TheRaider.net
 

Go Back   The Raven > The Films > Indiana Jones 5
User Name
Password

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 03-16-2011, 05:36 AM   #76
Hanselation
IndyFan
 
Hanselation's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoomsdayFAN
Oh God! I loath Peter Jackson's King Kong. Jackson would be one of the last people I'd want to take over Indy. HA! The film would be like 95% CGI.

If this was a perfect world and I could hand pick any director to take over Indy, it would probably be Christopher Nolan. That dude is known for his practical effects and masterful storytelling; which is just what we need... An Indy adventure which uses as many practical effects as possible, while using CGI ONLY to enhance and touch up the practical effects. Not to mention I believe he could bring us the next Raiders.


But I am still comfortable with Spielberg. I think the main problem with KOTCS was Lucas. He kept pressing for more CGI while Spielberg was pressing for more practical effects. Not only that, but Lucas is the one who kept flubbing up the story and tweaking it with his retarded ass ideas.

Anyway, for Indy 5, I hope Spielberg goes back to his "80s" ways, as far as aesthentics go. If JJ can make Super 8 look like 80s Spielberg, then Spielberg should be able to make Indy 5 look like 80s Spielberg.

As for the story..... I am afraid. As long as Lucas is in charge, it's probably not going to be up to par with the original three. I don't know why they can't be more daring like how they were for TOD. That, and bring back Kasdan to write it.

I quite agree with you.
Hanselation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2011, 07:27 PM   #77
kongisking
IndyFan
 
kongisking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Skull Island
Posts: 3,022
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoomsdayFAN
Oh God! I loath Peter Jackson's King Kong. Jackson would be one of the last people I'd want to take over Indy. HA! The film would be like 95% CGI.

If this was a perfect world and I could hand pick any director to take over Indy, it would probably be Christopher Nolan. That dude is known for his practical effects and masterful storytelling; which is just what we need... An Indy adventure which uses as many practical effects as possible, while using CGI ONLY to enhance and touch up the practical effects. Not to mention I believe he could bring us the next Raiders.


But I am still comfortable with Spielberg. I think the main problem with KOTCS was Lucas. He kept pressing for more CGI while Spielberg was pressing for more practical effects. Not only that, but Lucas is the one who kept flubbing up the story and tweaking it with his retarded ass ideas.

Anyway, for Indy 5, I hope Spielberg goes back to his "80s" ways, as far as aesthentics go. If JJ can make Super 8 look like 80s Spielberg, then Spielberg should be able to make Indy 5 look like 80s Spielberg.

As for the story..... I am afraid. As long as Lucas is in charge, it's probably not going to be up to par with the original three. I don't know why they can't be more daring like how they were for TOD. That, and bring back Kasdan to write it.

Um, not to sound like a smart-aleck, dude, but how else would you create a giant gorilla, giant dinosaurs, giant insects, a completely alien jungle, New York in the 1930's, etc.? Sorry, but your argument is flawed. Oh, that AND you insulted the mighty King, so yeah... But here's the good news: I think Nolan is a brilliant, brilliant, brilliant man as well. So at least there we can be friends.

And thanks for agreeing with me, Montana Smith. It's a damn shame you live in the UK, cause I'd totally be down for Extended Edition marathons with you. That swamp sequence was pretty *****in' wasn't it?
kongisking is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2011, 07:56 PM   #78
Montana Smith
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 10,617
Quote:
Originally Posted by kongisking
And thanks for agreeing with me, Montana Smith. It's a damn shame you live in the UK, cause I'd totally be down for Extended Edition marathons with you. That swamp sequence was pretty *****in' wasn't it?

Bah, these MTV kids want everything over in 5 minutes these days!

Jackson takes you on a journey, and if you're up for it, and into the subject matter, it's a journey you don't want to end. I wish Spielberg and Lucas had shown that much care and attention in KOTCS...
Montana Smith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2011, 03:52 AM   #79
Darth Vile
IndyFan
 
Darth Vile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Montana Smith
Bah, these MTV kids want everything over in 5 minutes these days!

Jackson takes you on a journey, and if you're up for it, and into the subject matter, it's a journey you don't want to end. I wish Spielberg and Lucas had shown that much care and attention in KOTCS...

You liked Jackson's King Kong Montana???
Darth Vile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2011, 04:23 AM   #80
Montana Smith
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 10,617
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Vile
You liked Jackson's King Kong Montana???

It's one of my favourite movies. It's pretty faithful to the original story and it's sentiment, and what's not to like about a giant gorilla, dinosaurs, and a 1930s tramp steamer heading off to a remote island?
Montana Smith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2011, 11:01 AM   #81
kongisking
IndyFan
 
kongisking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Skull Island
Posts: 3,022
Quote:
Originally Posted by Montana Smith
It's one of my favourite movies. It's pretty faithful to the original story and it's sentiment, and what's not to like about a giant gorilla, dinosaurs, and a 1930s tramp steamer heading off to a remote island?

I could kiss you, Smiffy, you're so correct!

I didn't mean that the way it sounded...
kongisking is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2011, 02:02 PM   #82
Darth Vile
IndyFan
 
Darth Vile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Montana Smith
It's one of my favourite movies. It's pretty faithful to the original story and it's sentiment, and what's not to like about a giant gorilla, dinosaurs, and a 1930s tramp steamer heading off to a remote island?

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.
Darth Vile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2011, 12:49 PM   #83
Stoo
IndyFan
 
Stoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Neuchâtel, Switzerland (Canadian from Montreal)
Posts: 7,996
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Vile
That’s a cheep jibe Stoo. Looks like your argument is faltering somewhat.
I think I’ve been consistent with my view since seeing the movie in 2008… and have been willing to defend and/or critique the movie as the topic allows. You posting contrary and limp wristed responses is just becoming dull. If you want to disagree/challenge, please do it with some level of rationality rather than your automatic fallback position of rancor.
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).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Vile
Semantics Stoo. I think Spielberg is making more substantial movies, in terms of subject matter. He’s refining his style (as artists usually do) but I don’t think his style has changed as much as you clearly think it has.
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Vile
I personally think the tank chase in TLC is a brilliant set piece and is wonderfully constructed… as such it still remains one of my favorite set pieces within a movie. However, I can still recognize that the set piece was reflecting a style of action that was being usurped in contemporary Hollywood movies/blockbusters. I also still believe that the tank chase from TLC is a far better set piece than anything in War of the Worlds or Jurassic Park II (and I think those are 2 good examples of where Spielberg falls short on the directorial stakes).
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. 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).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Vile
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.
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")?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Vile
C’mon Stoo – Even you should be able to grasp the notion of context and the use of examples to support/substantiate a position. I was using the likes of Aliens, Batman, Die Hard as examples of big budget, popular event movies (that were contemporary to TLC), in order to illustrate how Indiana Jones’ competition was upping the anti e.g. becoming more violent, darker etc. in comparison (whilst Indiana Jones was going more light-weight). And please, you need to refrain from just arguing semantics. The reason it would be obtuse to have a discussion comparing the action in The Wizard of Oz to Gladiator is that context is very important. They are different types of movies.
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".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Vile
I don’t believe it was me who cited Saving Private Ryan in the first instance, rather I was responding to the use of it as a relevant example. You may as well use Schindlers List as a suitable example of action scenes. After all, they both contain “action” and “Action is Action” isn’t it?
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Vile
I wasn’t aware that there was such a ground swell for Temple of Doom 2 to be made? I thought most of us were clamoring for a movie that had the impact/resonance Raiders had. Something different, something significant… something that would raise the bar? Surely anything less would just give us a variation on KOTCS.
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Vile
I welcome any movie making that isn’t just aping what’s gone before. I’d rather have a new Indy movie that tried to be different, and failed, than more of the same. Spielberg’s talent as a director isn’t in doubt (not by me anyhow). I was doubting his ability to give us something that would raise the bar re. Indy movies. If that isn’t the consensus here i.e. consensus that we want a movie that will blow other action movies out of the water (or at least have a good attempt at doing so) then I stand corrected.
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...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Vile
My position doesn’t keep changing… I think it’s your cognitive processes that are in question. Let me write it in crayon for you:
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Vile
1) I believe KOTCS mimicked the overall tone/style of the originals exceedingly well (whether that is a plus or a minus is dependant on personal view)
2) By being a homage to itself (IMHO) KOTCS was by definition re-producing an 80’s’esque style of action i.e. dated. I appreciated/enjoyed the homage, but the movie hamstrung itself by attempting to be so similar in style to the previous three. Instead of being a movie that allowed itself to blaze a trail, KOTCS was too focused on looking back (IMHO). It showed.
3) The most logical and relevant example one can use to determine if “Spielberg is too old for Indy” is, like it or not, KOTCS. Not Raiders... and certainly not Saving Private Ryan. If Spielberg is to direct another one, it’s logical to think it's going to be closer in style/technique to KOTCS than it is to Schindlers List or Munich. If you don’t like that idea, then prepare yourself…
1) I agree with you, somewhat, but not entirely.
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 by Stoo : 03-24-2011 at 01:02 PM.
Stoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2011, 05:09 PM   #84
Mickiana
IndyFan
 
Mickiana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,187
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?"
Mickiana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2011, 05:11 PM   #85
Darth Vile
IndyFan
 
Darth Vile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoo
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.

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.
Darth Vile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2011, 05:10 AM   #86
punisher5150
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 274
SS and laziness

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mickiana
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?"

Laziness was the exact impression I got with SS and Indy IV. Going through the motions.
punisher5150 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2011, 06:01 AM   #87
Montana Smith
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 10,617
Quote:
Originally Posted by punisher5150
Laziness was the exact impression I got with SS and Indy IV. Going through the motions.

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.
Montana Smith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2011, 03:07 PM   #88
Mickiana
IndyFan
 
Mickiana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,187
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.
Mickiana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2012, 06:25 PM   #89
jbonvillain
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 16
Thumbs up justin

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Vile
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.
i am in colour i am the old indana jones seen a message to me i will wating four you
jbonvillain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2012, 06:42 PM   #90
Archaeos
IndyFan
 
Archaeos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Not The British Museum
Posts: 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbonvillain
i am in colour i am the old indana jones seen a message to me i will wating four you

I am in awesome for you contributions and dark in jealous to me for envying yur sharp observations, jbotvillain.
Archaeos is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:01 AM.