okay. Good for them. I hope they enjoy themselves. I'm just agreeing with what Batutta said. Feel free to disagree. I will exercise my right to find fan films futile.
Click to expand...


Lighten up, Francis. :thumbsup: It's just a conversation.

I doubt very much they find they find it "futile" themselves. In the end, that's the only thing that matters.
 
GageFX said:
I absolutely agree. However at the level of some of these films, they are beyond basic learning and should be making their own stuff.
Click to expand...

I understand where you're coming from, but just wanted to put a little perspective on how I look at filmmaking in general.
There's a lot of stuff out there - a LOT. And we live in a time now where we have all seen many many movies, hopefully more than many if you're on this forum. It really is a part of the modern culture - a new media of storytelling and/or delivering a message to a large number of people.

Given all that - really how original are our ideas?
Even the most acclaimed films share some or all of these characteristics:
-Conform to a genre style that was developed before it
-Come from a book or well-known story, fit an archetype, or use historical events
-Were influenced/inspired by films made before it
-Follow a certain set of cinema conventions for "watch-ability"
-Follow an art style or borrow a set of principles set in another artistic style/period/medium
Again, these are just off the top of my head, and it's late. Not all of these thing will always apply, and there's more than what I listed.

However, I'm just trying to get at this - think about it...how original is anything? There's a saying that "it's all been done before". I don't submit entirely to that vein of thinking, but its humbling to realize.

GageFX, your post seems to imply the view that possessing "beyond a basic learning" of film making requires one to only make 'original' films from thereon.
In some cases, being original (whatever that means! :tongue:) is a commendable goal
Other times, the best films simply 'do it better' than anything before them. They might have pieces that are 'original' or borrowed from other genres or something that gives them a little distinction, but more than anything, they just do an damn good job.

Art of any kind finds its foundation on a plagiarism of sorts - without plagiarism (might be too harsh a word for the concept I'm going for), art would never be better, more complex, more relevant, deeper in purpose, more varied in execution, etc
I would say 'fan films' are a culmination of the latter, to an extreme in the sense that they are building upon a pre-imagined story structure and character. But don't get me wrong - they may not be trying to 'do it better' than the actual film they're spoofing or paying tribute to. Many times, they're just trying to 'do it better' than the other fan films out there ('Star Wars' shorts are the quintessential example of this)
Or other times, they're just high school/college kids that are bored over the summer and have a camera - good times :D

But again, I know what you're getting at with the 'original' talk - this is all a very valid conversation going on.
Just wanted to put some ideas up for scrutiny.
Cheers to discussion and knowledge
 
Loot Subu - great points and all very true. I've often thought about that, especially with music and chord progressions and lyrics.

I think what makes something original is that, perhaps it borrows from something or uses conventions, but you can just tell when it comes from the heart and from an individual... sure, it may do something that has been done before or borrow, but it is unique in its own right...

You can often tell when an idea STARTS from the heart and from a unique individual's ideas and originality, and then may repeat something/use conventions...

VS something that was crafted based around certain conventions.

The mistake a lot of fan films make is that instead of starting with something unique, original, and from the heart and then making sure to fall into the conventions of the original so that it feels like a sequel...

They start by trying to re-do or mimmick the original with a new series of set pieces...

And when they do that, it loses the magic...

That's my theory on why sequels are rarely if ever as good as (let alone top) the original...

Empire Strikes Back is one of the rare examples. So true to the spirit and conventions of the original, yet so fresh and original...
 
Like the way you think, filmguy :)
Very true about the music theory and progressions -- I used to get so frustrated when I was younger because I would think "There's only so many keys, so many progressions, so many ways to play combination of notes - it's so hard to come up with something that doesn't sound like something else!!"
But then, as you said, you learn to listen (or watch, in the case of films) for people who play from the heart. It's almost as if they inject their unique humanity/personality into their art.
 
I feel vindicated.

Did anybody watch South Park tonight? The new episode?

Yeah... we have the sensible people... and an army of "butters"... accept your butters-ness... you earned it... dick shooters.
 
lol Jim I just watched SouthPark last night, and they were correct they did Rape indi and like many others I felt ashamed of myself for doing nothing.
 
Aw. :) That was rude.

But I think Lucas is the main rapist.

Someone should hibernate Lucas and then Ripley will rescue him 300 years from now, floating in "the space between spaces".

*

Oh, nevermind...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top