Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny

MfMan

A more unlikely couple than Indy and Fleabag it would be hard to imagine. Last Crusade To The Temple Of The Crystal Tampon anyone?

FunLover18

MfMan wrote: »

A more unlikely couple than Indy and Fleabag it would be hard to imagine. Last Crusade To The Temple Of The Crystal Tampon anyone?

Because Indy has never worked with a woman before?

FunLover18

FunLover18 wrote: »

Because Indy has never worked with a woman before?

He specifically mentioned Fleabag not PWB

brevity

Agent Coulson wrote: »

The torch should have been passed to Kyle Chandler 20 years ago.

I said this years ago:

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=87892498&postcount=3

py2006

Nobody but Ford can play Indy.

FunLover18

[Deleted User] wrote: »

He specifically mentioned Fleabag not PWB

I wasn't really sure what point they were trying to make with the tampon joke though.

johnny_ultimate

FunLover18 wrote: »

I wasn't really sure what point they were trying to make with the tampon joke though.

I fail to see either a point or a joke in said post.

JP Liz V1

Mads Mikkelsen joins

pixelburp

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

Mads Mikkelsen joins

That'd be him playing the bad guy then. or an ally who betrays our heroes, to the suprise of no one.

pixelburp

pixelburp wrote: »

That'd be him playing the bad guy then. or an ally who betrays our heroes, to the suprise of no one.

I'm hoping Madds being in it results in a Mikkelsen blessing. With the exception of that Polar film, his 2 films a year tend to be good to great. So yes, attaching meaning to nothing.

Agent Coulson

So Crystal Skull was set in 1957 and it was released 13 years ago.

Are we now looking at Indy 5 being set in 1969/70.

pixelburp

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I'm hoping Madds being in it results in a Mikkelsen blessing. With the exception of that Polar film, his 2 films a year tend to be good to great. So yes, attaching meaning to nothing.

I dunno, Chaos Walking seems to attracted a lot of negative feedback so his hit rate ain't without some stinkers. Hard to know what to make of the cast; all the right choices in the world mean nothing of the script is garbage. And considering the rewrites Crystal Skull went through before it became the theatrical version, I'd hold no belief it won't be the same again.

pixelburp

pixelburp wrote: »

I dunno, Chaos Walking seems to attracted a lot of negative feedback so his hit rate ain't without some stinkers. Hard to know what to make of the cast; all the right choices in the world mean nothing of the script is garbage. And considering the rewrites Crystal Skull went through before it became the theatrical version, I'd hold no belief it won't be the same again.

Damn, my theory fails. I can't recommend Riders of Justice enough though!

Mr Crispy

Thomas Kretschmann has been added to the cast. Assuming this will be set in the 60s, are he and Mads playing former Nazis perhaps?

MisterAnarchy

Some good commentary by the Critical Drinker

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJrLxO8CGRg

MisterAnarchy

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

Some good commentary by the Critical Drinker

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJrLxO8CGRg

This is just another randomer ranting about "wokeness". Like there's legit criticisms of the decision to make yet another film. But this lot who go on elaborate rants about Star Wars and Indiana Jones because they're upset about diversity etc are just incredibly cringe.

FunLover18

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

Some good commentary by the Critical Drinker

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJrLxO8CGRg

Well, he's criticical, I'll give him that.

johnny_ultimate

Dismissing Fleabag as 'woke feminist nonsense' is such hilarious ignorance. Genuinely baffled that anyone could watch a show with characters as complex and morally messy as that and come away with that conclusion.

For many of these angry YouTube men feminism / wokeness seems to be 'there's a woman in it'. Such a miserable, joyless way to consume media.

pixelburp

Whether or not one agrees with the agenda being tabled, only the YouTube generation would peddle so much overwrought hot air for a movie that basically doesn't exist yet. And I hate video dumps on this site; at least add your own thoughts or preface. Defeats the point of discussion to just drop a video from an already divisive "content" maker

silverharp

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

For many of these angry YouTube men feminism / wokeness seems to be 'there's a woman in it'. Such a miserable, joyless way to consume media.

thats a strawman or strawwoman , its more that it becomes a combination of a marysue and all the opponents (male) are nerfed/fools so that said marysue can breeze through the film. you have never noticed that pattern?

pixelburp

silverharp wrote: »

thats a strawman or strawwoman , its more that it becomes a combination of a marysue and all the opponents (male) are nerfed/fools so that said marysue can breeze through the film. you have never noticed that pattern?

Ranting about a movie that (IIRC) hasn't even started filming, let alone come out yet at all; whether the opinions are reasonable or not, it's a collosal waste of time and energies. and just comes off as ignorant and agenda driven.

johnny_ultimate

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Dismissing Fleabag as 'woke feminist nonsense' is such hilarious ignorance. Genuinely baffled that anyone could watch a show with characters as complex and morally messy as that and come away with that conclusion.

For many of these angry YouTube men feminism / wokeness seems to be 'there's a woman in it'. Such a miserable, joyless way to consume media.

You got a lot further than me. I gave up as soon as he started ranting about the decline of straight white males. It's sort of bizarre that you can almost tell what to expect based on the guy's voice.

Tony EH

It's easy clicks.

johnny_ultimate

silverharp wrote: »

thats a strawman or strawwoman , its more that it becomes a combination of a marysue and all the opponents (male) are nerfed/fools so that said marysue can breeze through the film. you have never noticed that pattern?

I'm directly referencing his tedious note that Fleabag and Killing Eve are "drenched in feminist identity politics and probably got more praise than they deserved".

If anything, both shows (at least PWB's time on KE - I think it took a dramatic downhill dive quality-wise when she departed after season one) are a definitive counterpoint to the simplistic, 'mary sue' school of writing female characters. The leads in both shows are messy, deeply flawed, sometimes straight-up reprehensible. Even the preternaturally talented one in Killing Eve is also an absolute psychopath.

pixelburp

Killing Eve's love of Villanelle is no different to what happend with Dexter; the producers doubled down on ensuring a psychotic lead was shielded from repercussions for their actions, purely cos they had become super popular. Gotta keep the show running after all, and the (female led) Miami police became increasingly stupid. Ooooh, but of course cos Villanelle is a woman, oh it must be Mary Sue, woke woke blah blah blah. And yeah, Waller Bridge left the show after season 1, so you can't blame her. Fundamentally though? Did these people even watch the show cos Eve and Villanelle were car crash human beings.

I wonder is Brie Larsen relieved the angry white nerds of YouTube have found a new bete noir to condemn and scream about?

Will be nice when there's ACTUAL FOOTAGE of the movie to talk about. James Mangold still directing yeah? He's arguably one of the best middle tier directors out there TBH. Ford v Ferrari was surprisingly solid. Logan a stone cold classic

silverharp

pixelburp wrote: »

Ranting about a movie that (IIRC) hasn't even started filming, let alone come out yet at all; whether the opinions are reasonable or not, it's a collosal waste of time and energies. and just comes off as ignorant and agenda driven.

there is a certain amusement seeing a train wreck before it happens, its kinda like are you smarter than a Hollywood bean counter. If all these films cleaned a billion I'd say ok they have a formula and it works, but in reality a lot of these films do underperform so it appears at any rate that professional film makers are prepared to leave free money on the table so again amusing to watch

pixelburp

pixelburp wrote: »

Killing Eve's love of Villanelle is no different to what happend with Dexter; the producers doubled down on ensuring a psychotic lead was shielded from repercussions for their actions, purely cos they had become super popular. Gotta keep the show running after all, and the (female led) Miami police became increasingly stupid. Ooooh, but of course cos Villanelle is a woman, oh it must be Mary Sue, woke woke blah blah blah. And yeah, Waller Bridge left the show after season 1, so you can't blame her. Fundamentally though? Did these people even watch the show cos Eve and Villanelle were car crash human beings.

I wonder is Brie Larsen relieved the angry white nerds of YouTube have found a new bete noir to condemn and scream about?

Will be nice when there's ACTUAL FOOTAGE of the movie to talk about. James Mangold still directing yeah? He's arguably one of the best middle tier directors out there TBH. Ford v Ferrari was surprisingly solid. Logan a stone cold classic

Yep the Mangold aspect is potentially interesting. He's dealt with an aging hero in the past so I'm happy to give him the benefit of the doubt on this one.

pixelburp

silverharp wrote: »

there is a certain amusement seeing a train wreck before it happens, its kinda like are you smarter than a Hollywood bean counter. If all these films cleaned a billion I'd say ok they have a formula and it works, but in reality a lot of these films do underperform so it appears at any rate that professional film makers are prepared to leave free money on the table so again amusing to watch

Isthar was a train wreck; as were Heavens Gate, or 2015s Fantastic 4 reboot. Your powers of prescience though are incredible though, I'd hope you put those skills to lotto based use This is ranting over the costarring of an English actor inexplicably hated by some on the internet cos she's "woke" for writing ... *checks notes* complex, (incredibly) flawed female characters with narrative agency. Oh right. What a bitch.

I'll make my own predictions: this film, if it gets made.. will be fine. Nobody WANTS an Indy 5 in the first place and at least being helmed by a solid pro like James Mangold gives it a better chance than many it'll be B grade entertainment at best.

But wittering on about a single actor poisoning the well because she's going to (supposedly) costar in a film already past its sell by date? These YouTube guys need better hobbies TBH

Tony EH

While that YouTube guy's reasons for shitting on Indy 5 are foolish to say the least. There's no possible way that I can see it being "fine" myself. It's almost destined to be poor.

Indiana Jones died a long time ago.

pixelburp

Tony EH wrote: »

While that YouTube guy's reasons for shitting on Indy 5 are foolish to say the least. There's no possible way that I can see it being "fine" myself. It's almost destined to be poor.

Indiana Jones died a long time ago.

This is best case like. And based on my faith that James Mangold has solid form elevating pedestrian material with almost tradesman like dependability. Ford v Ferrari was a very trope laden script, elevated by good performances and Mangolds steady direction..

If this was given to some subpar director for hire, I'd have immediately written off this films chances from the start. Mangolds CV has given me enough pause to at least show the film a chance.