

There were elements of the film that were great and just as iconic as parts of the original 3 films.
I thought the opening act was brilliant, with the visit to area 51 and the bomb-test (I even liked the fridge escape, as it was very pulp-adventure).
The character surplus killed it, though, along with the ham-fisted way they delt with the death of Marcus and Jones' father and the endless nods to events in previous films.

Looked very 1950s, and as such; cool.
( ,
Wed 11 Aug 2010, 14:19,
archived)

The ants bit was okay and the vines bit was cringeworty. Everyone hates the vine swinging but amirite?
( ,
Wed 11 Aug 2010, 14:13,
archived)

the cgi spoiled the whole thing for me.
( ,
Wed 11 Aug 2010, 14:18,
archived)

Except for the massive, honking, non-Indy errors:
The fridge - Indy is human in a crazy magic-y world, not some retarded super hero who can survive being flung a mile in a metal box.
The vines - Peh
The needless CGI infestation that irritated throughout the film and horribly ruined the ending (or rather, replaced it).
Re: aliens: Seems fine to me, from an indy point of view. Badly handled, but not WRONG for the setting. Many chums disagree.
"Indy" plus points for: Motorcycle chase, Malt shop scene, the bit where he stands on the two jeeps and gets hit in the crotch by half the jungle.
So overall summary: Someone should make a fourth Indiana Jones film, this wasn't one. It just had a character that nicked the name and look.
( ,
Wed 11 Aug 2010, 15:03,
archived)
The fridge - Indy is human in a crazy magic-y world, not some retarded super hero who can survive being flung a mile in a metal box.
The vines - Peh
The needless CGI infestation that irritated throughout the film and horribly ruined the ending (or rather, replaced it).
Re: aliens: Seems fine to me, from an indy point of view. Badly handled, but not WRONG for the setting. Many chums disagree.
"Indy" plus points for: Motorcycle chase, Malt shop scene, the bit where he stands on the two jeeps and gets hit in the crotch by half the jungle.
So overall summary: Someone should make a fourth Indiana Jones film, this wasn't one. It just had a character that nicked the name and look.

he was the inspiration for the greatest impersonator of all time.
www.johnallen007.com/
( ,
Wed 11 Aug 2010, 14:16,
archived)
www.johnallen007.com/


Plus, he did Burt Reynolds and Kirk Douglas.
( ,
Wed 11 Aug 2010, 14:50,
archived)

the number in the email address on the status bar goes mental?
( ,
Wed 11 Aug 2010, 14:35,
archived)

It's an image map, an html-based way of turning custom-defined areas of an image as hyperlinks. It's going to be all the rage in 1987.
( ,
Wed 11 Aug 2010, 17:32,
archived)

Raiders and Temple had a nice sort of seriousness to them, yes there were wise cracks but it felt more like Indy was in trouble.
3 and 4 were just jokes and therefore no peril.
( ,
Wed 11 Aug 2010, 14:22,
archived)
3 and 4 were just jokes and therefore no peril.

Denholm Elliot hilariously having trouble with a horse and Indy knobbing the same woman as his dad.
er, yep.
( ,
Wed 11 Aug 2010, 14:30,
archived)
er, yep.

Crusade sucked. IMHO.
And I quite liked crystal Skull.
*ducks*
( ,
Wed 11 Aug 2010, 14:58,
archived)
And I quite liked crystal Skull.
*ducks*


It was unwatchable because of the dim blonde.
( ,
Wed 11 Aug 2010, 14:29,
archived)

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINDYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!
Fuck off you dim, director shagging, bitch!
( ,
Wed 11 Aug 2010, 14:32,
archived)
Fuck off you dim, director shagging, bitch!

As in the nod to the damsel in distress that was so typical of the serial dramas they were trying to emulate?
Count yourself lucky they didn't tie her across the mine car track.
( ,
Wed 11 Aug 2010, 15:00,
archived)
Count yourself lucky they didn't tie her across the mine car track.

She played a dumb, pampered, annoying woman.
The character is dumb, pampered and annoying. She played it perfectly. The fact that she was shagging the director doesn't alter the fact that the performance delivers exactly what the role requires.
On the other hand, if people complain they don't like the character, I will permit it, with a sage nod of approval.
( ,
Wed 11 Aug 2010, 15:05,
archived)
The character is dumb, pampered and annoying. She played it perfectly. The fact that she was shagging the director doesn't alter the fact that the performance delivers exactly what the role requires.
On the other hand, if people complain they don't like the character, I will permit it, with a sage nod of approval.

That guy just makes me retch. And him desecrating the motorcycle scene from the wild one was just wrong on a lot of levels.Cate was hot though.
( ,
Wed 11 Aug 2010, 14:27,
archived)

If only the role had been better written.
( ,
Wed 11 Aug 2010, 14:31,
archived)

this was as bad as having Ian McKellan as the polar bear warrior king in the golden compass - if any roles screams Brian Blessed, that is the one.
( ,
Wed 11 Aug 2010, 14:32,
archived)

though as an atheist flying saucers carry a whole lot more weight with me than "God came down and killed the bad Nazis"
( ,
Wed 11 Aug 2010, 14:37,
archived)

"God came down and killed EVERYONE WHO LOOKED AT HIM".
I was ok with that, it was pretty old-testament.
( ,
Wed 11 Aug 2010, 15:06,
archived)
I was ok with that, it was pretty old-testament.

but on the other, puppets are more feasable than cgi.
rule of thumb: if your fx start to look a little ropey in 20 years, this is acceptable. if they're already crap by the time the film is released, (unless you're working with no money) this is not.
( ,
Wed 11 Aug 2010, 19:12,
archived)
rule of thumb: if your fx start to look a little ropey in 20 years, this is acceptable. if they're already crap by the time the film is released, (unless you're working with no money) this is not.