CajoleJuice
Member
Going by the parallels between this series and the Die Hard series, I bet this will be received well-critically (as it already is), and it will fall between the 3rd and 2nd (or dead-last) for many fans.
Cheebs said:Oh btw kids, Ebert LOVED it. 3.5/4 stars:
http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080518/REVIEWS/969461084
Good point! It has already started to break the parallels. My hope factor has gone up.Cheebs said:Except unlike die hard more or less everyone is returning both the crew and the cast. Same story writer, same director, same editor, same composer, same producers, same cast...etc.
Die Hard 4 had Bruce Willis and no one else
AniHawk said:He loved Last Crusade too. This reminds me of his review of that film. Siskel gave it a thumbs down in 1989 for being same ol' same ol'.
Green Shinobi said:Wait, wasn't Die Hard 4 supposed to be amazing? I haven't seen it, but those were the impressions I got. Did I miss something?
DoctorWho said:Major spoilers in Ebert's review!!! I'm ruined!
BahahahGreen Shinobi said:Wait, wasn't Die Hard 4 supposed to be amazing? I haven't seen it, but those were the impressions I got. Did I miss something?
When it came out, everyone was sayingSpacLock said:Not if you try to compare it to the others.
Cheebs said:No more king kong! talk about how hot cate blanchett is
Hahaha, well I obviously wouldn't call it rancid shit, but being better than DH2 =/ amazing. And I'm not even totally sure if I'd go that far. But that's me, and I readily admit my biases.Solo said:Well, Die Hard 2 is rancid shit, so what does it matter? Also, King Kong is probably my most hated movie of the decade so far, just to throw a final Kong word out there.
Why do you prove time and time again that your taste in movies can't live up to your avatar?Solo said:Well, Die Hard 2 is rancid shit, so what does it matter? Also, King Kong is probably my most hated movie of the decade so far, just to throw a final Kong word out there.
Haven't some said the same about you?Green Shinobi said:Why do you prove time and time again that your taste in movies can't live up to your avatar?
I've been accused of not "getting" No Country For Old Men. But otherwise, no.CajoleJuice said:Haven't some said the same about you?
Green Shinobi said:Why do you prove time and time again that your taste in movies can't live up to your avatar?
CajoleJuice said:Anyway, getting back on topic, I do have some hope for this movie, but the amount of CG in the trailer was just off-putting.
Time will prove me right on those two.Solo said:You love King Kong and Cloverfield, two of my most detested movies, so I could ask the same of you.
I just know a lot of the stuff in the trailer I saw before Iron Man looked like CG. My friend agreed. Maybe it was due to the quick cuts of a trailer.DoctorWho said:I've yet to notice much of this CG and Spielberg keeps saying that there is very little in the film.
CajoleJuice said:Anyway, getting back on topic, I do have some hope for this movie, but the amount of CG in the trailer was just off-putting.
Green Shinobi said:Time will prove me right on those two.
But anyway, that came out harsh. I should have said "hyperbole FTL" or something.
I mean, Die Hard 2 = rancid shit? Come on. Even if it wasn't as good as the first, it wasn't that bad. As far as bad sequels go, the recent Shrek and Pirates of the Caribbean sequels are in a whole different league of suck.
And if King Kong and Cloverfield are two of the movies that you've hated most in this decade, then you must not watch a lot of movies.
I already explained!omg rite said:What? I barely noticed any CG.
MightyHedgehog said:I seriously wonder about how much validation one needs from critics to see a FUCKING INDY MOVIE. Maybe it is because I (rightly) understand that these kinds of films are required viewing for anyone who loves action and adventure. Damn kids and their ceaselessly turgid erections for review aggregator sites.
Kobun Heat said:Saw it today with xsarien. He says he needs to chew it over some more, I say thumbs up. Loved the action sequences, laughed a lot. There will likely be endless hand-wringing over whether this film "fits" with the previous trilogy or feels like an unnecessary appendix, but I thought it felt just like an Indy movie.
Cheebs said:People in the initial teaser thread thought the jungle shot was a green screen environment till the very shot they claimed was a green screen cgi shot was seen in a making of video, on location in a jungle.
MOAR!!!! Too bad Lucas decided to hold on to her though and ruin the awesomenessBlueTsunami said:wtf Kobun, were you at the premire or something? Did you see Kate Blanchetts HOT BAWDY?!
j-wood said:Dunno if it's been posted or not, but IGN's review is up
http://movies.ign.com/articles/874/874909p1.html
Lucas looks so bored there.Cheebs said:
the actual movie, maybe?DoctorWho said:so I'm really interested to see what others are seeing.
Except these people have called things from the trailer cgi when they weren't.FoneBone said:the actual movie, maybe?
"These people" being IGN UK?Cheebs said:Except these people have called things from the trailer cgi when they weren't.
Dan said:I saw a commercial the other day that had Cate Blanchett's character saying the skull wasn't made by humans...
Who the hell is in charge of this slapdash advertising campaign?
Kobun Heat said:Saw it today with xsarien. He says he needs to chew it over some more, I say thumbs up. Loved the action sequences, laughed a lot. There will likely be endless hand-wringing over whether this film "fits" with the previous trilogy or feels like an unnecessary appendix, but I thought it felt just like an Indy movie.