KotCS reviews in media

Cyrano

New member
The media

Everyone should remember we live in an age where negative reviews, comments and bashing sells papers. We revel in the failure of others and embrace shows where people are tossed off islands, stages, and out of faux homes. We love to tear things down as it emboldens our own egoes.

No one is held up as a hero or role model anymore. Can you name five? Everyone has an opinion on everything and it is usually negative. No one can possibly create something of merit that is better than our own talents. What a sad state.

The negative reviewers (so far) hide behind aliases providing no proof or real detail of the film beyond what has been put out there already. i have read the reviews both good and bad and it is obvious who saw the film and who didn't.

People who attened the screening loved the movie and cheered when the credits rolled. The industry people take the non-disclosure very serioulsy as the studios are more dilligent than the CIA and if you are caught violating it it jeapordizes your standing with them in the future which impacts your career. Besides facing the wrath of the studio the real fact is you will be fired from the industry company you work for.

See the film, draw your own conclusions, but rest assured, this is an Indiana Jones film made by Spielberg and starring Harrison Ford.
 

Adamwankenobi

New member
Cyrano said:
Everyone should remember we live in an age where negative reviews, comments and bashing sells papers. We revel in the failure of others and embrace shows where people are tossed off islands, stages, and out of faux homes. We love to tear things down as it emboldens our own egoes.

Everyone in the "American Idol crowd" needs to watch the 1969 film They Shoot Horses, Don't They?. :(
 

sandiegojones

New member
I found this in the LA Times regarding AICN and Indy. It seems real journalists can't stand the fat red-headed bastard:

Are grown up journalists really anticipating a flood of negativity because of one anonymous f-ing review of the film on AICN? YES!!!! And the fault lands dead on the editorial desk of the New York Times. And they should be embarrassed and apologize for a terrible editorial choice. (Fat chance of that!)

And Variety should be embarrassed as well. Creating false, ambitiously eye-grabbing mythology out of whole cloth is supposed to be what we expect from Nikki Finke, not a highly edited trade magazine!

It is, of course, possible that Indy will be slammed tomorrow. But all of this obsessive talk that skews negative based on NOTHING is relentlessly irresponsible and should stop. It's just not right.
 

Adam McDaniel

New member
1st official review! THE TIMES ONLINE LIKED IT!

From The Sunday Times
May 18, 2008
Crack! Indiana Jones takes whip to doomsayers
Ignore all the gossip, the new Indiana Jones film is worth the wait, says John Harlow in the first newspaper review
Harrison Ford as Indiana Jones

For almost 20 years, Hollywood has been waiting for the next instalment in the money-spinning Indiana Jones adventure series. Indy is back this week ? and even an ageing Harrison Ford can still crack an impressive box office whip.

The worldwide opening on Thursday of Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull ? the fourth instalment in the series featuring the world?s most indestructible archeologist ? has been accompanied by enough controversy and intrigue to merit a film of its own.

Disagreements among producers, arguments between screen-writers and actors, and lawsuits against anyone who has dared to reveal a smidgen of plot, have combined to make the $185m (£95m) film one of the most eagerly anticipated of the year.

Directed by Steven Spielberg and produced by George Lucas (of the equally spectacular Star Wars series), the film returns to 1957 ? the height of the cold war ? for another round of heart-pounding chases through tunnels and across clifftops as a motley gang of intrepid treasure hunters span the globe in their quest for the usual nonsense.
Related Links

* Dr Jones: digging up a golden relic

* Tales from the set of Indiana Jones

* The return of Indiana Jones

The long delay between the new adventure and the previous instalment ? released in 1989 and unwisely entitled Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade ? has piqued Hollywood?s interest.

In the internet/video game age, when most recent action blockbusters have been derived from superhero cartoons, can an ageing screen idol who hasn?t had a decent hit for years reprise the wild success of his youth?

The good news for Ford fans is that Indy may be older and greyer, but there?s still a spark to his repartee, and he still gets the girl in the end (the girl in question being Marion Ravenwood, played by Karen Allen, who was the love interest in the first Indiana movie, Raiders of the Lost Ark).

Whether Ford?s charm will be enough to earn the film the $400m it is estimated to need to recoup Paramount Pictures? investment remains to be seen. However, a preview attended by The Sunday Times last week suggested that the internet gossips who have doubted the film?s drawing power may be proved wrong.

Jones admits early on that chasing baddies is not as easy as it used to be. In one scene he escapes from a nuclear blast by hiding inside a lead-lined refrigerator. Science and probability were never among the series? strong points.

It rapidly becomes clear that since we last saw him saving the Holy Grail from the Nazis, Jones has become a sadder and more solitary character.

His gloom is broken when an unlikely pair of treasure hunters ? Mac, played by Britain?s Ray Winstone, and Mutt, played by Shia LaBeouf, a teen idol ? warn him that the dastardly Soviet Union is after a crystal skull that, in the finest Indy tradition, offers dangerous powers to anyone who possesses it.

Much has been made in internet chatrooms about LaBeouf?s potential impact on the film, and fears that he is merely a sop to lure teen viewers. Yet LaBeouf, who made a striking impact against computerised villains in Transformers, matches Ford quip for quip and leather jacket for leather jacket.

The first Indiana Jones film in 1981 was Spielberg?s homage to the Saturday morning cliff-hanger serials of the 1930s. The latest film still has a pleasingly old-fashioned feel, with several long, slow shots, plastic-like foliage, tinny sound effects and a silly python.

Cate Blanchett makes an eye-catching appearance as Irina Spalko, the spooky leader of the Russain villainry; John Hurt, the veteran British actor, lurks menacingly as a rival hunter.

The crystal skull itself was formerly the subject of obscure disagreement between Spielberg and Ford, but it?s now hard to see what the fuss was about. It might as well have been a brussels sprout for all the difference it makes to the plot.

The real pleasure for series fans may lie not so much in the madcap action, the carnivorous bugs and the familiar perils of quicksand, but the restored romance between Ford and Allen, and the fatherly relationship that develops between Ford and LaBeouf, who is clearly the new pretender to his whip.

Indy treats Mutt with the same sarcastic disdain that his own father, played by Sean Connery, lavished on him during the Last Crusade. You can probably guess how it all works out.

The new film has long appeared critic-proof ? audiences will flock to it whatever the critical verdict. Yet will it have the box-office legs to join its distinguished predecessors among the most popular films in Hollywood history ?

It is bound to triumph this weekend ? the Memorial Day holiday in America ? but the latest Narnia adventure, Prince Caspian, is waiting in the wings, and the late Heath Ledger will soon make a posthumous return to screens in the Batman film, The Dark Knight. Indy may have his work cut out to save the day for Spielberg.
 

Skipper

New member
Kind of a weird article. It was hard to tell if it was an actual review or an article about the movie that hinted that the movie may be good.

Anyway, it sounds promising.
 

Avilos

Active member
Skipper said:
Kind of a weird article. It was hard to tell if it was an actual review or an article about the movie that hinted that the movie may be good.

Anyway, it sounds promising.

Its a review they just did not want to spell out all the details. Plus they mix in speculation about what the overall reaction will. Even though they saw the movie and liked, that does not give them any insight on what everyone else will think.
 

splish-splash

New member
And another one that likes it :)

"Mythology, science-fantasy a dynamite mix in new ?Jones? movie

Only a matter of time before Indiana Jones? tastes for arcane scholarship and rip-snorting adventure should lead him toward cosmic warfare. There rests the point of the spectacular comeback flick ?Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.?


At 65, Harrison Ford is going strong as the leading man in the ?Indiana Jones? movies.


Some long-term fans will argue Jones belongs in the 1930s and has no business consorting with science-fiction mysteries. The new film?s flash-forward to the 1950s ? a generation after the events of 1989?s ?Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade? ? not only catches Harrison Ford at the right age to resume the portrayal but the setting crystallizes the series? chronic fascination with ancient religion and tribal superstitions.

Many enthusiasts, anticipating the Friday opening, will backtrack to the DVD racks for fresh looks at the three Jones films of 1981-1989, maybe even some Young Indiana Jones television episodes. But head writer George Lucas and director Steven Spielberg are hardly so near-sighted.

A more meaningful warm-up to ?Crystal Skull? might involve a look at Hammer Films? ?Quatermass and the Pit? (England/1957) or a reading of Donald Wandrei?s unearthly novel ?The Web of Easter Island? (1948) or Jim Marrs? ?Alien Agenda? (1998).

Jones, after all, has as much in common with the British Empire?s famous rocket scientist, Bernard Quatermass, as with such men of action as Doc Savage and Jungle Jim Bradley.

Prof. Quatermass? struggles against extraterrestrial menaces had foreshadowed the rise of Indiana Jones long before the day of Lucas and Spielberg.

The fictional characters ? all except Spielberg and Lucas ? are, in a sense, brought to cinematic life time and again in response to a popular need for heroic fantasy as an antidote to workaday drudgery.

The worst Jungle Jim movie of the post-WWII years (and there are many candidates) was worth its price of admission as a brief refuge from drab reality.

With ?Raiders of the Lost Ark? in 1981, master storytellers Spielberg and Lucas introduced Dr. Henry ?Indiana? Jones (played by Harrison Ford) as a crowd-pleasing nod to the pure-escapism matinee serials of the mid-century. Lucas had done as much with an unexpected hit of 1977 called ?Star Wars,? but the teaming with Spielberg restored the cinematic tradition of fantastic adventure to a level unseen since the 1940s cliffhangers heydays.

?Raiders? proved the genuine article, evolved with just enough nostalgic touchstones to anchor Lucas and Spielberg?s deeper interests in political intrigue, ancient superstitions and Big Science.

The film yielded appealing sequels, each hinging on the idea that certain sacred objects might represent powers beyond comprehension.

A mere synopsis cannot do justice to the new film, and it might spoil the fun. Suffice that Ford?s Jones has aged but not mellowed into the Cold War 1950s, when an international power-grab search for the legendary ?crystal skulls? associated with Mayan and Aztec antiquity pits him against Soviet operatives.

The 13 such carvings known to science represent one of the more baffling mysteries of archaeology. Tribal lore links the skulls with miraculous properties. In any event, the objects are ideally in keeping with what Ford has called ?the mysto-crypto stuff that?s part of every Indiana Jones movie.?

Final-version screenwriter David Koepp nods as fondly to post-WWII B-movie science fiction as Lucas and Spielberg have paid tribute to the WWII-era serials. The combination of interests makes for a sharp combination of weird menace and hard-charging action, spiked by Ford?s droll sense of humor under fire and his ability to perform some of the more jarring stunt work himself.

Shia LaBeouf lends rebellious vigor as a young accomplice named Mutt Williams. Karen Allen reprises her original ?Raiders? character with youthful vigor and seasoned gumption. Some might view LaBeouf?s casting as a set-up for a next-generation sequel, but for the moment his character serves ideally as an overconfident foil for Indiana Jones? seasoned wisdom in dealing with mortal perils.

Ford makes 65 appear a desirable age to attain. All along during a diversified career, he has made a point of infusing his more heroic roles with human frailty and fallibility.

And the new Indiana Jones adventure crystallizes that quality most effectively: The generosity of Ford?s portrayal is the whole point, enhanced by the producers? acknowledgment of mythology and science-fantasy as inseparable

Suffice that Ford?s Jones has aged but not mellowed into the Cold War 1950s, when an international power-grab search for the legendary ?crystal skulls? associated with Mayan and Aztec antiquity pits him against Soviet operatives. The 13 such carvings known to science represent one of the more baffling mysteries of archaeology. Tribal lore links the skulls with miraculous properties. In any event, the objects are ideally in keeping with what Ford has called ?the mysto-crypto stuff that?s part of every Indiana Jones movie.?


http://www.timesleader.com/living/20080518_18indy_jones_etc_ART0.html
 
Top