Why was Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull such a really s*** movie?

Dublin_Andy

when i went to see this back in May of this year, i was really excited and couldnt wait to see it. being a die hard of fan of the original trilogy and brought up watching them i was looking forward to some old school filmmaking, with realism,originality,excitement and grit...alas...

what i saw wasnt an indiana jones movie at all and was instantly forgettable...they said ther d be no CGI used at all... it was ladened with it and it looked crap... looked so fake...there was no excitement in it at all...ther s not a moment where we feel that the character is in peril...the action scenes where not memorable( except for the "nuke the fridge" scene) and the banther between the characters was annoying...

overall it was aimed at kids...its not as violent as the old ones...there was no believability...ther s no tension at all...it was a lazy effort with no heart put into it...

stick to the original trilogy if u kno whats good for you... they are classics that can be watched over and over again...

i guess they dont make them like they used to...

Tusky

I was really excited when I heard them say they werent going to use CGI. The Very first bloody shot in the movie is of a CGI gopher popping out of the ground =/. My main problems with it in bite size form are as follows.

- CGI. The main reason the originals are so timeless is because there is very little computer effects used. You can watch them today and they dont look dated. Crystal Skull had far far too many CGI moments and will look dated in 5 years time.

- Aliens. They just dont suit Indianna Jones. I'm well aware that there was plenty of hocus pocus in the originals, but Aliens just dont feel right in an Indy movie.

- Lack of a standout opening action scene. The original trilogy all had a fantastic action set piece at the beginning. This was definitely lacking in Crystal Skull. The warehouse scene doesnt hold a candle to any of the opening scenes from the other movies.

There were plenty of parts that I did like, but the whole thing was a bit 'meh'. Definitely stunk of Lucas...hes done to Indy what he did to Star Wars.

Mossy Monk

Aliens

Surviving a nuclear blast by hiding in a fridge that got blown how many miles away

Those are the 2 bits that jump out for me.

Dublin_Andy

Tusky wrote: »

I was really excited when I heard them say they werent going to use CGI. The Very first bloody shot in the movie is of a CGI gopher popping out of the ground =/. My main problems with it in bite size form are as follows.

- CGI. The main reason the originals are so timeless is because there is very little computer effects used. You can watch them today and they dont look dated. Crystal Skull had far far too many CGI moments and will look dated in 5 years time.

- Aliens. They just dont suit Indianna Jones. I'm well aware that there was plenty of hocus pocus in the originals, but Aliens just dont feel right in an Indy movie.

- Lack of a standout opening action scene. The original trilogy all had a fantastic action set piece at the beginning. This was definitely lacking in Crystal Skull. The warehouse scene doesnt hold a candle to any of the opening scenes from the other movies.

There were plenty of parts that I did like, but the whole thing was a bit 'meh'. Definitely stunk of Lucas...hes done to Indy what he did to Star Wars.

exactly... and when i seen the opening scene with the CGI gopher i thought "oh no"...

the last crusade is my favorite... escaping from the zeppelin and the tank scene etc etc

Green Hornet

Funny you should bring it up. I just watched it last night on DVD and it sucks!

As the previous posters say:

The lead lined fridge that blew miles away without the door even opening.
The jungle chase was cartoonish and completely unbelievable, even for Indiana Jones fims.
The alien thing was very disappointing.
The whole wedding thing too.

Cate Blanchett was not suited to her role either.

Disappointing because I had looked forward to it in a nostalgic way.

Galvasean

CGI monkeys... What the flying fudge???

Dublin_Andy

Galvasean wrote: »

CGI monkeys... What the flying fudge???

yeah lol and shia le bioufs character just happened to naturally swing from vine to vine like tarzan...

and the monkeys just happen to hate the Russians too... cmon like lol

GAAman

Did anyone else think in la boeuf's first scene he looked like a total village people head if ye get me? (Think covered in leathers and even the leather cap etc )

I thought (along with previous posters stuff) harrison fords new lack of ability to throw a punch went against him as well, there were at least two fight scenes where he threw a punch and it was just fake as hell

I think south park had it bang on

lostexpectation

because your not ten anymore

zeusnero

lostexpectation wrote: »

because your not ten anymore

that makes absolutely no difference :rolleyes:

As a 27 year old I still watch and thoroughly enjoy the Indiana Jones original trilogy. The simple fact is this movie was complete and utter tripe, from the storyline to the acting and everything in between.

FFS - Aliens, what the hell?

CyberGhost

CGI

Cheesy acting

Shia leblaf or something(hate that guy. No, no no non ono no no no)

The typical evil Russians

Previous movies felt like real adventures as a whole, this one felt like, "ok, let's do this quick and get it over with".



Cate Blanchet was hot milf though, I'd skull her.

ziedth

If I where to start a rant about how much I hated this film it would rival any hate filled rant over in PI,

The film itself was TBF awful, when I get dissapointed with sequels I always try and say to myself well as a stnad alone film how bad was it, Here is was awful.

The scenes that did it for me where,

1. Survivng the nuke in a fridge
2. Obvious Rip off Return of the Jedi Jungle chase
3. Sword fight on cars
4. The MONKEYS (oh god above the monkeys)
5.The Watefall scene (Inever came so close to walking out of a movie)
6. Aliens (As said don't suit an Indy film)
7. How every problem at the end was solved by showing it the alien skull
8.

for no reason the alien decided to kill cate blanchett at the end

I could really go on and on, Simply put I believe it ended my memories of childhood.

Auvers

George "turkey neck" Lucas

that is all

Earthhorse

It's because you can never go back. The idea of re-visiting franchises that are decades old in the hopes of re-capturing the magic is just the bad marriage of nostalgia and greed.

GhostInTheRuins

I was really close to seeing this when it was in the cinemas, I'm so glad I didn't now

MagicMarker

I actually liked this when I saw it, however I was sitting on a plane and was crying out for anything to hold my attention, so my judgement may have been slightly clouded.

Pigman II

KOTCS is an excellent addition to the series and consistent with the other movies. I'm surprised and disappointed that people (esp Indy fans) cannot see this.

Some of the points raised in this thread so far:

CGI - like it or not it's the order of the day. There's a whole generation of kids who have grown up on nothing but this stuff and they are not interested in going back to the old techniques. I think fans (As with Star Wars) from back in the day will only be happy if Indy4 been using matte painting and scale models. Once they see anything that looks like it was done on a computer its a case of "groan" irregardless of how good or bad it looks.

Aliens - All the Indy movies have fantastical elements in them. To the people who didn't like the alien spaceship bit, did you also tut just as much when you saw ghosts coming out of the ark of the covenant or when Indy encounters the 1000 year old crusading knight? In the 1950's American popculture was facinated by the prospect of aliens and UFOs. Just check out the deluge of b-movies from the era! The Indy series has always attempted emulate b-movies and as such it perfectly acceptable (nay necessary) for an Indy pix set in the 1950's to feature aliens.

Waterfalls - Indy goes off a waterfall too in ToD. Not a scratch. Again no one had any problems with that. Just and extention of the same idea here.

Overall I made this possibly one of the few family movies in the past 5 years that I didn't think was horrendous. It's a shame so many fans are missing out on the enjoyment value because they are living in the past.

ziedth

Pigman II wrote: »

KOTCS is an excellent addition to the series and consistent with the other movies. I'm surprised and disappointed that people (esp Indy fans) cannot see this.

Some of the points raised in this thread so far:

CGI - like it or not it's the order of the day. There's a whole generation of kids who have grown up on nothing but this stuff and they are not interested in going back to the old techniques. I think fans (As with Star Wars) from back in the day will only be happy if Indy4 been using matte painting and scale models. Once they see anything that looks like it was done on a computer its a case of "groan" irregardless of how good or bad it looks.

Aliens - All the Indy movies have fantastical elements in them. To the people who didn't like the alien spaceship bit, did you also tut just as much when you saw ghosts coming out of the ark of the covenant or when Indy encounters the 1000 year old crusading knight? In the 1950's American popculture was facinated by the prospect of aliens and UFOs. Just check out the deluge of b-movies from the era! The Indy series has always attempted emulate b-movies and as such it perfectly acceptable (nay necessary) for an Indy pix set in the 1950's to feature aliens.

Waterfalls - Indy goes off a waterfall too in ToD. Not a scratch. Again no one had any problems with that. Just and extention of the same idea here.

Overall I made this possibly one of the few family movies in the past 5 years that I didn't think was horrendous. It's a shame so many fans are missing out on the enjoyment value because they are living in the past.

Like everyone my friend you are entitled to your opinion BUT I in no way agree with you, CGI in films makes no difference to me like you said its a way of films now.

In regards to the waterfall scene my issue was that he wasn't hurt from the watefall (Its an INDY film for god sake:D) its that all 4 of the stayed in the car TWICE as they went over, IMO anyway this is just taking it too far.

There will always be people who will back up films that are not well recived I for one love the film the Boondock Saints and Visa Versa (The Saying not the film or choclate )

Pigman II

ziedth wrote: »

L
In regards to the waterfall scene my issue was that he wasn't hurt from the watefall (Its an INDY film for god sake:D) its that all 4 of the stayed in the car TWICE as they went over, IMO anyway this is just taking it too far.

Recap ToD.: 3x people jump out of a plane using a DINGY as a parachute. Upon hitting land they plummet down a mountainside at 100mph and then jump off a waterfall - all the while remaining with the dingy! How is this sequence of events any more plausable than the incident in KOTCS that, in your opinion, took it too far?

I think if you're going to accuse KOTCS of "taking it too far" than you should probably call the other 3x movies to the dock as well.

rod flanders

As much as I loved hearing the theme tune again, this film sucked!

r3nu4l

Tusky wrote: »

- CGI. The main reason the originals are so timeless is because there is very little computer effects used. You can watch them today and they dont look dated. Crystal Skull had far far too many CGI moments and will look dated in 5 years time.

Huh? Have you watched ToD recently? The scene where they plummet down the mine rails in the mine cart has some bloody awful effects that stand out as low budget and sad. I loved that film as a kid and still like it but I don't wear my rose-tinted fanboy glasses when watching it as an adult.

Don't get me wrong, I agree this was the poorest in the franchise but kids loved it and will remember it in the future, possibly more fondly than the originals!

zeusnero wrote: »

As a 27 year old I still watch and thoroughly enjoy the Indiana Jones original trilogy. The simple fact is this movie was complete and utter tripe, from the storyline to the acting and everything in between.

FFS - Aliens, what the hell?

Well yes, a lot of this movie stunk, in particular the script and acting but yet again, kids loved it. Yes, it's the worst of the four but the aliens thing is perfect for an Indy film as was the ancient crusader and hearts being plucked out of bodies by evil cult leaders.

Pigman II wrote: »

KOTCS is an excellent addition to the series and consistent with the other movies. I'm surprised and disappointed that people (esp Indy fans) cannot see this.

Some of the points raised in this thread so far:

CGI - like it or not it's the order of the day. There's a whole generation of kids who have grown up on nothing but this stuff and they are not interested in going back to the old techniques. I think fans (As with Star Wars) from back in the day will only be happy if Indy4 been using matte painting and scale models. Once they see anything that looks like it was done on a computer its a case of "groan" irregardless of how good or bad it looks.

Aliens - All the Indy movies have fantastical elements in them. To the people who didn't like the alien spaceship bit, did you also tut just as much when you saw ghosts coming out of the ark of the covenant or when Indy encounters the 1000 year old crusading knight? In the 1950's American popculture was facinated by the prospect of aliens and UFOs. Just check out the deluge of b-movies from the era! The Indy series has always attempted emulate b-movies and as such it perfectly acceptable (nay necessary) for an Indy pix set in the 1950's to feature aliens.

Waterfalls - Indy goes off a waterfall too in ToD. Not a scratch. Again no one had any problems with that. Just and extention of the same idea here.

Overall I made this possibly one of the few family movies in the past 5 years that I didn't think was horrendous. It's a shame so many fans are missing out on the enjoyment value because they are living in the past.

I don't agree it was excellent but agree with everything else you've said.

Pigman II wrote: »

Recap ToD.: 3x people jump out of a plane using a DINGY as a parachute. Upon hitting land they plummet down a mountainside at 100mph and then jump off a waterfall - all the while remaining with the dingy! How is this sequence of events any more plausable than the incident in KOTCS that, in your opinion, took it too far?

I think if you're going to accuse KOTCS of "taking it too far" than you should probably call the other 3x movies to the dock as well.

+1 Quoted for Truth.

humanji

I thought that the reasons it's so hated are that it was a very poor film and the fans of the originals expected too much.

I think the CGI was a big problem with it. I've no problem with a film using CGI, but when it's used to excess, it just takes away from the film. When I saw the bike chase I started to think that maybe the film was going to pull it together, but they just decided to throw in a load of random action set pieces and tie them together with a line or two of dialogue.

I didn't mind the fact that aliens were in it too much, it's just the plot around the aliens that made them shìt. I think it was Frank Darabont who wrote the orginal script and it had aliens in it. I'm sure it would of been a great movie if Lucas hadn't been allowed rewrite it.

The plot was horrific and the most appaling thing about it is that if Indy wasn't there, the outcome would of been the exact same. There just seemed to be no need for Indy to be in the film at all.

And my final problem was the fact that with such a fantastic cast, Shia Le Beouf was the only one who bothered his hole to try and act. They were just such half assed attempts at acting that I just hated all the characters.

All in all, it's a shìt film. As was said above, it was a marriage of nostalgia and greed. It was pretty much doomed from the start.

johnny_ultimate

Pigman II wrote: »

Overall I made this possibly one of the few family movies in the past 5 years that I didn't think was horrendous. It's a shame so many fans are missing out on the enjoyment value because they are living in the past.

Pigman II wrote: »

I think if you're going to accuse KOTCS of "taking it too far" than you should probably call the other 3x movies to the dock as well.

Well said. I am not going to say Crystal Skulls is a perfect film. There are moments I hated: namely the big three of monkeys, fridge and gophers. These are the moments where the CGI was just absurd and unwatchable. However, once you get past these three awful Lucasisms, it really is a very fun and enjoyable film. Pigman sums up most of the arguments well. Aliens are not the big issue everyone makes them out to be: the 50s setting ties in with it extremely well (as did the mythological elements with pre-WW2), and Indiana Jones was ALWAYS completely absurd: hearts being ripped out by hands, boxes of Godness that had a tendency to melt people, a Chalice that rapidly ages folk. In fact, aliens seem like a more likely possibility than some of the above examples. Absurd, yes. But what did you expect from Indiana Jones?

OK, the new film isn't up to the standard of the first three. But it was a good attempt with some fantastic moments: the diner fight and proceeding bike chase, the opening chase through the warehouse, the jungle sequences (barring the monkeys, it worked well - quicksand bit was good old Indiana Jones cheesiness) etc... Didn't even hate Shia LaBeouff - thought the role suited him well (although if they ever try to make a sequel with him as the protagonist, I dunno, I'll start a petition or something). I think the franchise had to move on, and many of the upgrades worked well while others didn't at all. But overall it was an enjoyable and very entertaining blockbuster. It was a far worthier update to the franchise than the dire Episode One, and felt to me like an Indiana Jones film. If you miss the mythological elements and really despise the aliens, then there is always DVD boxsets. Taken for what it is, the new one is alot of fun. George Lucas and CGI unfortunately made sure it wasn't a truly special sequel, but still don't think it was as dire as many believe.

Dublin_Andy

Pigman II wrote: »

KOTCS is an excellent addition to the series and consistent with the other movies. I'm surprised and disappointed that people (esp Indy fans) cannot see this.

Some of the points raised in this thread so far:

CGI - like it or not it's the order of the day. There's a whole generation of kids who have grown up on nothing but this stuff and they are not interested in going back to the old techniques. I think fans (As with Star Wars) from back in the day will only be happy if Indy4 been using matte painting and scale models. Once they see anything that looks like it was done on a computer its a case of "groan" irregardless of how good or bad it looks.

Aliens - All the Indy movies have fantastical elements in them. To the people who didn't like the alien spaceship bit, did you also tut just as much when you saw ghosts coming out of the ark of the covenant or when Indy encounters the 1000 year old crusading knight? In the 1950's American popculture was facinated by the prospect of aliens and UFOs. Just check out the deluge of b-movies from the era! The Indy series has always attempted emulate b-movies and as such it perfectly acceptable (nay necessary) for an Indy pix set in the 1950's to feature aliens.

Waterfalls - Indy goes off a waterfall too in ToD. Not a scratch. Again no one had any problems with that. Just and extention of the same idea here.

Overall I made this possibly one of the few family movies in the past 5 years that I didn't think was horrendous. It's a shame so many fans are missing out on the enjoyment value because they are living in the past.

your entitled to ur opinion but did you not find that it was so cheesy and childish...

watchin raiders and crusade, there is tension all the way and grittyness and great action and violence and emotion...none of which was in the new one

this new one was there pension money... it was a lame effort and it was severely aimed for kids...

maybe back in the day they could get away with alot more in a PG movie...

there was no excitement at all in the new one... not one instance where Indy was in any real peril...

it didnt keep you interested at all...

as i said they dont make them like they used to...

its all about CGI effects nowadays and no story anymore...

CGI looks even worse than the old matte paintings... CGI can make the impossible possible which ruins alot of movies... and then they go way past the point of believability i.e " nuking the fridge" or " jumping the shark"...

ziedth

Pigman II wrote: »

Recap ToD.: 3x people jump out of a plane using a DINGY as a parachute. Upon hitting land they plummet down a mountainside at 100mph and then jump off a waterfall - all the while remaining with the dingy! How is this sequence of events any more plausable than the incident in KOTCS that, in your opinion, took it too far?

I think if you're going to accuse KOTCS of "taking it too far" than you should probably call the other 3x movies to the dock as well.

TBF you have a good point I will admit that its been a number of years since i've seen Raiders ok temple However I didn't refer to them as realistic in any way. Dublin_Andy had a good point in that the first three seemed gritter then KOTCS, Nothing will on this earth convience me that it was anything other then a Lazy Cash in.

Waterfall scene aside though Pigman, You can't possibly have any comeback for the commie hating monkeys :D:D:D

Pigman II

ziedth wrote: »

Waterfall scene aside though Pigman, You can't possibly have any comeback for the commie hating monkeys :D:D:D

Hypontised kid down the mine in TOD. Trust me I have all the angles covered on this particular discussion

It's all just a bit of fun anyway. I think it's amazing that a 60 year old guy can still make movies that are fun yet people in their 20-30's take the whole thing so seriously and are so stuck in their way as to what they presume the vision of SOMEONES ELSES created world should look like that that they can't go with it. That said tho I sort of understand the irritation felt by some of the people here for Indy4. I felt the same way after SW episode 2 (ie that is was just making the set-pieces TOO ridiculous) and came out of the cinema fuming. After a while I calmed down and just learnt to consider the movie as a bit of swashbuckling entertainment and it finally started to work for me.

thewing

Turkey-Neck's love if CGI is a bit much - he should have stayed in self-imposed exile rather than ruin my childhood memories with Episode 1-3 and Crystal Skull.....

van damme

Absolutely dreadful movie. Totally reeks of George Lucas' interference!!!!!

Pigman II

van damme wrote: »

Absolutely dreadful movie. Totally reeks of George Lucas' interference!!!!!

Yep he really shouldn't be allowed 'interfere' in his own creations.

van damme

Pigman II wrote: »

Yep he really shouldn't be allowed 'interfere' in his own creations.

Well, he's currently making a very good job of destroying his creations -the originaly indy trilogy and the original star wars trilogy are classics, but he made a mess of the star wars prequels, and unfortunately the new indy film is a mess also.

Pigman II

van damme wrote: »

Well, he's currently making a very good job of destroying his creations -the originaly indy trilogy and the original star wars trilogy are classics, but he made a mess of the star wars prequels, and unfortunately the new indy film is a mess also.

In your opinion.

Don't know about Indy4 but it's on record that GL is happier with the SW prequels than he ever was with the original movies. Add to this the financial success of all 4 of these "disasters" (TPM 1st 1999, AOTC 4th 2002, ROTS 2nd 2005, KOTCS 2nd 2008) then GL could well be forgiven for considering it a successful decade overall. He made exactly the movies he wanted and made a shedload of money into the bargain. It's any auteurs dream come true.

BopNiblets

You know, it's too easy to blame George Lucas... and fun!

van damme

Pigman II wrote: »

In your opinion.

Don't know about Indy4 but it's on record that GL is happier with the SW prequels than he ever was with the original movies. Add to this the financial success of all 4 of these "disasters" (TPM 1st 1999, AOTC 4th 2002, ROTS 2nd 2005, KOTCS 2nd 2008) then GL could well be forgiven for considering it a successful decade overall. He made exactly the movies he wanted and made a shedload of money into the bargain. It's any auteurs dream come true.

It is just my opinion, and you are certainly entitled to yours.

thewing

Pigman II wrote: »

In your opinion.

Don't know about Indy4 but it's on record that GL is happier with the SW prequels than he ever was with the original movies. Add to this the financial success of all 4 of these "disasters" (TPM 1st 1999, AOTC 4th 2002, ROTS 2nd 2005, KOTCS 2nd 2008) then GL could well be forgiven for considering it a successful decade overall. He made exactly the movies he wanted and made a shedload of money into the bargain. It's any auteurs dream come true.

According to this philosophy, Titanic is the greatest film of all time...

The reason Episodes 1-3 did so well was because of the fan base of Episodes IV-VI. A lot of people (including myself) excitedly went to all 3 only to be let down each time - i don't think i've watched any of them since I saw them in the cinema, whereas Empire was on ITV the other day and I happily sat through it again...

He could be forgiven in thinking he had success going by box-office take, but I think most people in the 20+ age bracket would feel mugged by all his recent remakes....

Karl Hungus

BopNiblets wrote: »

You know, it's too easy to blame George Lucas... and fun!

It is easy to blame Lucas, but people seem to be forgetting that Spielberg has made his fair share of turkeys too. Hook anyone? Or how about that terrible Jurassic Park sequel, The Lost World? Don't get me wrong, Spielberg is still an exceptional director, but I don't think he's beyond blame here. Artificial Intelligence and War Of The Worlds were pretty big on CGI, so I really doubt Lucas alone to blame for some of the more outlandish set pieces.

Pigman II

thewing wrote: »

According to this philosophy, Titanic is the greatest film of all time...

Not really considering I never defined a films greatness by those parameters.

The reason Episodes 1-3 did so well was because of the fan base of Episodes IV-VI. A lot of people (including myself) excitedly went to all 3 only to be let down each time - i don't think i've watched any of them since I saw them in the cinema, .

Says more about you then that you would keep coming back for more. A decerning cinema-goer would having given up after ep1 or even ep2 but yet you went to all 3 in the hope SW would return to whatever idea you have of it in your head? Sorry it dissapointed you but you had plenty of chances to jump off the roller-coaster.

He could be forgiven in thinking he had success going by box-office take, but I think most people in the 20+ age bracket would feel mugged by all his recent remakes....

Perhaps they do and I'm sure he doesn't care (I wouldn't). He's making the movies he wants and as a bonus still reaching a fanbase. A lot of people enjoyed these movies or they wouldn't have made the money they did. You don't make the amount of ticket sales from 3x prequels and Indy4 simply by one-time visits from fanboys. There must be people repeat viewing these movies and recommending them to garnish those totals.

Also you're kidding yourself if you think the only people who watch this new stuff are fans from back in the day. For every dateless basement dwelling 30year old who has had his childhood raped by GL there is another 10 year old kid out there enjoying the new stuff. Mores the power for it because they are the people that the movies are primarily for.

Earthhorse

Pigman II wrote: »

GL is happier with the SW prequels than he ever was with the original movies.

This kinda sums it up for me. The man's taste has abandoned him in his old age. He is obsessed with a technical perfection which has led to many developments in the industry I'm grateful for; his latest films aren't one of them.

Karl Hungus

I think at this juncture I would like to say that I thoroughly enjoyed Episode III.

Pigman II

Earthhorse wrote: »

This kinda sums it up for me. The man's taste has abandoned him in his old age. He is obsessed with a technical perfection which has led to many developments in the industry I'm grateful for; his latest films aren't one of them.

That's nothing new. He has always been obsessed with technical perfection. Check his student movies at USC. They make absolutely no sense for the most part but are technically accomplished. Same with his first feature THX1138. Even American Graffiti is like an 'how-to' on how make the most with the least from a technical pov.

Of the original SW from 1977 he says he accomplished 10% of his original "on paper" vision for the movie. Basically the fans loved it and he hated it. So I think the main problem her is that he and his original fans are (figuratively) on two different planets and somehow only managed to be in sync for a very brief period in history.

Earthhorse

Yes, I know that. That's why he wasn't happy with the original Star Wars trilogy. He could see the blemishes the rest of us didn't notice or grew attached to over time. Perhaps judgement would be a better word to use than taste. His flaws become more apparent when he isn't forced to compromise.

thewing

Pigman II wrote: »

Not really considering I never defined a films greatness by those parameters.

Apologies - your original statement was that Lucas was entitled to think he had a great decade due box-office take, rather than the quality of his films.

Pigman II wrote: »

Says more about you then that you would keep coming back for more. A decerning cinema-goer would having given up after ep1 or even ep2 but yet you went to all 3 in the hope SW would return to whatever idea you have of it in your head? Sorry it dissapointed you but you had plenty of chances to jump off the roller-coaster.

I was prepared to dismiss Episode 1's failure as there was a lot of character building going-on - in Episode 2 I expected to see the 'Attack of the Clones' as the title suggested rather than a badly scripted love story.....and as for episode 3, I just wanted to see Anakin get his Vader on...still didn't take away for the fact that it was 2 hours of cartoonish-dross to get to that point...

Pigman II wrote: »

Perhaps they do and I'm sure he doesn't care (I wouldn't). He's making the movies he wants and as a bonus still reaching a fanbase. A lot of people enjoyed these movies or they wouldn't have made the money they did. You don't make the amount of ticket sales from 3x prequels and Indy4 simply by one-time visits from fanboys. There must be people repeat viewing these movies and recommending them to garnish those totals.

Also you're kidding yourself if you think the only people who watch this new stuff are fans from back in the day. For every dateless basement dwelling 30year old who has had his childhood raped by GL there is another 10 year old kid out there enjoying the new stuff. Mores the power for it because they are the people that the movies are primarily for.

That's the thing, I think i'm probably too old. When I saw original Star Ward/Indy's I was under-12. I'm sure today's 10-year old likes the new ones, but then I don't see as many lightsaber battles going on as back in the day so maybe not?!

But to get back on topic, Lucas over-doing of CGI ruined the new films for me. The scene in Crystal Skull of the car-chase threw the jungle was cartoonish. Less CGI and more story is what is required to make these films appeal across the spectrum...

Kashkai

Can't understand why anyone liked this film. I'm a big fan of Indy films and I'm old enough to have gone to see Raiders in the flicks way back when. However, Indy 1 - 3 were better films, e.g. grittier, better and more believable action, supernatural stories, and when he got hurt, you felt it too. KOTCS is just too clean cut and imo made for a young, i.e. kiddie audience. Compare the chase scene from Raiders with KOTCS and you'll understand what I mean. Raiders chase scene where the ark was being moved by the Nazis to the airstrip was a hell of a lot more believeable as it was shot using real people on moving vehicles in the desert and not on stationary vehicles using blue screen technology.

I thought Lucas and Spielberg were taking the piss with this movie, e.g. gophers, fridge surviving a nuke blast and being thrown miles away, the monkeys, the aliens that were the focal point of the movie but you ended up knowing feck all about them as the end was so rushed.

I'm genuinely sorry I spent good money on this blu ray as it is a boring film, with a flimsy story, waaaaay too much CGI and awful acting. Ford looked bored and just wanted another payday to keep him in his retirement, Le Boeuf was ridiculous as a 'tough guy biker' - he's too much of a nerd to play that character, Blanchett's acting and accent were so over the top that they were a joke, and John Hurt's part was forgettable.

To sum up, if you've wasted 2 hours of your life watching this film, I feel your pain. If you haven't seen it, don't fecking bother.

Big Knox

Dublin_Andy wrote: »

when i went to see this back in May of this year, i was really excited and couldnt wait to see it. being a die hard of fan of the original trilogy and brought up watching them i was looking forward to some old school filmmaking, with realism,originality,excitement and grit...alas...

what i saw wasnt an indiana jones movie at all and was instantly forgettable...they said ther d be no CGI used at all... it was ladened with it and it looked crap... looked so fake...there was no excitement in it at all...ther s not a moment where we feel that the character is in peril...the action scenes where not memorable( except for the "nuke the fridge" scene) and the banther between the characters was annoying...

overall it was aimed at kids...its not as violent as the old ones...there was no believability...ther s no tension at all...it was a lazy effort with no heart put into it...

stick to the original trilogy if u kno whats good for you... they are classics that can be watched over and over again...

i guess they dont make them like they used to...

I thought it would have been obvious??

Because George Lucas as an idiot...