Spectral Glider
Member
jestro said:
I remember him saying that Attack of the Clones was so good that it made Phantom Menace a better movie.
-
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
- Thread starter ManaByte
- Start date
- Status
I remember him saying that Attack of the Clones was so good that it made Phantom Menace a better movie.
brandonh83
Banned
Cheebs said:
Because George Lucas was on set I guess.
Skiptastic
Member
jestro said:
*facepalm.jpg*
Look, is Phantom Menace a great movie? No. Is it a good movie? Meh, probably not. But one of the worst movies ever made? Come the fuck on.
JzeroT1437
Member
Christ. Geeks would've been so much better off if the internet had never been invented and people just went to go see films without a 2 week prep rally of anxiously accumulating reviews and dissecting them to see if they really want to spend $7 and 2 hours of their time watching something.
Because you could be spending that time beating Portal again or jacking it to internet porn. And $7 is a whole Chinese buffet meal.
Just go see the film.
Because you could be spending that time beating Portal again or jacking it to internet porn. And $7 is a whole Chinese buffet meal.
Just go see the film.
artredis1980
Banned
for all the hype for this movie and all the Lucas hate, if the movie remains above 70% at RottenTomatoes then do you all agree that if it was any other movie, it would be at 95%?
brandonh83
Banned
JzeroT1437 said:
Could be the new best post on GAF.
I gotta say, "The George Lucas raped my childhood!-camp" has to be the canniest bit of reframing since the coinage of the term "Tax-and-spend liberal". The implication -- that the tons of legitimate arguments for finding the post-Empire Star Wars films to be laughable pap somehow all boil down to misplaced nostalgia and cynicism having replaced the purer joy of youth -- is truly a brilliant bait-and-switch worthy of Karl Rove. I bow to you, George Lucas Defence Force!
artredis1980
Banned
Coop said:
Phantom Menace: OK movie
But if you remove Jar Jar Binks. remove the Jar Jar Binks army battle, replace the kid, replace the princess then it would have been a good movie
radioheadrule83
Banned
Some people hold no value in entertainment anymore... I just don't get it.
When I watched the first indy movies I wasn't even in my teens, I was a child. But every year since I first viewed them, right up until this one, I've been able to sit myself in front of them and be thoroughly entertained. I just get totally lost in the adventure - in Harrison Ford's character, the iconic sillhouette, the fedora, the whip, the music, the artifacts, the locations, the red line on the map, the adventure, the misadventure, the corny villains, the snappy one liners, the great chases and set piece action sequences.
Spielberg and Lucas haven't made this movie because they want your critical acclaim, they're just offering another adventure... yet more whip-cracking entertainment.
I really am GLAD I am not one of those people who will be sitting there, hmph'ing my way through every scene with a cynical, solitary raised eyebrow. I'm glad I have suspension of disbelief enough to not particularly mind how they handle the VFX (although it sounds like some people have mistaken proper stuntwork for CG already going off posts earlier in this thread). I'm GLAD I won't be picking apart this movies' MacGuffin device, or scrutinising the facetime they give Marion Ravenwood or some shit, as though the series and characters are some kind of divine thing that I myself own. I feel totally confident that I have no unreasonable expectations. George Lucas and Steven Spielberg owe me shit. All they owe me for my ticket, is entertainment.
And for that, in this instance, all I need is something that feels like an Indiana Jones movie... which it sounds like we're getting. If by the end of it, I feel I'd rather live in a Universe where a fourth Indiana Jones movie exists, than one where it doesn't... if I feel entertained... then I don't give a f*** what any c*** on the internet thinks. By all accounts so far, it seems to be a viable entry, better than at least one of the prior trilogy movies -- all of which I loved.
Again, I can't wait
When I watched the first indy movies I wasn't even in my teens, I was a child. But every year since I first viewed them, right up until this one, I've been able to sit myself in front of them and be thoroughly entertained. I just get totally lost in the adventure - in Harrison Ford's character, the iconic sillhouette, the fedora, the whip, the music, the artifacts, the locations, the red line on the map, the adventure, the misadventure, the corny villains, the snappy one liners, the great chases and set piece action sequences.
Spielberg and Lucas haven't made this movie because they want your critical acclaim, they're just offering another adventure... yet more whip-cracking entertainment.
I really am GLAD I am not one of those people who will be sitting there, hmph'ing my way through every scene with a cynical, solitary raised eyebrow. I'm glad I have suspension of disbelief enough to not particularly mind how they handle the VFX (although it sounds like some people have mistaken proper stuntwork for CG already going off posts earlier in this thread). I'm GLAD I won't be picking apart this movies' MacGuffin device, or scrutinising the facetime they give Marion Ravenwood or some shit, as though the series and characters are some kind of divine thing that I myself own. I feel totally confident that I have no unreasonable expectations. George Lucas and Steven Spielberg owe me shit. All they owe me for my ticket, is entertainment.
And for that, in this instance, all I need is something that feels like an Indiana Jones movie... which it sounds like we're getting. If by the end of it, I feel I'd rather live in a Universe where a fourth Indiana Jones movie exists, than one where it doesn't... if I feel entertained... then I don't give a f*** what any c*** on the internet thinks. By all accounts so far, it seems to be a viable entry, better than at least one of the prior trilogy movies -- all of which I loved.
Again, I can't wait
Green Shinobi
Banned
Replace the Gungans with aliens that don't suck. Make the kid older and darker. If he was a slave, show how he used to get beat the fuck up by his master. Get rid of the ridiculous outfits for Amidala that somehow make Natalie Portman unattractive. Leave out midichlorians. Don't make Yoda a parody of himself, not every sentence he utters has to be inverted. He actually used normal sentence structure from time to time in the OT. Make the Trade Federation aliens look better, and don't make them sound like they're speaking Engrish. Make the battle droids more menacing and more powerful. Don't make the entire ending space battle depend on this clueless little kid getting extremely lucky; if he's supposed to be a great pilot, show him kicking ass (fits in with making him older and darker). Get rid of that virgin birth shit.artredis1980 said:
Then it would have been a good movie.
Spectral Glider
Member
Green Shinobi said:
Pretty much. I would also add, make Yoda actually look like Yoda. I have no idea what that thing in PM was. And the Trade Federation aliens, wow, they completely ruin the beginning of the film, just awful.
radioheadrule83
Banned
Green Shinobi said:
Not to derail discussion here, but can you think of any instance in any Star Wars movie where someone gets "beat the fuck up"? That wouldn't have fit the series at all. They are and always were family movies. I'm pretty sure if I'd been 8 while watching TPM, I'd of loved it more than I do. Your post reminds me of threads on the gaming side actually -- the "make it darker" mentality. I honestly don't get peoples' obsession with "darkness". I don't know how "dark" came to be synonymous with "cool"... I think in the case of Star Wars discussions, it stems from Empire.
The kid was meant to be innocent and stuff in the prequels though. The prequels are about his descent from that point forth. And the republic was at its peak. None of that is the problem with TPM... I generally don't like child actors. I do think if they'd have made him a little older (not darker) it would have been better. I could do without the virgin birth shit myself, but the entire saga leans on other myths to create its own, so I'm not particularly fussed.
radioheadrule83 said:
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes /Lebouf
As for the SW prequels, their biggest sin to me was that they lacked spirit, the cast lacked real emotive power and mostly seemed to be phoning in their parts. I could forgive a lot of other things for a cast that felt more invested in their deliveries.
Kung Fu Jedi
Member
Cheebs said:
I am. Already pre-purchased the tickets.
brandonh83
Banned
Wednesday night at midnight for me bitches!
Skiptastic
Member
Cheebs said:
This guy is. Midnight showing fo sho.
Freedom = $1.05
Banned
The trailers for this just scream "meh." And this is coming from a guy who for a good while went to sleep watching Raiders. Heres hoping that its better than Transformers.
O god please let it be better than Transformers.
O god please let it be better than Transformers.
Space Runaway
Member
Cheebs said:
I definitely am. The fact that it's out in a few days its nuts. It feels like just yesterday when they couldn't decide on a script and the films future was up in the air. Yet now it's here.
StriKeVillain
Banned
I'm most definitely hitting the Saturday matinée. I just can't deal with anyone under 18 years old anymore.
Shalashaska
Member
I hope you mean Friday matinée for your sake.striKeVillain! said:
Well, you can be sure that most of the audience is genuinely enthusiastic about the movie they're about to see. I'd say midnight showings have proven to be the best theater experiences I've had, hence why I seem to be going to more and more of them.temp said:
radioheadrule83
Banned
I've got a midnight ticket too. 12.10am GMT on Wednesday, and its getting ever closer
Kung Fu Jedi
Member
I'd love to see it at midnight, but I have to work in the morning, and I've found that after the initial excitement of the the opening scenes wear off, I start to get sleepy. Coming out of the movie at 2:30 AM (2 hour, 4 minute run time, plus previews) is a bit rough on us old guys.
DeathbyVolcano
Banned
temp said:
Just make sure you go with a few people you know so its an enjoyable experience. Also, prepare yourself with some really weird people at the theater.
Everyone at midnight showings is going to love the movie afterwards regardless, so you don't have to worry about people walking out going "Ehhhhhhhhh that sucked not at all like the book/comic/my imagination!"
Read the Eberthttp://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080518/REVIEWS/969461084 review and he's basically saying it sucks, but what do you expect you can't have Raiders (taste of the first pound of sausage) after all this time, you have to settle for this CG mess (a possible 2nd pound of sausage taste).
He seems to be justifying it be saying he wants to see more of what was great in Raiders in the 1980's pulp ficition, ridiculous action scenes, oneliners. Ridiculous
Its like he knows it sucks but moneyhat + winkwinknudgenudge = 3 stars = many pounds of sausages
He seems to be justifying it be saying he wants to see more of what was great in Raiders in the 1980's pulp ficition, ridiculous action scenes, oneliners. Ridiculous
Its like he knows it sucks but moneyhat + winkwinknudgenudge = 3 stars = many pounds of sausages
artredis1980
Banned
What the top critics say:
Toronto Star: Not grand but Great
Boston Globe: 2nd Best Indy in the series
NY Post: Better than temple of doom but not better than Last Crusade
Hollywood Reporter: Too much CGI
ReelViews: A bit dissapointing
LA Times: Smart
Newsday: All ingredients to make a great indy movie are there and they work
Chicago Tribune: Movie veers here and there unnecessarily
Ebert: If you like other indy movies, you will like this one, if you dont, you shouldnt be alive
Entertainment Weekly: Full of Fun and Joy
Time Magazine: This movie Delivers
USA Today: Indy looks weary but its still a great movie
Variety: Indy has his groove back
Salon.com: Even though its creaky its much better than most recent big budget movies
Toronto Star: Not grand but Great
Boston Globe: 2nd Best Indy in the series
NY Post: Better than temple of doom but not better than Last Crusade
Hollywood Reporter: Too much CGI
ReelViews: A bit dissapointing
LA Times: Smart
Newsday: All ingredients to make a great indy movie are there and they work
Chicago Tribune: Movie veers here and there unnecessarily
Ebert: If you like other indy movies, you will like this one, if you dont, you shouldnt be alive
Entertainment Weekly: Full of Fun and Joy
Time Magazine: This movie Delivers
USA Today: Indy looks weary but its still a great movie
Variety: Indy has his groove back
Salon.com: Even though its creaky its much better than most recent big budget movies
artredis1980
Banned
acidviper said:
Eberts review is positive on RT
BenjaminBirdie
Banned
radioheadrule83 said:Some people hold no value in entertainment anymore... I just don't get it.
When I watched the first indy movies I wasn't even in my teens, I was a child. But every year since I first viewed them, right up until this one, I've been able to sit myself in front of them and be thoroughly entertained. I just get totally lost in the adventure - in Harrison Ford's character, the iconic sillhouette, the fedora, the whip, the music, the artifacts, the locations, the red line on the map, the adventure, the misadventure, the corny villains, the snappy one liners, the great chases and set piece action sequences.
Spielberg and Lucas haven't made this movie because they want your critical acclaim, they're just offering another adventure... yet more whip-cracking entertainment.
I really am GLAD I am not one of those people who will be sitting there, hmph'ing my way through every scene with a cynical, solitary raised eyebrow. I'm glad I have suspension of disbelief enough to not particularly mind how they handle the VFX (although it sounds like some people have mistaken proper stuntwork for CG already going off posts earlier in this thread). I'm GLAD I won't be picking apart this movies' MacGuffin device, or scrutinising the facetime they give Marion Ravenwood or some shit, as though the series and characters are some kind of divine thing that I myself own. I feel totally confident that I have no unreasonable expectations. George Lucas and Steven Spielberg owe me shit. All they owe me for my ticket, is entertainment.
And for that, in this instance, all I need is something that feels like an Indiana Jones movie... which it sounds like we're getting. If by the end of it, I feel I'd rather live in a Universe where a fourth Indiana Jones movie exists, than one where it doesn't... if I feel entertained... then I don't give a f*** what any c*** on the internet thinks. By all accounts so far, it seems to be a viable entry, better than at least one of the prior trilogy movies -- all of which I loved.
Again, I can't wait
So well said. Hear fucking hear.
HomerSimpson-Man
Member
acidviper said:
Er...what?
That was a positive review. His opening paragraph basically conforms to the fact he loves what the Indy films goes for and thusly Kingdom with all it's spectacle he listed for it.
He basically admits following too much logical aspects to such a outlandish series as Indiana Jones is not the point, as he does it all to often. It's about the crazy adventure, and states what we all know and accept, that Raiders of the Lost Ark is an action masterpiece that started it all, and the succeeding films follow it knowing that. He concludes in the end if you like Indiana you will like this film, and if you don't there's no talking to you.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked