kongisking
Active member
Montana Smith said:
I could kiss you, Smiffy, you're so correct!
I didn't mean that the way it sounded...
Is Spielberg too old for Indy?
- Thread starter Raiders90
- Start date
I could kiss you, Smiffy, you're so correct!
I didn't mean that the way it sounded...
Darth Vile
New member
Montana Smith said:
Not my cup of tea really. I really like all the the set up stuff prior to Skull Island, but once on the island and Kong is introduced, I find it all quite tedious. Ironically, many of the criticisms levelled at the Indy sequels (more recently KOTCS), I think are more appropriate for King Kong e.g. too many characters, lack of character development, not enough peril, too much CGI etc. etc. Oh well.
Stoo
Well-known member
The phrase, "flip-flop like a fish", is not rancor. It's merely a similie used as a mild euphemism. Sorry if it rubs you the wrong way. Speaking of "limp wristed", "contrary" & "dull", you may think you've been consistent but that's not the case (and there's no point giving a detailed review because the examples are many).Darth Vile said:
Did I ever say to what degree his style has changed? No...but it has, indeed, changed especially in terms of filming action sequences. You said that Spielberg HASN'T changed in regards to making "action movies", even though "Saving Private Ryan" set a new standard. Semantics-Schemantics.Darth Vile said:
Your opinion entirely. Personally, the cracking glass scene in "Jurassic Park II" was a veritable nail-biter. For me, it's the best scene in the film and Spielberg didn't need dinosaurs to make it happen. In "War of the Worlds", the action scene in the street at the beginning was the first time...in a lo-o-o-ng time, that I actually felt frightened in a cinema.Darth Vile said:
Back in '89, the tank chase in "Crusade" was fun to watch but it never had me at the edge of my seat save for one, brief part which was resolved with an incongruous & ridiculous cop-out (in true serial fashion). Compared with other Spielberg action, the tank chase in "Crusade" doesn't stand out as his best (in my opinion).Sorry, Vile, but my knickers aren't in a twist since I agree that many of his films are a bit sappy and have never stated otherwise. I'm pointing out that the word, "always", is an absolute so your statement, "Spielberg has always been overly sentimental and saccharin sweet with his movies... so no change there", is false. Along with, "Duel", where is the sugar sweet & forced sentimentality in "Raiders" (or even "Jurassic Park II")?Darth Vile said:There are such things as exceptions right? Just because I/others may criticize Spielberg for being over sentimental in his movies, there is no reason for you to get your knickers in a twist about it. I still like Spielberg movies.
Not sure what you are stating. Of course one should stand behind ones convictions.
C'mon, Vile - Even you should be able to understand that solely adressing a brief quip (written in fine print & parentheses) while avoiding the larger issue is a limp-wristed tactic of deflection. You've completely ignored the real meat of my question. Sure, I can understand what you're getting at re: other 1989 blockbuster films, but your response still doesn't provide any reason for why Indy films CAN'T be compared to "Saving Private Ryan" but it's O.K. (in your book) to compare them to "War of the Worlds", "Minority Report" and "AI".Darth Vile said:
Please, try to stay on track. No one said it was you who first cited "Saving Private Ryan" in this conversation. It was myself who brought up, "Ryan", and with very good reason. If there is any action in "Schindler's List" then, yes, that is also fair game (been a long time since I've seen it. Is there any action in there?). Action is action. Should comparisons between Indy and other Spielberg-directed-action be strictly limited to his 'action/adventure' films, then all one really has are his 2 "Jurassic Park" movies.Darth Vile said:
Of course you weren't aware because of a myopic vision. You write, "I thought most of us" and seem to be confusing your personal desire as the general wish. As I said previously, bringing Indy up to speed with contemporary movie-making is not the same thing as breaking new ground/raising the bar.Darth Vile said:
Then stand corrected. You want a new Indy movie that hasn't aped what's gone before but "Crusade" aped "Raiders"! More of same with dad thrown in, yet you (and countless others) REVERE the re-tread. Flip-flop...Darth Vile said:
Oh, but your position does keep changing and I'm not alone in recognizing it. Your position fluctuates according to your ever-changing stance and this discussion is a great example. There's no fooling anyone...Thanks for writing things in crayon but it would've been better if you typed all in upper case because my unfrozen-caveman brain has its limits.Darth Vile said:
1) I agree with you, somewhat, but not entirely.Darth Vile said:
2) Flip-Flop. You've made your belief clear that the action in "Crusade" wasn't 'trail-blazing' and was outdated for its time yet it contains one of your most favourite action sequences in filmdom.
3) You're imagining things, Vile. I don't expect to ever see a possible Indy 5 done in a modern style but what I'm saying is that Spielberg *IS* CAPABLE of doing so. Remember, you said he has LOST THE ABILILTY when he hasn't. Get with the program. I would prefer an "old school" style. It is YOU who feels that it's a bad idea.
#2 & 3 is where your position falls to the ground...If Spielberg made "Skull" as an homage to/imitating his own, OLD style of directing action then your argument about him LOSING the ability to make action films is silly. An homage is a CONCIOUS EFFORT to pay tribute to the past. Yet you use "Skull" as an example of this supposed inability simply because it's his latest. This is not logical nor does it make any sense. BIG Flip-flop!
An additional #4
4) You forgot to clarify whether Indy films are 'action' films or 'action/adventure' films. The distinction is quite important because you switch between the two genres whenever it suits your cause.
Last edited:
Spielberg is not too old for Indy or any movie making. There has been/are capable older directors out there making good pics. Spielberg was over Indiana Jones after the third. He had to be convinced to do a fourth and he was reluctant about the story. But the fourth was generally liked by the public and made lots of money. He is entirely capable of making a good fifth one, but what is the script like that he's given to shoot? The originality of Raiders and the energy they put into it will be difficult to duplicate. Maybe it's not necessary now? Raiders sounded like a trial and a half to make. I wonder if that difficulty brings out a better film? Amongst some of us fans, it was felt there was a "laziness" behind the making of CS. I think the thread question should have been, "Is Spielberg still enthusiastic about Indiana Jones?"
Darth Vile
New member
Stoo said:
Lol - At last something we can all agree on. Nice to see that even your hubris has its limits. You may not be the brightest crayon in the pack Stoo, but you have your occasional moments of colour.
punisher5150
Member
SS and laziness
Laziness was the exact impression I got with SS and Indy IV. Going through the motions.
Mickiana said:
Laziness was the exact impression I got with SS and Indy IV. Going through the motions.
Montana Smith
Active member
punisher5150 said:
I'm not sure it showed laziness, but rather that they were going through different motions: that is, a different direction, away from where I wanted Indy to be. They followed this route, and it's that which made KOTCS look negligent. The creative team, in my opinion, gave the movie the wrong treatment. Instead of a shot of adrenaline, for the most part they injected it with some mellowing influence! Beneath the bluster there is an innate blandness folling Doom Town.
That's more correct, Montana. The feeling of laziness I think derives from there not being enough suspense. It was supposed to be a cliff hanger type movie and there were people hanging off cliffs and going over cliffs and over waterfalls and racing each other but they didn't quite create the suspense that I was looking for.
jbonvillain
Guest
justin
i am in colour i am the old indana jones seen a message to me i will wating four youDarth Vile said:Lol - At last something we can all agree on. Nice to see that even your hubris has its limits. You may not be the brightest crayon in the pack Stoo, but you have your occasional moments of colour.
