| Author |
 Topic  |
|
GHcool 
"Forever a curious character."
|
 Posted - 06/05/2008 : 06:37:12
|
| I just came back from seeing it with friends. I kept thinking to myself, "Its got to get better than this! Soon its gonna be better!" And then the monkey scene came and I wrung my hands of it. |
 |
|
|
Wheelz 
"FWFR%u2019ing like it%u2019s 1999"
|
Posted - 06/26/2008 : 13:34:30
|
I think it's pointless to argue about realism and plausibility in a film such as this. Let's face it, there wasn't a whole lot that was plausible in any of the 4 Indy movies. Aliens are not inherently less believable than a thousand-year-old knight guarding the Holy Grail, or a box of sand that melts people's faces off. The magic of movies is that a great film can make you believe.
In Crystal Skull, there were enough elements -- from the undeniably plexiglass titular prop to the extensive and obtrusive use of green-screen -- that removed me from the movie and made it impossible to believe what I was seeing, much as I wanted to.
But for me, the biggest thing this film lacks is the breakneck out-of-the-frying-pan-into-the-fire pace of the first three. In those, you barely had a chance to absorb what you had just seen when, BANG, we're on to the next action sequence. At the end you were left catching your breath and marveling at what a great time you just had, and thus you didn't bother going back to pick apart the details.
This one, though, is so plodding and leaves so much room for introspection that one can't help but continuously question its very premise throughout.
There were indeed plenty of problems with this movie, but I would have been more apt to forgive them if I'd just had a better time watching. |
|
|
|
benj clews
"...."
|
Posted - 06/26/2008 : 18:51:28
|
I agree about not questioning the realism and plausibility in the Indiana Jones films... to an extent. In the previous three, the only thing questionable was the MacGuffin: the Arc of the Covenant, powerful holy stones, the Holy Grail. I think the important thing, though, was that everything else was grounded in reality, making it that much easier to forget about the unfeasibility of the central idea.
Had the fourth film had vaguely believable action sequences, I have no doubt I would have gone along with it as I have the original three. But surviving a fall from hundreds of feet inside a fridge, driving a truck off a cliff into a tree, at least 2 pensioners surviving dropping over three huge waterfalls in a truck (miraculously staying upright and with everyone inside the first two times), swinging merrily through jungle vines like the character had done it all his life... all of it was just too stupidly unrealistic.
I'll admit, even now I do wonder if you really could parachute out of a plane in a dingy, but you know what? At least I do wonder about it. None of the above scenes made me want to do anything but yell "Oh... f*ck off!" at the screen. I don't even think it was the green screen that ruined it for me- it was just, aside from a couple of fist fights, none of that gritty somehow-he'll-make-it Indiana Jonesy-ness was there.
|
|
|
|
silly
"That rabbit's DYNAMITE."
|
Posted - 06/26/2008 : 21:12:29
|
quote:
Originally posted by benj clews
...but you know what? At least I do wonder about it. None of the above scenes made me want to do anything but yell "Oh... f*ck off!" at the screen.
I find that happening to me a lot in the latest Superhero movies that are video games placed on screen.
Indy IV was basically treated like a superhero movie, he just didn't wear a cape.
|
|
|
|
randall 
"I like to watch."
|
Posted - 06/28/2008 : 23:57:14
|
My instant take? George and Steven are a generation older than the guys who made the original trilogy. [That would be George and Steven.] But these days, they're not as comfortable with CGI as directors [and I assure you the first three were co-directed], even though ILM has blazed many passages. The technology has overcome them as surely as it did Bill Gates.
Indy was all about passing on the thrill of 40s serials to a new generation. INDY 4 is about passing on INDY 1,2 and 3 -- and the experiment fails. GWL was on much firmer ground when he tried to tie Young Indy into actual history, and that's where the future lies. |
|
|
|
Cheese_Ed 
"The Provolone Ranger"
|
Posted - 10/19/2008 : 14:56:37
|
Finally caught it on DVD last night.
1 out of 10
        
Failed on every level for me. Can't think of one thing I admired.
If you get it on disc, you've got to watch the making of featurette and see how long you take Spielberg/Lucas/Ford trying to convince us (or themselves) they've made a good Indy movie here. I took it for about 10 minutes. |
|
|
|
Beanmimo
"August review site"
|
Posted - 10/28/2008 : 10:10:04
|
I saw the ad for Indy iv it while waiting to watch Irom Man (again).
I turned to a friend who hasn't seen it and told her that the only way she might be able to enjoy it was by treating it as a normal run of the mill action movie and not part of the Indiana Jones series.
That's my final word.
|
|
|
|
Airbolt
"teil mann, teil maschine"
|
Posted - 11/27/2008 : 00:16:06
|
Finally caught it on DVD. Tired looking Indiana Jones fights commies while audience fights ennui. Enough has been said about the CGI - it was incredibly fake in places tho.Not a fitting end to the series.
Oh well, they might have Wall e in tomorrow! |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Indiana Jones IV (Spoilers)
