Dr.Jonesy
Well-known member
Indy's brother said:That's a great find, Cap'n! Got a link for that?
I got it;
http://www.netflix.com/Top100
Indy's brother said:That's a great find, Cap'n! Got a link for that?
Captain Craig said:I wish those quotes from Karen included a phrase such as "things are near completion".
I soo want an Indy 5!!!
No matter the bashing that genre film snobs hurl upon KOTCS it's obviously liked by the mainstream. It's been in the Netflix 100 since it's release on DVD over a year ago. Currently at #53
Mickiana said:3 years - consider that still early.
Captain Craig said:I wish those quotes from Karen included a phrase such as "things are near completion".
DaveTheHutt said:So Spielberg's a bad action director now? Come on!
At least with Spielberg's work you can work out what the hell's going on - most modern directors rely on digital editing tricks to make the action so staccato and close-cut you can't follow the geography or flow of the sequence.
Sorry, but Indy with the likes of Micheal Bay at the helm would NOT be Indy!
Darth Vile said:I don't think it's a question of Spielberg being a bad action director, rather that his style has become dated.
Mungi said:Who cares? His action scenes in "War of the Worlds" for example are some of the best I've ever seen.
Darth Vile said:You are on an Indiana Jones discussion board... we care. That's what these boards are all about i.e. discussion. Perhaps we should preface every single topic with 'Who Cares?'...
punisher5150 said:One thing SS was good at was building tension as the action scene progressed. For Indy 4, I just never felt any tension at all. The jungle chase had too many comedic elements intertwined to let any real tension build. He had a little comedy dispersed in the action scenes of ToD (esp the mine car chase) but that scene was fairly long and the comedy release was followed by more tension building. I remember literally being on the "edge of my seat" from the time Indy fought on the rock crusher until the end of the rope bridge in the theaters. I don't think he's lost that ability. I think he was just being lazy on Indy 4.
I'd agree. At worst, Spielberg's action scenes are imaginative and well thought out. I also like the action in KOTCS (although I recognise that some scenes work better than others). I was simply highlighting the notion that the way action is directed/edited has changed... and that Spielberg's direction in KOTCS is closer to the originals than it is to say Iron Man, Casino Royale, Inception, The Dark Night etc. etc. Wether one is better than the other is largely subjective... however, there is some justification in stating that Spielberg's direction of action is no longer progressive (as it was in the 1980's).Mungi said:What I wanted to say is that the action in his newer films is still great, in my opinion. It might be different, but I still have my fun watching the jungle chase or the warehouse chase in Indy 4 for example.
Darth Vile said:I'd agree. At worst, Spielberg's action scenes are imaginative and well thought out. I also like the action in KOTCS (although I recognise that some scenes work better than others). I was simply highlighting the notion that the way action is directed/edited has changed... and that Spielberg's direction in KOTCS is closer to the originals than it is to say Iron Man, Casino Royale, Inception, The Dark Night etc. etc. Wether one is better than the other is largely subjective... however, there is some justification in stating that Spielberg's direction of action is no longer progressive (as it was in the 1980's).
Mungi said:http://twitter.com/benmckelvey/status/37636242694737920
Karen Allen, the star of the first and most recent Indiana Jones movies, says she will be on stage at Armageddon taking questions about the continuing adventures of the movies' namesake as well as her turns in Animal House and Starman. [...] As for the fifth Indiana Jones film … ''There is a script being worked on and there seems to be agreement on the core of the story. From what I hear, Harrison [Ford] and George [Lucas] and Steven [Spielberg] like the core of the story.'' Allen, seen here in the first of the series in 1981, admits that her acting career doesn't compare to that of Indiana Jonesco-star Ford, but questions whether he has been more ''successful'' than her. ''In my 20s acting was all that I was about, but when I had my son I kind of realised that there's more to life. How many blockbuster movies do you have to be in?''
http://www.smh.com.au/national/the-diary/a-big-day-for-nudity-20110217-1ayas.html?skin=text-only
She'll be there on March 5th: http://www.armageddonexpo.com/au/special-events/ade
Montana Smith said:I don't think there's anything wrong with Spielberg's directing style. Just that with KOTCS it was the material he and his fellow creators gave themselves to work with. It was the material that stifled the actors, and made their performances under-par.
There are a couple of important points to further.Montana Smith said:I don't think there's anything wrong with Spielberg's directing style. Just that with KOTCS it was the material he and his fellow creators gave themselves to work with. It was the material that stifled the actors, and made their performances under-par. While they all talked the buddy talk in interviews, I was never convinced that the likes of Hurt or Winstone were really into this.
KOTCS was out of touch, it wasn't as bonded as ROTLA or TLC. The long years since the latter drove a wedge into the series. It doesn't bode well for an Indy V, so I'd rather they didn't even try.
A point well made...Rocket Surgeon said:They probably approached the work, (the chase) in a similar way though Raiders was a second unit shoot and not helmed by Speilberg.
This makes a difference along with the sensibilites of the cast and crew.
I've not seen anything to suggest that John Hurt was expecting anything more than what he got. I'm assuming he was doing it for the financials, CV or opportunity to work with Spielberg, as I seem to remember him saying on a BBC interview that he wasn't even familiar with the other Indy movies (apart from Raiders - and I'm not even sure he'd watched that all the way through). I agree that the particular characters you mention won't be the highlights of those actors careers... as you state, that's what happens when you employ well known, established actors who already have a wealth of great work to their names.Rocket Surgeon said:A big problem in my estimation is the casting of actors with established careers. John Hurt points out in interviews that he was disappointed with his role. The material suffers because the cast isn't as invested in the project, (as last night's oscars show:if it's not on the page...), John Hurt, Cate Blanchet, Ray Winstone, will be remembered for their roles in other films and not their characters in Crystal Skull.
Belloq, Dietrich, Toht. The characters were memorable for their economy of speech, for their performances, and for the writing...in one case the actor improvised a scene.
Darth Vile said:Can't agree with the first part of your post Montana i.e. the material weakening the quality of action (if that's what you are saying). The action in Indy movies is not really dialogue driven. Also, the action scenes follow a very similar pattern/premise in all the movies e.g. vehicular chase, escape from something that's collapsing, being trapped in an impossible situation etc. etc. If you look at it on the page (sans monkeys/vines), there is no reason why the jungle chase should be any inferior to the tank chase from TLC... similar objective, similar standard of dialogue. Sure, the dénouement of the tank chase has it heading towards a ravine (which ups the anti somewhat in the last couple of mins), but even prior to that the action appears more snappy (there is also the standout stunt of a leap from galloping horse to tank). If we, for the sake of argument, agree that the tank chase works better; then for me it must be either because we're just a bit bored with the formula (seen it all before) or that something didn't click either with direction on set or in the editing room.
I think it's a fine line, and when we talk about something not working as well as it should, it's usually by small degrees things fall short. However, if an action scene doesn't work, or is bland, logic dictates that it shouldn't be the material as action is pretty much self contained and visual. The trench run in Star Wars ANH would still be a great action scene even if you'd not seen the previous 1.5 hrs of the movie. Same goes for the dénouement of Jaws or the truck chase in Raiders or the train station shoot out in The Untouchables. Good action/set pieces will get you emotionally involved without the need for complex plotting or dialogue... that's the art of direction/editing/musical scoring.
indy4242 said:Indy does nothing but drive.
Welcome back, everyone...for another edition of "The General Movie Critique Show"! Starring your HOST...Mister Darth Vile!Darth Vile said:I think it's a fine line, and when we talk about something not working as well as it should, it's usually by small degrees things fall short. However, if an action scene doesn't work, or is bland, logic dictates that it shouldn't be the material as action is pretty much self contained and visual. The trench run in Star Wars ANH would still be a great action scene even if you'd not seen the previous 1.5 hrs of the movie. Same goes for the dénouement of Jaws or the truck chase in Raiders or the train station shoot out in The Untouchables. Good action/set pieces will get you emotionally involved without the need for complex plotting or dialogue... that's the art of direction/editing/musical scoring.