Why are people so hard on Indy IV?

Finn

Moderator
Staff member
Almost regret banning Sankara's latest reincarnation now. This could have proven an epic tug-of-war.
 

Montana Smith

Active member
Face_Palm said:
The film could reflect a science fiction 1950s B-movie

It's unmistakable that it does, with elements such as giant ants, aliens, a flying saucer, or the atomic bomb.

Yet there are elements from later periods, such as the aliens being of the von Däniken variety (1969-); and the fridge being an unused element from the first draft screenplay for Back to the Future.
 

Stoo

Well-known member
kongisking said:
You're really confusing me, feller. Aren't you one of the premiere haters of the movie on here? Ahem:

[A quote from Raiders112390]

So...pick a side, and quit being a Mac!
Raiders112390 was being sarcastic with that remark. A 'premiere hater' he is most certainly NOT.
Face_Palm said:
Also screw the haters, they are in a very small minority, Indy 4 was very well received. Don't believe me?

RottenTomatoes Score; 78%/User Score of 3.5.
-Empire Magazine's Top 500 Films of All Time voted by readers/website users
-Cannes Film Festival = Standing Ovation
-MovieWeb Fan/Critic Accumulated score; 82% and a 3.8 "Great" score.
-CinemaScore= B+ average
-MetaCritic Score - 65 (4 Pts less than acclaimed Avengers) 7.1 User
-MovieFone 3.5 Stars Audience/4.0 Stars Critics
-Yahoo! Movies User Score - 4/5 Stars/B
-BoxOfficeMojo Surveys; 41% gave it an A, 37%; B. Compared to Temple of Doom's
37% A ratings, with each film; having the same number of votes, relatively.
-Fandango Critic/Fan Accumulated Scores of Hundreds of Votes/Reviews = Go!
-AICN - Two 'A' reviews. "Indiana Jones 4 is our childhood captured in perfection."
-Fandango Users/Critics Rated it 'Go Now!
-Nominated Best Action Movie at the 2009 Critics' Choice Awards.
-The Visual Effects Society nominated it for Best Single Visual Effect of the Year, Best Outstanding Matte Paintings, Best Models and Miniatures, and Best Created Environment in a Feature Motion Picture.
-Nominated by Saturn Awards for Best Science Fiction Film, Best Director, Best Actor, Best Supporting Actor, Best Costumes and Best Special Effects.
-Entertainment Weekly Review A-
-NY Times Review- A
-Coming Soon reviews = 8/10 and 7/10
-Billboard Review- B
-Saturday; Evening Post; - A
-Roger Ebert - 3/4 Stars
-Most Watched Film on TV - 2009/2010
-Top 3 DVD sales - 2008/09
-78% Voted Good to Excellent/Perfect at The Raven Net forums - 260+Voters.
-ComCast Cable Score - 3 out of 4 Stars
-SlashFilmSurvey; 24,356 votes, 83% voted 'loved it'.
-TheRaven - 78% out of 210 voters scored it a 7 and above out of 10. 8-9 were the most common answers.
-IndyCast - Reviews - 86.5% Positive from Listeners
If you're going to repost what Dr.Jonesy wrote, then you might as well give him credit for it.;)

See here
Finn said:
Almost regret banning Sankara's latest reincarnation now. This could have proven an epic tug-of-war.
Hey, a decision can always be reversed! :D
 

kongisking

Active member
Stoo said:
Raiders112390 was being sarcastic with that remark. A 'premiere hater' he is most certainly NOT.

Egg officially on my face. Sorry, Raiders112390. I'm probably confusing you for another fellow... :eek:
 

Raiders90

Well-known member
Yeah, I've always been more a middle of the road, leaning supporter, of KOTCS. But I was parodying the vitriolic hate for the film (some people do act like it's the worst film ever made) in that post.
 

kongisking

Active member
Came across this. It's a heartwarming reminder that some of us do like the movie, and especially the idea of an older Indiana Jones. Not the best clip quality, but has some nice editing and a touching song choice. Beware, some major feels await:

<iframe width="640" height="480" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/tuWzTTqDHdo" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
 

Indyfan82

Member
Cool video! Thanks for posting.
And for the record, as I've probably said somewhere here before, I love ALL the Indiana Jones movies.:) :cool: :whip:
 

indytim

Member
Face_Palm said:
The people that do not enjoy the film simply do not understand both the film itself, or the entire series.

I perfectly understand the movie and its part in a franchise that celebrates the Saturday morning serials of the 1930s and 1940s. But I do not enjoy it simply because the movie is not a worthy addition to the franchise due to weak storytelling. It's a patchwork of ideas from previously written scripts, clumsily threaded together.
 

Joe Brody

Well-known member
Túrin Turambar said:
Fury road was terrible, lots of mindless explosions zero plot, Tom Hardy playing A Oak Tree, go watch The Road Warrior.


Maybe in your opinion but it's a $300M+ "terrible" film. And it hasn't even opened in Japan yet where it is expected to big box office.

And according to Forbes:

t’s a critically-acclaimed outright masterpiece that offers eye-popping practical action and stunt work as well as the kind of gender parity that is all-too-rarely seen in mainstream cinema.


. . .and when talking box office, I repeat, this is an 'R' rated film that opened hard on the heels of two of the biggest action movies of all time -- and it got there (I think) without China, so very impressive.
 

Pale Horse

Moderator
Staff member
Come on Joe. Even you know you can't argue facts with Sophomoric Internet trolls.

But I do appreciate 'em.
 

mrman7

New member
All the best and worst parts of a family reunion

Indiana Jones is like your favorite bachelor uncle. :cool: He's this cool older guy who travels around and does fun stuff and every few years he pops into your life and takes you to Disneyland or a concert or the toy store or something. You grow up having great memories of all the times you had with him as a kid. Then you see him at a family reunion when you're an adult. You still love your uncle but he's older now and you realize that he's not quite so cool anymore. He's not as energetic and doesn't do as many cool things. You wonder why he hasn't settled down and gotten married or had kids or got a real job. :confused: It's good to see him and you love him but this isn't how you want to remember him, you want to remember him as the fun young dude you used to hang out with. :whip: :gun: Not the old boring version! :sleep: :(

It's great to see Indy back in action again and there's a lot of fun to be had in this film. I love the cafe scene and the ensuing motorcycle chase. It's a real chase with real stunts, like in the old flicks. It's fun and it seems actually dangerous! I enjoy hearing about Indy's war record in World War II, fleshing out what happens between LC and CS. I like the stuff with the Nasca lines and learning the history about Oreana. The scenes of Indy and Mutt walking through the town talking about Pancho Villa are fun and it's nice to hear the movies call back to the TV series. I like the dude getting pulled into the ant hole. CREEPY. The opening sequence is okay. I don't mind the refrigerator thing. It's still more believable than the power of god coming out of an ark to melt people's faces. I don't even mind the alien stuff. It makes sense in the context of the film. The original took place in the 1930s when Nazis were the pulp cinema bad guys. This takes place in the 1950s when space aliens and communists were the bad guys. It works. Mutt's fine too. That first shot of him on the motorcycle is super cool. Perfectly captures the era. Love it. His line "what're you like 80?" is hilarious. I like the contrast between 50s kid and crusty older Indy. It works. I think we had reached a LaBeouf saturation point as a culture at that point in time. I think his character will earn it's share of admirers over time. Don't even really care about Mutt swinging with the Monkeys. The Indy flicks owe a lot to Burroughs' Tarzan novels. It's a little reference. It's FINE. Don't worry about it. Calm down people. It's a movie. You're adults.

The REAL problem with Crystal Skull is the overuse of special effects. The original had great stunts. Old timey stunts. Tricks stolen from old westerns. There were a few key, strategic moments where effects were used and used well. Matte paintings fleshed out some of the environments. Model work was used to blow up tanks and planes and stuff. There was even a bit of bluescreen for some of the airplane scenes and such. But the stunts were the star. Most of the stunts here are done on bluescreen, which is especially egregious in the chase sequence through the jungle. They're trying to ape the truck chase in Raiders and the tank chase in Last Crusade. Those scenes were awesome because they took some stuntmen and vehicles out to the desert to beat the heck out of each other and jumped off horses and stuff. It's great! It felt dangerous because, like, it kindof was. That's an actual dude crawling under the moving truck with his whip. That's a real guy jumping off a real horse on a real road onto a real car. It's cool! The only time we see special effects is at the end when vehicles fly off cliffs. Raiders uses a matte, Crusade uses a little model. It looks kindof dumb but it's charming in an old-time serial way. There's ZERO danger in the chase at the end of Crystal Skull. NONE. They're all in a studio! What could possibly happen? Nothing. No tension, no drama, no interest. Doesn't work. Why? I guess they're competing with the Mummy movies or whatever. So what! Casino Royale had real fights with real guys and that was a huge hit! Fast and the Furious movies take real cars out to the desert and have people hop around. It can work for Indy too!

Other than better stunts, what would have saved this movie? Honestly? Sean friggin' Connery. Three generations of Joneses at it on one adventure. Would have been great. Can't fault the filmmakers for trying. Connery's a stubborn (and rich) dude.

Could/should this have been better? Absolutely. Is it as good as Raiders or Crusade? Ummm...NO. Is it as good as Doom? Hate to break it to you. YES. It is. Like on every measurable level, this is a WAY better movie. Am I glad this came out? Yes! If for no other reason than we finally got some more freaking Indiana Jones action figures.

So back to the family reunion. It's good to see Indy back in action. Good to see Marion too. But yeah, instead of an adventure with your cool uncle, we're now on an adventure with your parents. I guess that's lame. But you know what? I like hanging out with my parents. I even saw this movie with them. We had a fun time. It brought me back to when we all saw Last Crusade together on opening day when I was a boy. I don't look forward to getting old. But I think that when I do, I'll like this movie a lot more. It's about a guy who's probably too old to save the day but he does it anyway. I like that message.

Raiders of the Lost Ark is probably the most perfect adventure film of all time. Last Crusade, for my money, is one of the most fun and entertaining flicks ever created, flawed though it might be. Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is passable family entertainment whose main flaw is that it isn't what everyone thought it should be.
 

Stoo

Well-known member
mrman7 said:
The REAL problem with Crystal Skull is the overuse of special effects. The original had great stunts. Old timey stunts. Tricks stolen from old westerns. There were a few key, strategic moments where effects were used and used well. Matte paintings fleshed out some of the environments. Model work was used to blow up tanks and planes and stuff. There was even a bit of bluescreen for some of the airplane scenes and such. But the stunts were the star. Most of the stunts here are done on bluescreen, which is especially egregious in the chase sequence through the jungle. They're trying to ape the truck chase in Raiders and the tank chase in Last Crusade. Those scenes were awesome because they took some stuntmen and vehicles out to the desert to beat the heck out of each other and jumped off horses and stuff. It's great! It felt dangerous because, like, it kindof was. That's an actual dude crawling under the moving truck with his whip. That's a real guy jumping off a real horse on a real road onto a real car. It's cool! The only time we see special effects is at the end when vehicles fly off cliffs. Raiders uses a matte, Crusade uses a little model. It looks kindof dumb but it's charming in an old-time serial way. There's ZERO danger in the chase at the end of Crystal Skull. NONE. They're all in a studio! What could possibly happen? Nothing. No tension, no drama, no interest. Doesn't work.
Hi, Mr.Man and welcome to The Raven.:hat:

Justed wanted to point out a couple of things:

1) The standard, "old-time serial way" was to drive real cars off of real cliffs.

2) The bulk of the jungle chase wasn't done in a studio. Granted some shots were digitally enhanced with extra foliage but those are real guys jumping onto/falling off/dragging behind real jeeps in a real jungle. Spalko's fights with Mutt & Marion have some tell-tale green (not blue anymore) screen shots but they're only a small percentage of the entire thing. The overwhelming majority was filmed outdoors on real, moving vehicles.

I agree that the sequence is lame but it isn't because of the "overuse of special effects". It's the lack of focus on Indy that ruins it for me. He doesn't do much after jumping into the amphib...and I HATE that stupid line, "Hey, look out for the bla-blub-blub!", or whatever the frickin' hell Indy says when Mutt is about to get caught in the vines.

Effects in the Indy movies were a BIG draw for me in the '80s, especially "Doom" because it was so cool (at the time) to see such a high amount used for something other than spaceships flyin' around. The mine cart chase is done entirely in a studio with tonnes of effects and it doesn't lack any thrills because of that fact. "Raiders" and "Doom" both won Oscars for Visual Effects so technical wizardry was a star of the earlier movies, too.;)
mrman7 said:
I think we had reached a LaBeouf saturation point as a culture at that point in time.
Depends on which culture, though. I had never heard of Shia until the casting for "Skull" was announced.
mrman7 said:
Who dat?:confused::p:whip:
mrman7 said:
Is it as good as Doom? Hate to break it to you. YES. It is. Like on every measurable level, this is a WAY better movie.
I disagree, emphatically & categorically!:gun:
 

Duaner

New member
mrman7 said:
Is it as good as Doom? Hate to break it to you. YES. It is. Like on every measurable level, this is a WAY better movie.

I think very few would agree with you on this. Temple of Doom has so much more going for it than Crystal Skull: the whole opening sequence in Shanghai, the escape from the crashing airplane, the dinner sequence, the passageway filled with bugs, the spiked ceiling closing in on Indy and Shorty, the heart removal, the rock crusher, the thrilling mine car sequence, and last but not least the rope bridge sequence - the best scene in ALL Indiana Jones movies.

Crystal Skull just lacked anything of the sort. I liked it overall, but too many of its scenes were laughable instead of memorable.
 

Attila the Professor

Moderator
Staff member
Duaner said:
I think very few would agree with you on this. Temple of Doom has so much more going for it than Crystal Skull: the whole opening sequence in Shanghai, the escape from the crashing airplane, the dinner sequence, the passageway filled with bugs, the spiked ceiling closing in on Indy and Shorty, the heart removal, the rock crusher, the thrilling mine car sequence, and last but not least the rope bridge sequence - the best scene in ALL Indiana Jones movies.

I give you all of those save for the dinner sequence, which is half quite good (exposition delivered through tense dialogue) and half the nadir of the original 3 (shock humor with decidedly racist implications). I think only the greaser monkeys, the rubber tree, and perhaps the waterfalls come close as sequences.

Duaner said:
Crystal Skull just lacked anything of the sort. I liked it overall, but too many of its scenes were laughable instead of memorable.

And I think there are some very solid sequences in Crystal Skull. The bulk of the opening sequence, from car trunk to refrigerator, is excellent, and easily better than Last Crusade's intro.
 

Randy_Flagg

Well-known member
Attila the Professor said:
And I think there are some very solid sequences in Crystal Skull. The bulk of the opening sequence, from car trunk to refrigerator, is excellent, and easily better than Last Crusade's intro.

Even though I tend to criticize KOTCS, I have to agree that the opening act was quite fun, and I wish the rest of the film maintained that level of excitement.
My only real criticism with it is that that Doomtown scene felt tacked on simply because Lucas/Spielberg wanted it in the movie, and couldn't think how else to incorporate it. It really felt as if the opening act should have ended with Indy sneaking off into the night after getting off the rocket sled. Doomtown didn't really move the story along at all. It's kind of like if, in Raiders, after Indy gets into the biplane at the end of the opening act, the biplane crash lands on an island, and Indy has another little adventure with some natives, before returning to the university. In other words: Totally unnecessary filler.
 
Top