Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny

Dades

pixelburp wrote: »

Your first mistake is reading Medium I've only ever stuck to technical, programming articles and even then half are so dogmatic and opinionated they're often unreadble. It's long-form Twitter at this stage.

I think you're right. Some of the film stuff is worth reading. But even at this stage the design stuff I signed up for in the first place annoys me.

So much clickbait, badly researched writing and outrage over everything that doesn't conform to this morning's sensibilities.

JP Liz V1

Toby Jones has joined

artvanderlay

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

Toby Jones has joined

https://www.edinburghlive.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/harrison-ford-seen-scottish-beauty-20803559

Whatever about if this turns out okay or not, one of the complaints is about how Kathleen Kennedy is involved, granted mainly because of a certain crowd. Think this tweet is pretty relevant.

https://twitter.com/DonaldClarke63/status/1404210895241220097?s=19

pixelburp

I do wonder if those who are obsessed with Kathleen Kennedy could even name 5 other Hollywood producers (who haven't been in the news for the wrong reasons ala Weinstein); that sure is a helluva a CV but then I also wonder how many of the movies those Always Outraged have even seen. She's probably twice the SJW considering she produced The Colour Purple and Lincoln :pac:

speedboatchase

Deleted User wrote: »

Whatever about if this turns out okay or not, one of the complaints is about how Kathleen Kennedy is involved, granted mainly because of a certain crowd. Think this tweet is pretty relevant.

https://twitter.com/DonaldClarke63/status/1404210895241220097?s=19

Is it not moreso about the fact that she was the Star Wars equivalent of Kevin Feige but dropped the ball immediately?

py2006

Not really keen on the Scottish setting, hopefully its just a couple scenes.

He has to be in a jungle setting, encountering a lost tribe or something with lots of ACTUAL bugs, snakes and spider webs etc.

Theboinkmaster

Anyone see the tweets from Mangold to Kadish over his comments?

I assume Disney are tearing their hair out at Mangold, getting into a twitter feud with some small podcast owner.

Insane stuff and not a good sign of where Mangold's head is out

Tony EH

Theboinkmaster wrote: »

Anyone see the tweets from Mangold to Kadish over his comments?

I assume Disney are tearing their hair out at Mangold, getting into a twitter feud with some small podcast owner.

Insane stuff and not a good sign of where Mangold's head is out

Care to elaborate?

pixelburp

Tony EH wrote: »

Care to elaborate?

Googled and seems like Mangold got catty at the above tweet protonmike shared; TBH if I had only just started working on something and had the Great Unwashed of Twitter sledgingit left, right and centre, I'd be feeling miffed too. Mind you, Mangold should know you don't feed the trolls on the internet and only end up looking the worse for it. Especially when the knives are already out for Indy 5 before a single piece of footage is seen.

This random site I found seems to have collated the responses:

https://cosmicbook.news/indiana-jones-5-director-james-mangold-responds-backlash

MisterAnarchy

Well James Mangold has confirmed that he and the Butterworth brothers wrote an entirely new script for Indy 5 which is good to hear.

Tony EH

pixelburp wrote: »

Googled and seems like Mangold got catty at the above tweet protonmike shared; TBH if I had only just started working on something and had the Great Unwashed of Twitter sledgingit left, right and centre, I'd be feeling miffed too. Mind you, Mangold should know you don't feed the trolls on the internet and only end up looking the worse for it. Especially when the knives are already out for Indy 5 before a single piece of footage is seen.

This random site I found seems to have collated the responses:

https://cosmicbook.news/indiana-jones-5-director-james-mangold-responds-backlash

Hmmm...while I have no enthusiasm for Indy 5, whatsoever, Mangold should really have more cop on than to get into 180 character spats with gobshites on Twitter. Absolutely nothing good comes of that.

FunLover18

I think Mangold handled it pretty well. There was no need for him to engage at all but I don't think he completely embarrassed himself.

Theboinkmaster

FunLover18 wrote: »

I think Mangold handled it pretty well. There was no need for him to engage at all but I don't think he completely embarrassed himself.

I disagree I think he’s an embarrassment lowering himself to respond to trolls on Twitter and gets nasty.

Very poor judgement and I’d say Disney are fvcking fuming with him.

Doesn’t say much for his state of mind.

Theboinkmaster

Theboinkmaster wrote: »

I disagree I think he’s an embarrassment lowering himself to respond to trolls on Twitter and gets nasty.

Very poor judgement and I’d say Disney are fvcking fuming with him.

Doesn’t say much for his state of mind.

I'm sorry but that entire comment is hyperbolic nonsense and as for state of mind? Cop on with the bar stool psychoanalysis

silverharp

he messed up, the original tweets didnt tag him, he decided to inject himself into random Twitter, and there was nothing gracious about what he said, totally petulant

pixelburp

The only winner here will be that rando's podcast really; I'm sure they've seen a subscriber bump. But I sympathise with Mangold; directing a film production during CoVid isn't an easy or stress-free task ATM (see Tom Cruise going apeshít over some of his crew's mistakes). And even if nobody really wants an Indy 5, Mangold isn't out to make a Bad Movie; yet the factionalisation of the internet is such a cottage industry now, the knives were out the moment this started shooting. Talking Heads manufacturing outrage 'cos successful Hollywood producer Kathleen Kennedy is producing, or Waller-Bridge is starring. It's sad, and will only go away with people with more exposure ignore it en masse. So Mangold should have taken a breath, never responded in the first place - but I still get it.

silverharp

the best retort is a good film, and they dont mess up the way one expects Disney to do

pixelburp

silverharp wrote: »

the best retort is a good film, and they dont mess up the way one expects Disney to do

I genuinely don't think that'll be enough for these types. Indy 5 would have to be a flawless piece of cinema to get a thumbs-up ... and even then! The nature of YouTube/podcast sledging is that a single mistimed joke, or perceived slight (we both know every single line & action of Waller-Bridge will be parsed) will be dumped on. It doesn't even have to be "political" either: the "Everything Wrong With..." style is easier content than actual analysis. Suspension of Disbelief is a switch now.

Heck, going by this thread if Last Crusade was replicated in style and tone exactly in 2020+, there'll be plenty of Think Pieces attacking #5 for being too jokey, too silly. Typical Disney, using the Marvel formula! Ya know that's how the thinking would steer; anything with jokes now is "the Marvel formula". Critically, this film can't win; financially we'll see. I've said it enough that I don't want an indy 5 but I'm absolutely keeping an open, hopeful mind.

silverharp

pixelburp wrote: »

I genuinely don't think that'll be enough for these types. Indy 5 would have to be a flawless piece of cinema to get a thumbs-up ... and even then! The nature of YouTube/podcast sledging is that a single mistimed joke, or perceived slight (we both know every single line & action of Waller-Bridge will be parsed) will be dumped on. It doesn't even have to be "political" either: the "Everything Wrong With..." style is easier content than actual analysis. Suspension of Disbelief is a switch now.

Heck, going by this thread if Last Crusade was replicated in style and tone exactly in 2020+, there'll be plenty of Think Pieces attacking #5 for being too jokey, too silly. Typical Disney, using the Marvel formula! Ya know that's how the thinking would steer; anything with jokes now is "the Marvel formula". Critically, this film can't win; financially we'll see. I've said it enough that I don't want an indy 5 but I'm absolutely keeping an open, hopeful mind.

they are professional film makers, every line, nod and wink is carefully scripted so really its on them. Otherwise there will be subjective stuff down to the tone of the humor etc. or relatively objective stuff like telling a good story , good villain and one or 2 interesting side characters.
Honestly if its a decent paced mcguffin hunt with shady nazis, and great production values, im looking forward to it

py2006

I just really hope they listened to the criticisms of the last outing and avoid some of those pitfalls.

pixelburp

silverharp wrote: »

they are professional film makers, every line, nod and wink is carefully scripted so really its on them. Otherwise there will be subjective stuff down to the tone of the humor etc. or relatively objective stuff like telling a good story , good villain and one or 2 interesting side characters.
Honestly if its a decent paced mcguffin hunt with shady nazis, and great production values, im looking forward to it

"Carefully" scripted? Your presumption here about Hollywood writing is charming :pac:

Heck it's not uncommon for films to start shooting without a script - IIRC the Mission Impossible movies start with storyboards, not a finished script.

Theboinkmaster

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I'm sorry but that entire comment is hyperbolic nonsense and as for state of mind? Cop on with the bar stool psychoanalysis

I stand by what I said - what he did doesn’t exactly scream confidence in his work and faith in this project.

silverharp

pixelburp wrote: »

"Carefully" scripted? Your presumption here about Hollywood writing is charming :pac:

Heck it's not uncommon for films to start shooting without a script - IIRC the Mission Impossible movies start with storyboards, not a finished script.

now now, are you saying everyone that likes to analyse films like 2001 are just seeing random sht that isnt there? it wasnt a comment on the quality as such but I'd at least grant them that someone at some stage made conscious choices and were doing their best, whether they are right people is a different discussion.
Basically it will come down to how they treat the Indy character.

johnny_ultimate

As foolish as it is to get involved in Twitter spats in general (no matter who you are) to me Mangold's defensiveness likely comes from pride in the project and respect for his collaborators. I can only imagine how ****ty it would be if you were literally just starting production on a film you were putting everything into and you had to listen to naysaying dweebs ****ting on it all the time. Better for one’s mental health to try to filter it out granted, but being proud of one’s work is a very human response.

Healthy, reasonable scepticism about the project is natural given the track record of bleated 'franchise' sequels. But self-entitled nerd rage is not healthy and reasonable.

Two things can be through simultaneously: don't get involved in petty twitter spats; and don't go on the internet having a hissy fit about a film you know nothing about that's a week into production. Although frankly don't have hissy fits in general - life's too short and film as a medium is too rich to spend years obsessing over franchise films, like many of these internet angry men are.

Tony EH

silverharp wrote: »

they are professional film makers, every line, nod and wink is carefully scripted so really its on them.

That's absolutely not how movies are made these days.

Studios have a much bigger influence on the film makers than people think and they demand their quotas of certain things to be put into "their" movie. That's partly why there's an inordinate amount of inept, unfunny, "comedy" in practically everything made now. Studio mandated laughs that wreck a movie's tone. Ridiculous action scenes where characters don't give a shit about their own existence.

There are other studio mandated changes that are thrust upon film makers too, in respect to character, narrative and pacing that can often reduce the original script(s) to ashes.

And because they hold the purse strings, they will get their way too. On these big tent pole movies it's even worse. Producers are king. The director is just there to film the thing.

If I'm honest, I'm giving the benefit of the doubt to the project because Mangold has actually dealt with aging heroes pretty amazingly in the past. I'd love if he could inject that sort of brilliance into this. My concern on the other hand is he might be given limited creative freedom.

silverharp

Tony EH wrote: »

That's absolutely not how movies are made these days.

Studios have a much bigger influence on the film makers than people think and they demand their quotas of certain things to be put into "their" movie. That's partly why there's an inordinate amount of inept, unfunny, "comedy" in practically everything made now. Studio mandated laughs that wreck a movie's tone. Ridiculous action scenes where characters don't give a shit about their own existence.

There are other studio mandated changes that are thrust upon film makers too, in respect to character, narrative and pacing that can often reduce the original script(s) to ashes.

And because they hold the purse strings, they will get their way too. On these big tent pole movies it's even worse. Producers are king. The director is just there to film the thing.

then you can push the criticism up the chain to the likes of KK , I dont mind so much if a film is just not good because it looks like the product of a committee, Army of the Dead for example, which had the feel of throwing a bunch of cliche elements into a blender to see what comes out.

pixelburp

Hollywood cinema was never, ever NOT driven by the executive level; ultimately these things are made for making money after all. But equally you can't say with certainty how each and every production was treated by its producer tier either. Some are hands on, some are hands off; there's definitely interjections now when it comes to global markets for instance; while some were famously well known such as Weinstein who thought nothing of editing films behind directors' backs (famously coming to blows with Parasite director, Bong Joon-ho. Others might want X, Y and Z, and don't care how the production gets there. It depends.

But the only reason you'd peg blame on a producer like Kathleen Kennedy is purely because of a personal axe to grind 'cos she diddled with the toys of Star Wars. If there's any history with her tinkering on (say) the Spielberg films she oversaw, I'm not aware of it - and I find it hard to believe Spielberg would put up with it either. But then Kennedy is now the big bogeywoman, an otherwise stellar career upended for having the gal to mess with the Sacred Text of Star Wars.

BorneTobyWilde

Indiana Jones needed the darker type version of the series, the same they done with films like Superman, or Batman, or Rocky, Joker .
Trying to copy the Jones movies of the 80's won't work