I still like it!

michael

Well-known member
Rocket Surgeon said:
I personally got a BIG laugh when Dovchenko told Indy and Marion

FOR LOVE OF GOD SHUT THE HELL UP!​
Might be one of the funniest moments in all of the movies.
 

avidfilmbuff

New member
I wish to sum up exactly what I mean when I said Kingdom was a breath of fresh air. I basically feel that the summer film has gone down the drain. Back in the 1980's, summer films used to have a feeling of awe, majesty, and a feeling of light heartedness. It seems however that there hasn't been a great blockbuster film since Jurassic Park. Since the new millennium, however, summer movies have become odd.

First of all, 80% of them are now based on comic books. Now I try to open-minded when it comes to films, but I really dislike comic books, with the exception of Tintin and Uncle Scrooge. I mean, can't there be a single year without a comic book film. Every once and a while there is a good summer film like Spiderman 1 and 2, but films like these are nowhere near as good as the older summer films. But the vast majority of these films are weird and overrated. Today I have just finished watching Hellboy 2, and couldn't believe that it had a more positive response than Crystal Skull. I have seen many other summer films such as Lord of the Rings, X men, The Incredible Hulk, and many others, and they are all either odd, bland, and/or depressing. Whatever happened to summer films such as Ghostbusters, Indiana Jones,or Star Wars. In fact, even George Lucas' attempts to revive Star Wars were just as bland as the other summer films of the new millennium.

But them comes Crystal Skull, and it is everything what I feel a summer film should be. It was full of awe and majesty, it was lighthearted, and most of all, it was fun and old fashioned. But what happens, the public rejects it. They called it silly, contrived, flawed, and worst of all, they falsely accused it of being exactly like the pieces of garbage they've been enjoying all these years. When I came home from the movie theater on May 22nd, I felt fantastic, but all those feelings quickly went away when I saw the message boards on imdb and all the youtube reviews. With that being said, I am not looking forward to Ghostbusters 3 and Tintin, for if they are done right, they'll be considered awful, but if they're done wrong, they just be embraced by the general public and internet community. We live in sad times.
 
Last edited:

graz

New member
avidfilmbuff said:
But them comes Crystal Skull, and it is everything what I feel a summer film should be. It was full of awe and majesty, it was lighthearted, and most of all, it was fun and old fashioned. But what happens, the public rejects it. They called it silly, contrived, flawed, and worst of all, they falsely accused it of being exactly like the pieces of garbage they've been enjoying all these years. When I came home from the movie theater on May 22nd, I felt fantastic, but all those feelings quickly went away when I saw the message boards on imdb and all the youtube reviews. With that being said, I am not looking forward to Ghostbusters 3 and Tintin, for if they are done right, they'll be considered awful, but if they're done wrong, they just be embraced by the general public and internet community. We live in sad times.

I know what you're saying here. When I came out of KOTCS having thoroughly enjoyed it, I came on the net and this site in particular to have fun discussing what was great about it. I was quite stunned by the level of cynicism and negativity. Shame really..:(
 

michael

Well-known member
avidfilmbuff said:
but all those feelings quickly went away when I saw the message boards on imdb and all the youtube reviews.

I wouldn't take what any of those people have to say seriously. As fas as I'm concerned, youtube comments are the downfall of civilization. And imdb is filled with trolls.
 

TennesseBuck

New member
avidfilmbuff said:
I wish to sum up exactly what I mean when I said Kingdom was a breath of fresh air. I basically feel that the summer film has gone down the drain. Back in the 1980's, summer films used to have a feeling of awe, majesty, and a feeling of light heartedness. It seems however that there hasn't been a great blockbuster film since Jurassic Park. Since the new millennium, however, summer movies have become odd.

First of all, 80% of them are now based on comic books. Now I try to open-minded when it comes to films, but I really dislike comic books, with the exception of Tintin and Uncle Scrooge. I mean, can't there be a single year without a comic book film. Every once and a while there is a good summer film like Spiderman 1 and 2, but films like these are nowhere near as good as the older summer films. But the vast majority of these films are weird and overrated. Today I have just finished watching Hellboy 2, and couldn't believe that it had a more positive response than Crystal Skull. I have seen many other summer films such as Lord of the Rings, X men, The Incredible Hulk, and many others, and they are all either odd, bland, and/or depressing. Whatever happened to summer films such as Ghostbusters, Indiana Jones,or Star Wars. In fact, even George Lucas' attempts to revive Star Wars were just as bland as the other summer films of the new millennium.

But them comes Crystal Skull, and it is everything what I feel a summer film should be. It was full of awe and majesty, it was lighthearted, and most of all, it was fun and old fashioned. But what happens, the public rejects it. They called it silly, contrived, flawed, and worst of all, they falsely accused it of being exactly like the pieces of garbage they've been enjoying all these years. When I came home from the movie theater on May 22nd, I felt fantastic, but all those feelings quickly went away when I saw the message boards on imdb and all the youtube reviews. With that being said, I am not looking forward to Ghostbusters 3 and Tintin, for if they are done right, they'll be considered awful, but if they're done wrong, they just be embraced by the general public and internet community. We live in sad times.


I agree in general...there was nothing in Crystal Skull that separated it so much from the enjoyment of the earlier films, at least in my opinion. There have been valid criticisms of the script but those same criticisms could be applied to the earlier films. Crystal Skull has a sense of fun to it and a middle-aged sensibility because of the character of Indy. It is not as escapist as the first two films (and LC did not have too much escapism) but it is good old fashioned fun. I did not expect much more than that but I think some of the people on the message boards took it seriously (and called Raiders ultra-realistic - that is laughable).

Summer films have changed considerably - as long as there are lots of explosions and not much to think about, Transformers 2 is considered a ton of fun. Crystal Skull dared to make us think a little, at least about our ancient civilizations and about Indy's future with his new family. It wasn't one explosion after another, thank goodness. :gun:
 

avidfilmbuff

New member
To Tennessee Buck:

Say I just looked at your public profile, and I remember you, when I was desperately searching youtube for a good review of the film, yours was not only one of the few positive ones but also the only one that was analytical and well thought out. But then your account got deleted and the video was gone, but when you recreated your account you didn't upload it again. Are you ever going to re-upload it? It certainly made me feel better when I was trying to find some hope for the public reaction to Crystal Skull.
 

James

Well-known member
avidfilmbuff said:
I wish to sum up exactly what I mean when I said Kingdom was a breath of fresh air. I basically feel that the summer film has gone down the drain. Back in the 1980's, summer films used to have a feeling of awe, majesty, and a feeling of light heartedness.

With that being said, I am not looking forward to Ghostbusters 3 and Tintin, for if they are done right, they'll be considered awful, but if they're done wrong, they just be embraced by the general public and internet community.

I know exactly what you mean. KOTCS reminded me of why I started loving movies in the first place. If you go back and look at the blockbusters of the 1980's, those are not serious-minded films. They're fun, imaginative, and escapist.

It's much different today, since there's a greater focus on realism (sic) and darkness. The average kid doesn't really want a movie to help him escape reality- he wants it to justify his own. After all, if you devote an entire year to discussing a movie online, you want to feel like it wasn't a waste of time. This is probably why all these bleak, dour films keep landing in the IMDB's Top 250.

Fortunately, cinematic trends tend to change with each new decade. It will be interesting to see if the upcoming 'teens' will be a throwback to an era like the 1950's or 1980's. (Both of which followed a decade of more serious-minded cinema.)

Just looking at the current summer, we can already see lightweight escapism (ie. Star Trek; Transformers 2) outperforming darker fare like Terminator 4 and Angels and Demons.
 

TennesseBuck

New member
avidfilmbuff said:
To Tennessee Buck:

Say I just looked at your public profile, and I remember you, when I was desperately searching youtube for a good review of the film, yours was not only one of the few positive ones but also the only one that was analytical and well thought out. But then your account got deleted and the video was gone, but when you recreated your account you didn't upload it again. Are you ever going to re-upload it? It certainly made me feel better when I was trying to find some hope for the public reaction to Crystal Skull.

Hey there avid, unfortunately, I did not save the review on tape and no longer have it on my computer...but I will be doing an analysis of Crystal Skull on my website and a youtube video as well. Of all the Indy films, Crystal Skull may be the most misunderstood. Thanks for remembering...didn't know if anyone did. :whip:
 

DeepSixFix

New member
avidfilmbuff said:
I wish to sum up exactly what I mean when I said Kingdom was a breath of fresh air. I basically feel that the summer film has gone down the drain. Back in the 1980's, summer films used to have a feeling of awe, majesty, and a feeling of light heartedness. It seems however that there hasn't been a great blockbuster film since Jurassic Park. Since the new millennium, however, summer movies have become odd.
Well the first "Pirates of the Caribbean" rocked. I went in knowing nothing about it and was blown away.
 

avidfilmbuff

New member
TennesseBuck said:
Hey there avid, unfortunately, I did not save the review on tape and no longer have it on my computer...but I will be doing an analysis of Crystal Skull on my website and a youtube video as well. Of all the Indy films, Crystal Skull may be the most misunderstood. Thanks for remembering...didn't know if anyone did. :whip:

That's too bad, it really was a great review. I'll be looking forward to your future analysis. By the way, your website is really fantastic, it's great to see someone who loves films as much as I do.
 

Indy's Fist

New member
DeepSixFix said:
Well the first "Pirates of the Caribbean" rocked. I went in knowing nothing about it and was blown away.
I knew little about KOTCS before I went and enjoyed it tremendesly. I wonder how many others would enjoy movies more if they didn't know anything before seeing them? In the old days we had no choice, however with the 'Net it seems the script of any film is made avialible months before a film's release. It's alot like opening a present before Christmas. Knowing what it is kills the joy of getting it at all!
 

TennesseBuck

New member
avidfilmbuff said:
That's too bad, it really was a great review. I'll be looking forward to your future analysis. By the way, your website is really fantastic, it's great to see someone who loves films as much as I do.


Thanks avid, will let u know soon enough. :gun:
 

kongisking

Active member
DeepSixFix said:
Well the first "Pirates of the Caribbean" rocked. I went in knowing nothing about it and was blown away.

Where do you stand on the next two movies, dare I ask? Are you one of the many hooligans that thinks they are despicable horse semen mixed with cat feces?
 

Attila the Professor

Moderator
Staff member
kongisking said:
Where do you stand on the next two movies, dare I ask? Are you one of the many hooligans that thinks they are despicable horse semen mixed with cat feces?

It's times like these I worry about your blood pressure.

(And really, as a moderator, think you should tone it down.)
 

AlivePoet

New member
Attila, your follow-ups are like the punchlines that kongisking's posts require to work. :hat:

Oh, and kongisking: while the second film, I think, could be enjoyed at least somewhat, the third was considerably worse than your offered description.
 

tambourineman

New member
The first Pirates was fantastic, one of my favorite films. The other two have some great parts, but were just too convoluted and over the top. They'd have been much better making three totally seperate films (like Indy) with just having Captain Jack and his crew return.

Back on topic, Ive tried to see the movie from the point of view of those who hate it, but I just cant. I think the movie has a lot of flaws and I could rattle of a list of things I dont like or things that should have been done differently but overall its a fun film and its just so great seeing Indy back that I dont understant how an Indy fan couldnt help but like it.
 

Indy's Fist

New member
tambourineman said:
The first Pirates was fantastic, one of my favorite films. The other two have some great parts, but were just too convoluted and over the top. They'd have been much better making three totally seperate films (like Indy) with just having Captain Jack and his crew return.

Back on topic, Ive tried to see the movie from the point of view of those who hate it, but I just cant. I think the movie has a lot of flaws and I could rattle of a list of things I dont like or things that should have been done differently but overall its a fun film and its just so great seeing Indy back that I dont understant how an Indy fan couldnt help but like it.
Thank you! Your post is exactly how I see it!
 
Indy's Fist said:
Do you really want me to point out every error in every Indy movie? I could make a list as long or longer for each movie.

No, you can't. Just think of ONE single plot-hole that clamorous in the first three films. "Raiders", "Temple" or "Crusade", c'mon, just think of one. You won't find it. I'm sure.

Darth Vile said:
If the retracting staircase defies belief, what about all the other booby traps that defy logic e.g. spring loaded spikes that work on light/refraction (Raiders). At least one could excuse the feasibility of Akator by stating "built by aliens"... but how the hell did the Hovitos (or their ancestors) manage to build a temple that has better security than The Bank of England???

No, no, no. Just no, man. You are citing a little (and VERY fascinating if you ask me) incongruence as if it was an actual letdown for the plot credibility. BUT IT IS NOT. There are similar details in all of the first three films, and in almost all adventure films in general for what I know, but that IS part of the charm. After all, it is still highly speculated that ancient civilizations may have obtained levels of technology that are so much superior, so enormously different from our consolidated knowledge to be almost impossible for us to understand.
Obviousely, it's clear that a booby trap so advanced as to sense light variations IS a little too much. But that DOES NOT constitute a plot hole. That DOES NOT cause a film to sink down. And in any case there is a big difference between chosing some logical/factual plot-holes to DRIVE the story of a film, and using some little and forgivable incongruences just to create some atmosphere.

As often happens, you are comparing things that simply doesn't stand in the same category just for the sake of defending the un-defendable. And you perfectly know it, also, since you are not stupid at all.

To conclude. Has it occured to you that the problem does not lie in fact that the staircase defies belief, but moreso in the fact that the staircase itself should have been already activated, and so no more functional, at the moment of Indy's arrival??
_________________________________________________________________

Well, now the rest of my post will be a brief comment on the articles posted by Wilhelm (great read, by the way).
First thing is, Kasdan may not have liked the scenes of the film because he had written them, and he exactly knew all the details of the dialogues. So, to him, the film could have lost a lot of his intensity. To us, instead, "Raiders" is just a film that perfectly delivers all of the key information to the plot following.
Kasdan says that the first scene between Indy and Marion has been heavily cut and so it doesn't work. And he says the same for the scene in the tent with Belloq. I say, those two scenes both works GREAT. But it's not just me. Everybody thinks so, because they freaking actually works great. The dialogues in their simplicity perfectly manage to sum up the state of a long term relation between Indy and Marion, and the intrusion of Belloq. Maybe the original version was even better, as Kasdan claimed, but this doesn't mean that those scenes do not work.
Other scene is the dig. Well, I say, just try to figure out... they are in an enormous digging site, with hundreds, maybe thousands of people working all over the area. Do you really think that a dozen of arab diggers lead by Indy (in arab disguise) would have been so easily recognisable in that context?? Do you really think that every single nazi soldier on that immense digging site should have known exactly who and where was working there, and why?? Do you really think that in the same situation it would have been so easy to spot Indy and his companions?? For un-suspicious nazi sentinels, finding Indy and his men would have been almost impossible. A matter of pure coincindence. It's pretty much the same as recognizing one specific person in the middle of a crowd of people, all dressed the same, while you don't even know that the person you are looking for is actually there. IMPOSSIBLE. I've always interpreted that scene this way, it's a very natural way of thinking, nothing far-fetched, yet it logically works fine. Kasdan being hypercritical about that is most probably due to the fact that he simply imagined a completely different scene.
And then...

I think you all agree with me when I say that the scene with the rubber raft is FAR mor plausible that an atomic bomb not instantly vaporizing Indy, the fridge, and everything else in the sight. Same goes for the railway jump against the highly acrobatic equilibrisms of Mutt Williams, during the swordfight with Spalko.

How does the airport agent know Indiana has 2 companions coming with him?

Wu Han was supposed to escape with Indy instead of Willie. They were obviousely prepared for that.

Why is Mola Ram sacrificing people?

Uhm... maybe because he is said to be the evil spiritual leader of a blood thirsty Kali cult?? Ever thought of that??

It's an idiot plot, where characters do things solely for the benefit of the film, not because it bears any relationship to the story.

The only idiot thing I can see is called Alan Dean Foster. With all due respect.

Characters must have motivation.

There are at least two, and both of them are sufficiently noble and credible. First, Indiana Jones has been politely asked to help the people of the village. And he is a good guy, so he might have simply decided to try. Second, and more important, Indiana Jones is an adventurer and a professor. He has a respectable culture. He does not believe in occult, so it's plausible to think that he is lead by his pure curiosity, and he thinks he may actually investigate the Pankot Palace to see what's the matter. TWO motivations, not just one. Both valid enough. Both implicit, yet evident.

Well, conclusions. You must admit there is a concrete difference between DESPERATELY TRY to find some faults in a well done film, and BEING LITERALLY blown by many evident flaws in a mediocre one.
First case is "Raiders", "Temple" and "Crusade". Second one is "Kingdom". Now, if you really disagree (not just for the sake of it), please start to argument your motivations. And let them be convincing.

Indy's Fist said:
I knew little about KOTCS before I went and enjoyed it tremendesly. I wonder how many others would enjoy movies more if they didn't know anything before seeing them? In the old days we had no choice, however with the 'Net it seems the script of any film is made avialible months before a film's release. It's alot like opening a present before Christmas. Knowing what it is kills the joy of getting it at all!

I was almost completely spoiler free by the time "Kingdom" was released. And still it was the biggest disappointment ever. Being open minded is not that big of a deal...
_________________________________________________________________

Oh, mine, some of the posts in these last pages just made me go ??????? :confused: (n)
_________________________________________________________________

Ah, I was almost forgetting about this:

sandiegojones said:
Okay, these have been answered several times over the past year.

1) After WWI gunpowder was coated with graphite to prevent unwanted explosions. Graphite is magnetic. At the time this could have been possible. Gunpowder is a little different nowadays.

2) The letter Mutt brought to Indy from Oxley gave the location of the grave. Indy just didn't realize it until he saw Oxley's cell and all of the engravings. Once they got to the cemetery Indy figures the rest out himself. The cemetery itself was not a secret, just the chamber where Orellana was entombed.

3) The temple was likely not shut when Orellana first got to Akator. He arrived and was likely welcomed by the Ugha and the aliens. Orellana and his men were brought inside the temple and likely tried to steal the treasure. They killed an alien and took the skull and on their way out, the staircase collapsed and some of Orellana's men fell to their deaths and the temple was shut. There are some depictions of the conquistadors arriving and killing and alien on the wall of the Ugha temple that you can see before they pop out of the walls (you can also see them on the special features disc on the DVD).

4) See number 3. :whip:

Thanks for the clarifications, mate!! (y) ;)
But I have to say that I still find points 3 and 4 to be a little too forced and unconvincing.
 
Last edited:
Top