• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Official Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull Rottenwatch/Reviews

Status
Not open for further replies.
I love how Lucas says 'Harrison's only 65' (66 in a couple months) in relation to making more, as if Spielberg is happy to get into production on another one right away. I don't see Spielberg even thinking about going ahead with another Indy until Ford is 75 or so.
I can't wait for Lucas to say Harrison's still spry enough to play Han Solo and starts production on Episode VII.
 

Sapiens

Member
Amir0x said:
We're not here to kill those who liked it.

I wonder why every thread, it's like those on the dislike side and those on the like side cannot coexist. What happened to people having dissenting opinions, debating with passion and then realizing at the end of the day that we can't change each other's positions?

Every time any thread, why I or someone else is criticizing some film or game, it's like the people who love it are reading their kryptonite. Vice versa too!


It's fun.
 

Solo

Member
How could Spielberg even fit in another Indy in the next 5 years or so? He seems to be booked solid (on more interesting projects, too). Looking forward to him finally making that Lincoln movie. Its been on the backburner for like a decade now. Hell, even Tintin makes me excited in ways another Indy can't.
 

Sapiens

Member
Solo said:
How could Spielberg even fit in another Indy in the next 5 years or so? He seems to be booked solid.


He'll find a way. Remember how he practically shat out War of the Worlds?


The only problem I had with Indy was it felt like he was a little too much in auto-pilot. But this is his first release in three years, so lets hope he can shoot a few more big wads of film-sperm before he goes back into hiding.

It seemed from 2001 -2005, you couldn't come in your hand without hearing about a new Spielberg film.
 
Solo said:
How could Spielberg even fit in another Indy in the next 5 years or so? He seems to be booked solid (on more interesting projects, too). Looking forward to him finally making that Lincoln movie. Its been on the backburner for like a decade now. Hell, even Tintin makes me excited in ways another Indy can't.

Hell yeah. I'm actually really hoping we get Lincoln the same year we get The Rise of Theodore Roosevelt. Spielberg and his proven relationship with Neeson up against the Scorsese and DiCaprio unity in the same genre seems almost too awesome.
 

Solo

Member
Yeah, I mentioned that too after seeing the movie - in terms of direction, CS was really a lackluster effort from Spielberg.

EDIT: while I look forward to Lincoln, I'll take Scorsese doing Roosevelt with Leo any day over it.
 

SCReuter

Member
Saw it yesterday afternoon and had a blast.

Loved the cast, the chemistry between actors, Indiana's one-liners, the numerous balls out action sequences, even the cinematography.

The only parts that took me out of the experience were the Tarzan and Marion car vault scenes, but both were so small relative to the rest of the film that I'm not going to get my panties in a bunch over them. Oh yeah, the inter-dimensional being at the end should not have been CG either.
 

HugBasket

Banned
It was a bad Indy film. The charm felt cheap and the opening action was pretty standard Indiana stuff. "Hey look I'm running and they are shooting and missing!" The car scene was cool.

The ending/
alien crap
, gtfo

I guess it could lead to some decent sequels with LeBouf doing them as long as George Lucas stops writing.

In the end though, fun movie.
 
Loved it, on par with Temple of Doom in entertainment (and I love TOD, unlike some people which I don't get.). However, I can see why reactions are so mixed. It's the end of the saga, so it was meant to be Indy's most epic, over-the-top adventure. Believability is always relative which is why everyone is nitpicking so many scenes. For me it would be
the Rusky being swallowed by ants and Mud swordfighting with spread legs on two cars. The Tarzan bit was mediocre but not sacrilegous.
I also admit to loving
alien conspiracy theories and ancient astronaut stuff even if it's really bogus. That ending was one of the best in the series, even if it was CGI-heavy. But could wires and bluescreen do a giant flying saucer rising out of a valley? No.
C'mon, Indiana Jones is based on 40's pulp fiction, not logical thrillers like The Bourne Identity.

B+
 

Sanjay

Member
WOW, and heres me thinking that Lucas could not write a film worse then The Phantom Menace but he proved me wrong. Also for me this is the worst film Spielberg has ever directed.

Akira is a overrated anime, Mediocreat at best.

I hope the american remake will turn out to be better then the original anime so good luck with that Garry Whitta.

(I dunno whats more shocking that how bad Indiana Jones 4 was or that Garry Whitta is doing the script for Akira, I allways heard he was a writer with the gaming podcast he does but now its a reality for me)
 

DrLazy

Member
Mifune said:
Why are you confusing bad storytelling with lack of realism? The two have nothing to do with each other. The problem with Crystal Skull wasn't the fact that it was outlandish or unbelievable; it's that it was a semi-interesting story poorly told.

I feel like a great movie could have been made with this premise. Koepp let us down. As did Spielberg and Lucas for going ahead with this script.


This.
 

Cheebs

Member
Solo said:
How could Spielberg even fit in another Indy in the next 5 years or so? He seems to be booked solid (on more interesting projects, too). Looking forward to him finally making that Lincoln movie. Its been on the backburner for like a decade now. Hell, even Tintin makes me excited in ways another Indy can't.
This is the guy who often directs 2 pictures a year (JP and Schindler's List in 93, WotW and Munich in 2005...etc)
 
Cheebs said:
This is the guy who often directs 2 pictures a year (JP and Schindler's List in 93, WotW and Munich in 2005...etc)

But he only does that when both pictures have already had at least a couple years of prep time already.
 

Cheebs

Member
Scullibundo said:
But he only does that when both pictures have already had at least a couple years of prep time already.
Lucas already says he has an idea for the plot of Indy V and is going to run it by Spielberg & Ford so I guess it has already started ;)
 

Solo

Member
Cheebs said:
This is the guy who often directs 2 pictures a year (JP and Schindler's List in 93, WotW and Munich in 2005...etc)

Which he usually follows up with 3-4 years of no output whatsoever. I prefer my Spielberg to have something out at least every second year.
 
I found it funny in the Cannes Q&A where he mentioned that people had only been asking for sequels to Indy, and not to A.I or Hook. :lol

Is it wrong that I would be there day 1 for a Hook sequel?
 

Slavik81

Member
Fucking awesome.
I watched Raiders of the Lost Arc a little over a week ago.
When I went and saw Crystal Skull, it totally showed itself to be classic Indiana Jones.

Brilliant movie.
 

Cheebs

Member
Solo said:
Which he usually follows up with 3-4 years of no output whatsoever. I prefer my Spielberg to have something out at least every second year.
I may be a Indy fanboy but I right now am more excited about Lincoln than the possibility from Indy 5. I am so glad Chicago Seven fell apart, I had no interest in it.
 

Cheebs

Member
Scullibundo said:
I hear that. Chicago Seven never really interested me.

Here's a better question: When the fuck is Spielberg going to do Interstellar?
It's his next scheduled film after Lincoln right now.

I am hyped about that one. Chris Nolan's brother who wrote Memento and The Dark Knight is doing the script.
 

border

Member
Was there any reason why the alien things killed the Russian chick? In all the previous movies there was a reason for the villain to bite it -- they violated the rules laid forth by some sort of mystical artifact. In this movie it seems like they killed her just because they are douchebags. Kind of stupid I think.
 

Cheebs

Member
border said:
Was there any reason why the alien things killed the Russian chick? In all the previous movies there was a reason for the villain to bite it -- they violated the rules laid forth by some sort of mystical artifact. In this movie it seems like they killed her just because they are douchebags. Kind of stupid I think.
the aliens were mind readers. you saw the alien get pissed, he saw what she planned to do so he killed all of them
 

DaMan121

Member
border said:
Was there any reason why the alien things killed the Russian chick? In all the previous movies there was a reason for the villain to bite it -- they violated the rules laid forth by some sort of mystical artifact. In this movie it seems like they killed her just because they are douchebags. Kind of stupid I think.

Either: with their psychic abilities they could read Spalko's evil intentions so they overloaded her brains, or they were just neutral and simply fulfilled her wish and gave her knowledge of EVERYTHING that fried her brain. I like the latter, as it is more akin to Crusade's message of be careful what you choose / wish for. Although the alien did look to be very angry at the end.
 

Flynn

Member
Foreign Jackass said:
Spielberg doing a biopic is about the least interesting thing I could see him doing. Same goes with Scorsese. God I hate biopics.

Seriously. They're paint-by-numbers movies.
 
Solo said:
I agree by and large about biopics, but I loved The Aviator, so Im torn.

I liked The Aviator, too, but it was Scorsese's weakest picture in a while, before The Departed came, that is. Yes, I liked Gangs of New York a lot more than The Aviator, and would watch it twice before watching The Aviator again. I'd even say Gangs is the most underappreciated movie in probably a decade. It's gonna end up being a classic.
 

Solo

Member
Fair enough. The other reason I want to see this particular biopic as that Roosevelt led a really interesting life.

Gangs is out on BD next month, looking forward to it.
 
I liked it, watched it yesterday and almost saw it again today :D

Almost everything is great, just a few things that could be better (or shouldn´t be there at all):

1.
The ants are ridiculous. Bad CGI, wtf?
2
WTF @ ther Tarzan part :lol
3.
Aliens


That´s all I guess.
 
The Aviator shits all over Gangs of New York. I would even go as far to say The Aviator is leagues ahead of The Departed. It just seemed to me that Scorsese took a whole lot more time and care to The Aviator, but then he always did love the golden age.

Edit: I'm guessing it was just me, but when I saw that shot of Indy standing infront of the mushroom cloud I really wanted to see a Spielberg-helmed T4.
 

Solo

Member
Its funny you should say that because The Aviator was about as far from a personal, pet project for Scorsese as you can get. Like on The Departed, he was a hired gun for The Aviator. Hell, Mann was set to direct until the 11th hour.
 
Scullibundo said:
The Aviator shits all over Gangs of New York. I would even go as far to say The Aviator is leagues ahead of The Departed. It just seemed to me that Scorsese took a whole lot more time and care to The Aviator, but then he always did love the golden age.

Edit: I'm guessing it was just me, but when I saw that shot of Indy standing infront of the mushroom cloud I really wanted to see a Spielberg-helmed T4.

I think I remember about two good scenes from The Aviator. I remember at least five great ones from GoNY, without even thinking about it.
 
Solo said:
Its funny you should say that because The Aviator was about as far from a personal, pet project for Scorsese as you can get. Like on The Departed, he was a hired gun for The Aviator. Hell, Mann was set to direct until the 11th hour.

Yes and no. Scorsese had always said he wanted to do a piece of the golden era of Hollywood, which is why we get a lot more exposition on that in the first half of the film. I know he also spent the latter half of a year not only going over the story with Leo, nailing down the character of Hughes; but going over the look he wanted with the art director. I'd say it was a project that whilst not originally envisioned as his, was injected with his own personality well before the cameras rolled.
 

RSTEIN

Comics, serious business!
Solo said:
Its funny you should say that because The Aviator was about as far from a personal, pet project for Scorsese as you can get. Like on The Departed, he was a hired gun for The Aviator. Hell, Mann was set to direct until the 11th hour.

Cool, didn't know that!
 

Solo

Member
Scullibundo said:
Yes and no. Scorsese had always said he wanted to do a piece of the golden era of Hollywood, which is why we get a lot more exposition on that in the first half of the film. I know he also spent the latter half of a year not only going over the story with Leo, nailing down the character of Hughes; but going over the look he wanted with the art director. I'd say it was a project that whilst not originally envisioned as his, was injected with his own personality well before the cameras rolled.

Dont get me wrong - the final product is very much Scorsese. Im just saying that it wasnt his baby. But things like the different color palettes for the different eras, the tracking shots, the scenes with Howard locked in the projection room - all classic Scorsese.

Ive always wondered how Mann's version would have been (Mann is another of my favorites).
 

RSTEIN

Comics, serious business!
It's funny how great ideas can be killed by small, simple things. Take GTAIV, for example. Obviously it's an incredibly ambitious, technically awesome game. BUT NO CHECKPOINTS? WTF? WHO FORGOT THAT? For me, no checkpoints almost ruin the whole experience of the game. With Indy IV, there are many examples of small, little things that almost ruin it (well, did ruin it for some). The gophers are just soooo stupid. Like, who thought that was a good idea? WHY? WHY?
 
Solo said:
Dont get me wrong - the final product is very much Scorsese. Im just saying that it wasnt his baby. But things like the different color palettes for the different eras, the tracking shots, the scenes with Howard locked in the projection room - all classic Scorsese.

Ive always wondered how Mann's version would have been (Mann is another of my favorites).

I like Mann, but I think he's fairly overrated. He's in no way comparable to Scorsese, has never had a really discernable auteur vision. He's just a very competent director with good ideas, and that's all good, but the way some critics gave importance to Miami Vice (yes, some big critics did) was just completely ludicrous.
 

Dan

No longer boycotting the Wolfenstein franchise
Cheebs said:
It's his next scheduled film after Lincoln right now.

I am hyped about that one. Chris Nolan's brother who wrote Memento and The Dark Knight is doing the script.
He needs to skip all his current projects and do Interstellar. Who cares about mo-capped Tintin? Something I've also realized, his real-world dramas always frustrate me immensely with their sentimentalized politics, so I can't see myself ultimately liking Lincoln.
 
If they do make Indiana Jones 5, I hope the story is different from the one that Lucas has been mentioning lately. I don't have anything against Shia, but I'd like to see them take another crack at making a real Indiana Jones movie.

Crystal Skull would be a terrible way for Jones to go out (of the lead role, at least).

Maybe they'll make it a prequel? Set it in 1953 or something.
 

neight

Banned
SantaC said:
Indiana Jones is not just some B movie franchise, it's suppose to the pinnacle of adventure flicks; and on that level it fails horribly.
The original three were supposed to have the same feel as Republic serials. This new one is supposed to have the feel of 1950s B movies. Some of you are elevating the Indy movies to something they never were. If you want a more serious Indy you're actually going to have to look towards the Young Indiana Jones tv series.
 

Sanjuro

Member
neight said:
The original three were supposed to have the same feel as Republic serials. This new one is supposed to have the feel of 1950s B movies. Some of you are elevating the Indy movies to something they never were. If you want a more serious Indy you're actually going to have to look towards the Young Indiana Jones tv series.
a5kbp.gif
 
neight said:
The original three were supposed to have the same feel as Republic serials. This new one is supposed to have the feel of 1950s B movies. Some of you are elevating the Indy movies to something they never were. If you want a more serious Indy you're actually going to have to look towards the Young Indiana Jones tv series.

I haven't taken the time to actually keep up with this thread, but somebody a while back did point out that Raiders of the Lost Ark was nominated for the Best Picture Oscar and it won 4 other Oscars. Raiders was a VERY good film in its own right, regardless of what the inspiration for the character was.

Just because the inspiration for the movie was a B-movie or a serial or what have you does not mean that the final product is automatically of the same quality level. The inspiration is evident, but Spielberg created something much better than a pulp story in Raiders.

People who are dismissing the quality level of Raiders of the Lost Ark (and as a result, the series as a whole) are crazy. It has always been more than just a Saturday morning story.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom