Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny

Options
1…2425272930…33

Comments

  • Options
    #782
    Bobby_Bolivia
    Registered Users Posts: 272 ✭✭Bobby_Bolivia


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120643524#Comment_120643524

    Let me guess, Indy is old, useless, broken down, can't do anything right and Pheobe Waller Bridge is great at everything, full of sass, wit and puts down Indy at every single opportunity.

    Hopefully Hollywood gets the hint and Waller Bridge goes away. She ruins everything she touches. Heavily featured in the worst Star Wars movie at the box office, portraying probably the worst character in Star Wars film history in L3, who yes, was actually worse than Holdo and Jar Jar. Writing credit on a bottom 5 Bond movie. And a starring role in what's shaping up to be the worst Indiana Jones movie. She truly has the anti-midas touch.



  • Options
    #783
    MisterAnarchy
    Registered Users Posts: 14,603 ✭✭✭✭MisterAnarchy


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120644063#Comment_120644063

    Unfortunately that seems to be the case according to the BBC Review of the film.

    Like another of Ford's so-called "legacy sequels", Star Wars: The Force Awakens, this one brings back old characters (John Rhys-Davies's Sallah has a pointless cameo), introduces new ones who are strangely similar to the old characters, and has the air of a film passing the torch (or whip) to the next generation. But it does all this in an even gloomier fashion than The Force Awakens did. I'm not sure how many fans want to see Indiana Jones as a broken, helpless old man who cowers in the corner while his patronising goddaughter takes the lead, but that's what we're given, and it's as bleak as it sounds.

    https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20230519-indiana-jones-and-the-dial-of-destiny-review-gloomy-and-depressing-final-act

    Will these studios ever learn ?

    Post edited by MisterAnarchy on


  • Options
    #784
    buried
    Registered Users Posts: 9,693 ✭✭✭buried


    Bringing back old characters and plotlines just for the sake of it is nothing new. The Last Crusade started all this lame throwback $hite over 30 years ago.

    "You have disgraced yourselves again" - W. B. Yeats



  • Options
    #785
    pixelburp
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,941 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    The character is 80 years old. Leaving aside the inherent redundancy of a coda to a coda given Crystal Skull GAVE Indy and ending... but not sure how you write an action adventure where an octogenarian lead isn't playing second fiddle to someone younger, regardless of gender or whatever's presumed to have been brought to the script. You just can't make an action film with someone that old in the lead.



  • Options
    #786
    Bobby_Bolivia
    Registered Users Posts: 272 ✭✭Bobby_Bolivia


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120655237#Comment_120655237

    Top Gun Maverick proved what people want to see from these legacy sequels. They want the legacy characters treated with the utmost respect, knowing more than the rookies, schooling them even. They want them to be competent, and still as cool as they were all those years ago.

    Maybe he has lost a step but he should still be the sharpest guy in the room still have the quickest wits. He should be the one showing her the ropes. Him still having it is what people want to see, not him being a sad miserable excuse for a man who gets constantly ridiculed by some know-all, great at everything sassy amazing woman.

    Unfortunately, Kathleen Kennedy only knows one way to treat a legacy character - like a bumbling incompetent idiot, that needs to be treated with kid gloves, consistently patronised and put down routinely, by the far more superior female character. See also: Obi Wan and the child Leia, Luke and Rey.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #787
    ~Rebel~
    Registered Users Posts: 31,224 ✭✭✭✭~Rebel~


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120655527#Comment_120655527

    I haven't seen any reviews saying that this thing of Waller Bridge belittling him the whole time is actually real... that's just been something a certain type of person has been whinging endlessly about since way back when it was first mentioned she'd even be in it. Let's maybe see what sort of relationship they actually have before getting into a tizzy.

    Maverick was the ideal scenario alright, though it's a lot easier to do when it's the hyper-mobile Tom Cruise, and he gets to do cool stuff in a plane - it's not so easy with a very very old man in a more tangibly physical movie. Also an inherent part of Indy has always been that he bumbles his way into bad situations and then just about scrapes and scraps his way out of them. He's always been smart, but also impetuous and rash, a swashbuckling seat-of-his-pants guy who is not at all in control of the situation. Maybe making him a different, more calm and considered character could be nice character growth, becoming a bit more stoic like his Dad, but it's not something that's actually a part of the guy we know and love.



  • Options
    #788
    silverharp
    Registered Users Posts: 17,849 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120655527#Comment_120655527

    Imagine if Top Gun Maverick had been made by Disney 🤣

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Options
    #789
    pixelburp
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,941 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    It should be pointed out that Maverick is supposed to be in his 50s(?) during that film, as opposed to - again, to remind - the 80 year old archaeologist Indy is at this stage. Easier to have the old hand teach the young 'uns new tricks when by all accounts their body can still stand upright normally (and by recent accidents, Harrison Ford shouldn't be flying himself)

    But not even getting into the weeds of this given ... ... ya know, the movie isn't out yet and it's just another round of rumours acting as Confirmation Bias over the big bad wimmin getting in the way. Or indeed the kneejerk [Kathleen Kennedy|Phoebe Waller-Bridge] Ate My Dog segue. Just gonna wait n' see at this stage: if it's passingly entertaining and gives Indy a vaguely respectable walk into the sunset then, cool.



  • Options
    #790
    silverharp
    Registered Users Posts: 17,849 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    The movie was always going to be subpar, the previous movie ruined it by moving away from the supernatural, they could have course corrected with this one, have a movie based on the Russians finding another artifact to rival the Ark and have Indie do something to hide both again or some such. Or if you have to have nazis in it, do some Nazis on the run, Israel, artifact, the stuff writes itself.

    At this stage the it would be amazing if the leaks werent directionally correct so you have a movie going from a possible 8/10 going down to a 5/10

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Options
    #791
    B.A._Baracus
    Registered Users Posts: 11,186 ✭✭✭✭B.A._Baracus


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120633653#Comment_120633653

    Wouldn't be surprised to hear he thought it was a good script.

    Imagine being an actor and given a new script to a movie series you've done... if you look at other movies like fast and furious having 10 movies and now about saving the world and going to space, you'd be like well this sequel script can't be that bad. Maybe people will like it.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #792
    silverharp
    Registered Users Posts: 17,849 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120656947#Comment_120656947

    I doubt he did it for the cash, you maybe have 5 or 6 good years left, you dont want to be spending 2 of them schlepping around movie sets, maybe he thought it would redeem the previous movie?

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Options
    #793
    pixelburp
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,941 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    We're talking about an industry where actors, directors and creative people routinely work well into their 80s and beyond (hello Clint Eastwood): why Harrison Ford might have starred in this film nobody here has seen yet can be simply explained by a desire to keep working for working's sake. I very much doubt this will be the worst thing he ever starred in. And it's not like it's a well-covered cliché where "retirement" is hardest for those most defined by an urge to keep busy; not everyone wants to kick back and let death find them sitting down.



  • Options
    #794
    loyatemu
    Registered Users Posts: 14,831 ✭✭✭✭loyatemu


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120657152#Comment_120657152

    Probably a fair explanation, decent roles are rare enough for someone aged 80+, at least Clint can cast himself in his own movies. Apparently HF didn't really enjoy doing the Star Wars movies and only came back for The Force Awakens on condition his character was killed off. But he does enjoy doing the Indiana Jones series. I doubt the stars give much of a damn about the "legacy" aspects of these long running series.



  • Options
    #795
    MisterAnarchy
    Registered Users Posts: 14,603 ✭✭✭✭MisterAnarchy


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120656201#Comment_120656201

    Did you even read the quote I highlighted from the BBC Review of the film ?

    I'm not sure how many fans want to see Indiana Jones as a broken, helpless old man who cowers in the corner while his patronising goddaughter takes the lead, but that's what we're given, and it's as bleak as it sounds.



  • Options
    #796
    pixelburp
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,941 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120657185#Comment_120657185

    Well exactly to the last sentence: I think it's too easily forgotten that for many actors it's just a job, no matter how iconic the role might be or become. Fans and audiences can exercise way more possessiveness or fundamentalism than the actor ever does, turning into something hostile and toxic.

    That said, sometimes there'll be actors who understand the nature and fondness for a particular role: look at Leonard Nimoy as a good example there; someone who, IIRC, initially resented the type casting as Spock but then came around to it & embraced his "ambassadorial" aspect of that iconic role. Could be misremembering mind you. Patrick Stewart also shows a bit of that for a more latter-day example, being the custodian of not just one iconic role but two.



  • Options
    #797
    buried
    Registered Users Posts: 9,693 ✭✭✭buried


    Too much talk here about what the "actors" desire and want. In any real creative work of art, work that is showcased to a paying audience, the audience is a far more important aspect to the work. It is the audience who ultimately gives the work it's legacy, because it is the audience who are the ones who have paid and have enjoyed the creative work, the writing, the mythos of the stories. That's what made the Indiana Jones series work. The actors have F**k all to do with it. That's what, astonishingly IMHO Disney, have failed to comprehend. They just think you stick the same actors from the stories that worked over 40 years ago and that will do. It won't do, because if you stand over a pile of badly written muck, that's all you have, and that's all the audience will experience.

    "You have disgraced yourselves again" - W. B. Yeats



  • Options
    #798
    pixelburp
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,941 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120659378#Comment_120659378

    Well not quite: the actors sometimes define the thing the audiences love - it doesn't come out of thin air that viewers embrace an entity with as much passion as they can. Doctor Who was made with 5 quid and some bubble wrap but someone like Tom Baker or David Tenant basically defined the role as theirs, by sheer dint of performance and charisma. The actors essentially owning the role that audiences came to cherish. As said, Leonard Nimoy came to live with becoming that icon.

    And it's all well and good decrying Legacy Sequels, but equally, when a studio does try to evolve a character, you can still get wailing and backlash that Favourite Character X wasn't frozen in amber and the exact same as remembered. Like or loath it, Last Jedi tried to move Luke Skywalker's story on - and fans cried foul their hero wasn't still swinging his sword, all resulting in nostalgic junk with Episode 9.

    You say Disney but all of popular media is riven by masturbatory nostalgia at the moment, they're just the most industrialised about it through Disney+ and those live action remakes. Sure only this month we got The Flash movie with Michael Keaton playing batman again, trailers showing him spouting catchphrases from the 1989 movie cos Nostalgia Feels.



  • Options
    #799
    StevenToast
    Registered Users Posts: 3,404 ✭✭✭StevenToast


    I would actually pay not to watch this....

    Luckily, i can do that for free...

    "Don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining." - Fletcher



  • Options
    #800
    mewso
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 8,885 Mod ✭✭✭✭mewso


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120656483#Comment_120656483

    The problem here is that we can end up going in circles. For example I might defend a diverse cast in a work of fiction based in Roman times for example. I'd defend it because I don't really care as long as the writing is good and the cast perform well regardless of their ethnicity. Not to mention how much I hate the lazy use of the 'W' word instead of actual criticism with any of these things. But that also means if they decide to make an 80 year old character from a beloved franchise the action hero of the movie then I'd accept that too if the writing was good and the performances entertained. That goes for the god daughter being the hero showing the 80 year the error of his ways too based on the same evaluation. I'm not concerned with the unrealistic 80 year old action hero or the patronising god daughter hero as long as it works.



  • Options
    #801
    silverharp
    Registered Users Posts: 17,849 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120661376#Comment_120661376

    the structure of the film needs to be right though , The Last Crusade for instance , the hero was the hero , but his dad saved him at the end but both had satisfying and very touching arcs. What doesnt work is any kind of bait and switch, that cant be written well at all, or main character acting out of character to facilitate another character.

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #802
    BruteStock
    Registered Users Posts: 1,290 ✭✭✭BruteStock


    I don't need to see the film to know that Fleabag is going to be an obnoxious annoyance because that has been the trend for Disney female characters and the buck ain't going to suddenly stop now. Helena even looks like a gender swapped version of Mutt from the lousy 4th film. Remember how everybody hated him.

    Indy who was mid 40's in the 3rd film is passed down wisdom and guidance all throughout the film by his elderly father. The holy grail in this film is the journey , not the destination to find the holy relic. Relationships , self reflection , family bonding and friendships. Will any of these themes play into the new film?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jY5Paugfurs&ab_channel=TheUpcoming




  • Options
    #803
    Arne_Saknussem
    Registered Users Posts: 2,723 ✭✭✭Arne_Saknussem


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120655226#Comment_120655226


    That wasn't a throwback, it was a flashback. And there was a point to it, to introduce the Connery character and give context to the father-son dynamic.

    Comparing it to the current Lucasfilm horseshit memberberry dross would be incorrect, regardless of whether you think it slightly overdid the nod/wink whip & fedora origin schtick.

    That Hollywood took it and ran with it to the extent it's the sole reason franchises are rebooted these days can't be blamed on Speilberg thou, in the same way that you can't blame the Beatles for Phil Collins.



  • Options
    #804
    pixelburp
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,941 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120661376#Comment_120661376

    Well to that, we gotta wait and see whether the script works to that end; and by all accounts the so-far all over the map reviews suggests nothing's certain. The average settling somewhere along the sense it's all right, rather flat and irrelevant ending and far from the slight against St. Indy some might suggest. But we'll see.

    And I should point out, to extend your point about "so long as the story's good" and counter the idea I'm just completely antagonisoc against nostalgia: I'm watching Picard season 3 and as brazenly nostalgic as it is, it is also definitely doing so from the acknowledgement its characters are 40 years older and past their point of origin. The script isn't wallowing in nostalgia for its own sake (so far. I'm still watching it).



  • Options
    #805
    mewso
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 8,885 Mod ✭✭✭✭mewso


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120664147#Comment_120664147

    Funny you mention Picard. I enjoyed Season 3 but I found the nostalgia just a bit too much. It becomes a crutch to excuse some dodgy writing on too many occasions. Anyway as you say we need to wait and see with IJ5. I live in hope. I have an intense dislike for the folks who like to pile on if they sniff their hated 'W' in anything. Like I say to anyone unfortunate enough to be within earshot of me - Lord of the Rings (TV Show) was not bad because of diversity. It was bad because it was bad.



  • Options
    #806
    pixelburp
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,941 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120664318#Comment_120664318

    Well therein lies the problem: I do always, genuinely, try to approach any given film with an open mind - even stuff I suspect I'm not gonna enjoy (like the Fast Saga - all one of those movies I watched, lol). Sometimes I'm surprised I liked something, sometimes disappointed by something I think I'd have enjoyed.

    But I suspect there are those who have made their minds about this film simply because of presumed motives behind the script, or those starring and/or producing the thing. And so will fit their response to match that expectation. I hope not, but we've been on this loop before. The W-word has become overused to the point of meaningless.



  • Options
    #807
    silverharp
    Registered Users Posts: 17,849 ✭✭✭✭silverharp



    What a headline from a Fortune article

    https://finance.yahoo.com/news/force-left-lucasfilm-gone-wrong-083000919.html

    ‘The Force has left Lucasfilm’: What has gone wrong for the studio behind ‘Star Wars’ and ‘Indiana Jones’—and how Disney’s Bob Iger can salvage his $4 billion investment


    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Options
    #808
    JP Liz V1
    Registered Users Posts: 85,578 ✭✭✭✭JP Liz V1


    https://www.irishtimes.com/competitions/2023/06/07/win-a-pair-of-tickets-to-the-special-preview-screening-of-indiana-jones-and-the-dial-of-destiny-at-cineworld-dublin/

    https://forumofgames.com/




  • Options
    #809
    silverharp
    Registered Users Posts: 17,849 ✭✭✭✭silverharp



    zoinks! Disney wont be getting their money back anytime soon with those projections lol. The guy writing this though clearly was never in the same room as a basic economics book , and hilariously fails to mention inflation adjusted when making comparisons to earlier films but hey ho. Probably on the low side, more likely 100m but would still be a flop

    https://deadline.com/2023/06/indiana-jones-and-the-dial-of-destiny-box-office-projection-1235412010/#comment-3756698

    "With Dial of Destiny at a $60M 3-day, that’s easily the second-best start for the Indiana Jones franchise. In the box office era, Last Crusade opened to $29.3M 3-day ($46.9M over extended Memorial Day weekend) at 2,327 theaters. 1984’s Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom bowed to $25.3M 3-day ($42.2M extended Memorial Day weekend) at 1,687 theaters. 1981’s Raiders of the Lost Ark‘s gross trajectory harkens back to the way blockbusters were made over a year: The pic opened to $8.3M at 1,078 theaters and by January 1982 earned $179.6M with an initial cume of $212.2M, lifetime gross of $248.1M."

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Options
    #810
    alexago
    Registered Users Posts: 57 ✭✭alexago


    How many Indiana Jones films do we need? I like the first two, most of all.

    Actually, I think that the last films just spoiled all the impression of Indiana Jones.

    It would be better if something new and interesting were created instead of continuing the old story.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #811
    pixelburp
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,941 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Well, good to know Indy's method of archaeology remains intact: break everything!

    https://youtu.be/LsZb0RE-ZfE




Advertisement