Crystal Skull hatred knows no bounds

TennesseBuck

New member
seasider said:
When you have a Macguffin that is a skull of a non-human head and a movie that starts in Area 51 with Russians looking an item from the Roswell incident, we're kind of passed the "Who are they?" phase by the time Indy reaches Akator. Raiders was different as the Ark was the Macguffin and its power was a mystery. Nobody cared who the "angel of death" was as she wasn't a central part of the story. In KOTCS, the aliens/idbs kind of are the Macguffin so a scene or set of scenes explaining who they are and what they're about is justified in my opinion. We see their flying saucer take off but it's not like Indy gets taken on board and is given a personal tour of their digs.


No, Richard Dreyfuss had a personal tour in Close Encounters but all kidding aside, I was not bothered by the UFO. Some UFO specialists believe that aliens taught primitive civilizations how to build pyramids and other wonders...don't know if I believe that but it is an interesting story and it was inevitable that such a story would involve Indy. What I found fascinating is a little tidbit on how hard it is to find places or objects in any archaeologist's experience, like how Indy almost died from typhus (sp?) looking for Akator, assuming at first that it did not exist.
 

Mickiana

Well-known member
Re Tennessee Buck, the personality of Indy is affected by a set of influences, at least in part, by the characters he met through his young life. Fedora represents the roguish gold seeker and Indy's donning of his style of garb tells us that he is in part like that character, maybe only to a small degree or even to a large one, but nevertheless he has become like him to some extent.
 

Darth Vile

New member
TennesseBuck said:
No, Richard Dreyfuss had a personal tour in Close Encounters but all kidding aside, I was not bothered by the UFO. Some UFO specialists believe that aliens taught primitive civilizations how to build pyramids and other wonders...don't know if I believe that but it is an interesting story and it was inevitable that such a story would involve Indy. What I found fascinating is a little tidbit on how hard it is to find places or objects in any archaeologist's experience, like how Indy almost died from typhus (sp?) looking for Akator, assuming at first that it did not exist.

I think the whole UFO/alien/inter-dimensional being thing was handled pretty well in KOTCS. It's just a matter of wether that sits comfortably within an Indiana Jones movie. For me personally, I was ok with it until we saw the alien and giant silver flying saucer at the end... that was a shot too much for me, as I would have preferred something a little more nebulous. However, I can appreciate that showing a flying saucer was very much in keeping with what the movie was trying to capture (B movies of the 50's)... and I suppose is about as obvious as angels coming out of the Ark.
 

Walton

New member
StoneTriple said:
To me the ending of Kingdom would have been better if they discovered the floor was made of metal, but could never find the edges of it (because it was huge), and were left (as we would have been) wondering what the temple really was.

I like that. Nice approach, ST.

StoneTriple said:
I've only seen the first of the Star Wars prequels, so I can't speak to the other two.

That's a blessing in disguise. They're what I call "star wars: the downward spiral continues," and "star wars: wow, it really can get worse."

seasider said:
When you have a Macguffin that is a skull of a non-human head and a movie that starts in Area 51 with Russians looking an item from the Roswell incident, we're kind of passed the "Who are they?" phase by the time Indy reaches Akator. Raiders was different as the Ark was the Macguffin and its power was a mystery. Nobody cared who the "angel of death" was as she wasn't a central part of the story. In KOTCS, the aliens/idbs kind of are the Macguffin so a scene or set of scenes explaining who they are and what they're about is justified in my opinion. We see their flying saucer take off but it's not like Indy gets taken on board and is given a personal tour of their digs.

So display the skull's power, hint everywhere, and don't explain anything. I didn't mind seeing the remains/hand in Hangar 51. Or even the temple paintings, or even the skeleton thrones. The 13 skeletons could have stood up and walked, but seeing a fleshed-out IDB (in Spalko's tent and in the throne room) took away the desire to know more. Just :gun: it :dead:
 

Cole

New member
Walton said:
That's a blessing in disguise. They're what I call "star wars: the downward spiral continues," and "star wars: wow, it really can get worse."
The fan hate is excessive and irrational, and is in many ways comparable to 'Crystal Skull' in those regards.

Episode II and III are better, in my opinion, with Episode III being a must-see.



So display the skull's power, hint everywhere, and don't explain anything. I didn't mind seeing the remains/hand in Hangar 51. Or even the temple paintings, or even the skeleton thrones. The 13 skeletons could have stood up and walked, but seeing a fleshed-out IDB (in Spalko's tent and in the throne room) took away the desire to know more. Just :gun: it :dead:
In response to the Ark.......we already kinda of knew where the power comes from. Indy explains in the beginning - "The power of God or something." It's obviously a Jewish/Christian artifact.

We just didn't know what exactly would happen when the Ark is opened - if anything at all........just like we didn't know exactly what would happen when the skull was returned. So there's still mystery and intrigue there.
 

StoneTriple

New member
Walton said:
That's a blessing in disguise. They're what I call "star wars: the downward spiral continues," and "star wars: wow, it really can get worse."

It's a blessing I made certain of. :cool: Zero interest after seeing Phantom.

Cole said:
The fan hate is excessive and irrational, and is in many ways comparable to 'Crystal Skull' in those regards.

There's a huge difference between my lack of interest in the prequels and the hate\bashing that goes on.

As far as irrational goes - it's not irrational just because you don't agree with it. I'm on a Star Wars board and never bash the prequels - because I saw the first one once and said goodbye to the franchise. I'm there to occasionally discuss the one film I do own & watch (Star Wars77). That's something I wish more people around here would do - check the hate at the door. Criticisms and disappointment? - I'm all for discussing them. However, you have people here who created accounts just so they could bash Kingdom & all things Lucas (carry-over prequel hate). Like I said - gargantuan difference between that behavior and my disinterest.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Darth Vile

New member
Cole said:
The fan hate is excessive and irrational, and is in many ways comparable to 'Crystal Skull' in those regards.

Episode II and III are better, in my opinion, with Episode III being a must-see.


StoneTriple said:
There's a huge difference between my lack of interest in the prequels and the hate\bashing that goes on.

As far as irrational goes - it's not irrational just because you don't agree with it. I'm on a Star Wars board and never bash the prequels - because I saw the first one once and said goodbye to the franchise. I'm there to occasionally discuss the one film I do own & watch (Star Wars77). That's something I wish more people around here would do - check the hate at the door. Criticisms and disappointment? - I'm all for discussing them. However, you have people here who created accounts just so they could bash Kingdom & all things Lucas (carry-over prequel hate). Like I said - gargantuan difference between that behavior and my disinterest.

Agree with yer both. Wise words my friends... :D
 

Cole

New member
StoneTriple said:
It's a blessing I made certain of. :cool: Zero interest after seeing Phantom.



There's a huge difference between my lack of interest in the prequels and the hate\bashing that goes on.

As far as irrational goes - it's not irrational just because you don't agree with it. I'm on a Star Wars board and never bash the prequels - because I saw the first one once and said goodbye to the franchise. I'm there to occasionally discuss the one film I do own & watch (Star Wars77). That's something I wish more people around here would do - check the hate at the door. Criticisms and disappointment? - I'm all for discussing them. However, you have people here who created accounts just so they could bash Kingdom & all things Lucas (carry-over prequel hate). Like I said - gargantuan difference between that behavior and my disinterest.
Right, I wasn't singling you out, I was just speaking to the general fan hate - about how George Lucas and CGI have destroyed anything good and decent left in the world.

Granted, there's probably plenty to complain about 'The Phantom Menace' and I'm sure you could have many interesting discussions about that.......but, I don't know how anyone could walk away from it and call it a truly "horrible" movie........and the same can be said for 'Crystal Skull.' The disappointment is only so severe because of the grand expectations and preconceived notions of the audience - which in effect are probably impossible to meet.

I think that's why you see these extreme opinions. And any time you're talking extremes, it's usually irrational.

You know, you hear people say - "Well......it's a good film on its own, but it's a terrible Indiana Jones film."

What?!? A good film is a good film. If anything, you would think true Indy fans would be a tad more forgiving because they get to see the hero they know and love so well back on the screen again.

Compare it to another resurrected franchise like 'Rambo' or 'Die Hard 4' or something......why have those films not recieved a fraction of the hate that Indy 4 has? Can you honestly tell me they are better films?

No.........I think the difference is Indiana Jones has much more iconic, universal appeal.......everyone had an opinion, everyone had high expectations through the roof. Indy 4 was under the microscope thousands of times greater than those other films. 'Rambo' couldn't even make 50 million in the States, and 'Die Hard 4' made like 130 million, which is pretty decent.......but incomparable to Indy which made over 315 mill. It shows the popularity.

I also believe audiences are far more cynical today ('The Dark Knight' was the massive hit of the summer and it was so dark it felt like a rated-R movie), but that's a whole 'nother thing.
 
Last edited:

Darth Vile

New member
Cole said:
Right, I wasn't singling you out, I was just speaking to the general fan hate - about how George Lucas and CGI have destroyed anything good and decent left in the world.

Granted, there's probably plenty to complain about 'The Phantom Menace' and I'm sure you could have many interesting discussions about that.......but, I don't know how anyone could walk away from it and call it a truly "horrible" movie........and the same can be said for 'Crystal Skull.' The disappointment is only so severe because of the grand expectations and preconceived notions of the audience - which in effect are probably impossible to meet.

I think that's why you see these extreme opinions. And any time you're talking extremes, it's usually irrational.

You know, you hear people say - "Well......it's a good film on its own, but it's a terrible Indiana Jones film."

What?!? A good film is a good film. If anything, you would think true Indy fans would be a tad more forgiving because they get to see the hero they know and love so well back on the screen again.

Compare it to another resurrected franchise like 'Rambo' or 'Die Hard 4' or something......why have those films not recieved a fraction of the hate that Indy 4 has? Can you honestly tell me they are better films?

No.........I think the difference is Indiana Jones has much more iconic, universal appeal.......everyone had an opinion, everyone had high expectations through the roof. Indy 4 was under the microscope thousands of times greater than those other films. 'Rambo' couldn't even make 50 million in the States, and 'Die Hard 4' made like 130 million, which is pretty decent.......but incomparable to Indy which made over 315 mill. It shows the popularity.

I also believe audiences are far more cynical today ('The Dark Knight' was the massive hit of the summer and it was so dark it felt like a rated-R movie), but that's a whole 'nother thing.

The thing is (for me anyhow), I don't go on Rambo and/or Die Hard fan sites... so I wouldn't know what fan reaction is like for those movies. We here, see Indy through the lens of a microscope... The consequence is that qualities and issues are magnified to the extreme.

The reality is that not that many people outside of communities such as this are that bothered. It was a movie, like many others, that came and went. People on the whole seemed to be entertained by it whilst it played... and they certainly spent millions going to see it and buying the DVD. And like 99.9% of sequels, there is probably a general consensus (if one were bothered to offer an opinion) that KOTCS 'wasn't as good as the originals'. It's an opinion largely unqualified (given the nature of the first 2 Indy sequels)... but it's certainly a view that doesn't automatically disqualify/discount KOTCS. After all, the first 3 movies are viewed as 'iconic'.
 

AndyLGR

Active member
Cole said:
I don't know how anyone could walk away from it and call it a truly "horrible" movie........and the same can be said for 'Crystal Skull.' The disappointment is only so severe because of the grand expectations and preconceived notions of the audience - which in effect are probably impossible to meet.
Compare it to another resurrected franchise like 'Rambo' or 'Die Hard 4' or something......why have those films not recieved a fraction of the hate that Indy 4 has? Can you honestly tell me they are better films?
Do you mean better films than KOTCS or better films than the others in their franchise?

Speaking as a big fan of the Die Hard movies, Die Hard 4 ticked all the boxes for me. As Darth mentioned previously, any forum represents a tiny tiny minority of the fans out there, so I can't speak for those and I havent seen any other opinions from the other fans, but certainly from my point of view DH4 was a very good entry in the series.

Cole said:
No.........I think the difference is Indiana Jones has much more iconic, universal appeal.......everyone had an opinion, everyone had high expectations through the roof. Indy 4 was under the microscope thousands of times greater than those other films. 'Rambo' couldn't even make 50 million in the States, and 'Die Hard 4' made like 130 million, which is pretty decent.......but incomparable to Indy which made over 315 mill. It shows the popularity.
I think the amount the Rambo and Die Hard 4 movies made isnt the issue, they were succesful on the same level as the other movies. Within the audeince that these movies were aimed at, they were (I believe) a success and did good business.

The simple fact being that Indy is a more universally popular franchise, but no matter how much money Indy made or (as mentioned previously) even how much The Phantom Menace made, there are things that in my mind are seriously wrong with those films. Theres much to like and much to love too, but you can't help but say they were poor entries in to their respective franchises........ and its impossible not to compare them back to the originals, that will always happen, thats the bar that they have to beat or equal.

And also a wait of nearly 20 years just adds to the expectation. Its human nature.
 

Darth Vile

New member
AndyLGR said:
Do you mean better films than KOTCS or better films than the others in their franchise?

Speaking as a big fan of the Die Hard movies, Die Hard 4 ticked all the boxes for me. As Darth mentioned previously, any forum represents a tiny tiny minority of the fans out there, so I can't speak for those and I havent seen any other opinions from the other fans, but certainly from my point of view DH4 was a very good entry in the series.

I think the amount the Rambo and Die Hard 4 movies made isnt the issue, they were succesful on the same level as the other movies. Within the audeince that these movies were aimed at, they were (I believe) a success and did good business.

And also a wait of nearly 20 years just adds to the expectation. Its human nature.

Speaking only for myself, I think all the Rambo movies (excluding 'First Blood' - which I would say was a fair to middling movie) are extremely poor. I think Die Hard was/is a great action movie, and to a lesser degree, did for the genre in 88 what Raiders did in 81. The other Die Hard sequels are similar beasts to the Indy sequels, with 'Die Hard 2' being the weakest instalment. Again, only my opinion, but I thought Die Hard 4 was quite similar to KOTCS in that it was an extension of the previous movies... by it's very nature superfluous, somewhat inferior, but nonetheless a welcome addition.
 

AndyLGR

Active member
Darth Vile said:
Speaking only for myself, I think all the Rambo movies (excluding 'First Blood' - which I would say was a fair to middling movie) are extremely poor. I think Die Hard was/is a great action movie, and to a lesser degree, did for the genre in 88 what Raiders did in 81. The other Die Hard sequels are similar beasts to the Indy sequels, with 'Die Hard 2' being the weakest instalment. Again, only my opinion, but I thought Die Hard 4 was quite similar to KOTCS in that it was an extension of the previous movies... by it's very nature superfluous, somewhat inferior, but nonetheless a welcome addition.
I agree on the Rambo movies, the frst is definitely the best of a bad bunch.

Even though the same applies to most sequels, superfluous and often inferior, the continuation of franchises like Indy and Die Hard, I think, is in the main a good thing for fans. Especially if the sequel is a decent film. Indy 4 failed to be a decent film for me. However that doesnt stop me hoping that theres a 5th film in the series.
 

Darth Vile

New member
AndyLGR said:
I agree on the Rambo movies, the frst is definitely the best of a bad bunch.

Even though the same applies to most sequels, superfluous and often inferior, the continuation of franchises like Indy and Die Hard, I think, is in the main a good thing for fans. Especially if the sequel is a decent film. Indy 4 failed to be a decent film for me. However that doesnt stop me hoping that theres a 5th film in the series.

I'd agree that as long as there is a market (and some artistic reason to continue), sequels have their place... However, what constitutes a good sequel is where there is some disagreement. :)

I'd also agree with what you said before in that the Indy movies (and Spielberg/Lucas movies in general) tend to set a very high standard. Therefore expectations are that much more for Indy/Star Wars movies. On the Star Wars thing, my criteria for setting expectations (prior to release of Episode I of course) was always 'should be better than Return of the Jedi'. So for me, 2 of the prequels bettered ROTJ... which IMHO was quite a good return (given the quality of the originals). So in context of my original expectations, the prequels (although far from perfect), justified their existence.
 

AndyLGR

Active member
Darth Vile said:
I'd agree that as long as there is a market (and some artistic reason to continue), sequels have their place... However, what constitutes a good sequel is where there is some disagreement. :)
Also playing a part in that decision is the money it will make and also the ?laziness? if that?s an appropriate description. Because the character exists, there?s a market for it and its not really developing a brand new idea. There has been a certain laziness and sloppy attitude to some sequels that have been released, arguably the majority.

In addition there is the audience appetite and desire to see the further adventures of characters and stories. I bet we are all guilty of it, even though we may not enjoy a particular film in a series or feel slightly let down by it, we will still be there to see another sequel because we have the belief that the next one will be good and we will feel the same enjoyment as we felt with the original. Its rare that it is as good of course, but sequels still provide some entertainment value even though they are usually un-necessary.

Darth Vile said:
I'd also agree with what you said before in that the Indy movies (and Spielberg/Lucas movies in general) tend to set a very high standard. Therefore expectations are that much more for Indy/Star Wars movies. On the Star Wars thing, my criteria for setting expectations (prior to release of Episode I of course) was always 'should be better than Return of the Jedi'. So for me, 2 of the prequels bettered ROTJ... which IMHO was quite a good return (given the quality of the originals). So in context of my original expectations, the prequels (although far from perfect), justified their existence.
We may be in the minority but I?ll go along with statement. I enjoyed much of the SW prequels.
 

Dr.Jonesy

Well-known member
Found this on some guy's blog, I can't say I disagree with most of the stuff he says. It's a good quick read;

"Goodbye Indy.

I’ve watched Indiana Jones since I can remember, growing up with VHS copies of the series as a kid. Raiders being my absolute favorite of course. I was always excited at the idea of Indy IV; however I never got too excited. When 2007 rolled around, I was deep into the making of The Dark Knight, and I really let Indy go on the backburner. However, when I saw the first teaser trailer, I was ecstatic! And I got into the online craze, so to speak. When May rolled around, I was super excited. And May 22nd, I sat in that theater and couldn’t have been happier. When the lights went out, that was a great feeling. When the credits rolled and the lights lifted, I felt pleased. I thought it was great, but not as great as I wanted. But still, great! And the theater did too, with applause from the audience members who had been into the film the whole way through. I only got to see it twice, with the second time being A LOT better and I ranked it 3rd best in the series at that point. Most everyone I know that saw the film thought it was great or at least good. Most even ranked it above TOD or some (rarely) above LC. This pleased me, definitely.

However, I always was the type of Indy fan that really wanted other people to enjoy these films as much as I do. The downfall of this movie came from the first day I went on the internet in June. I was reading message boards on IMDB and AICN, and…wow…they were just ripping this film that I thoroughly loved to shreds. I mean, really…I was pleased that I got another Indy film and out of nowhere I’m reading “Rape my childhood”, “SHIA DIE!”, “Too old!” “Fridge sucks!”, “ALIENS?!?! REALLY?! OMG!”, “Ruined another series, thanks ****ing LUCAS!”.

I was so pissed, to say the least. Even if you are a die hard Indiana Jones fan, I at least expected the people who dislike the film to at least be calm and respectful towards the makers of the film and the fans of it. How far from wrong I was. I can’t understand how this film could be so despised. Sure, I could see how someone could say “Well…wow, I really expected it to be better. That was pretty bad.” But the amount of hostility, anger, profanity, insults, and exaggeration that has come to be associated w/ this film is appalling. I got into countless arguments on numerous message boards over this film. Sure, this film had plenty of it’s supporters on the net, there were a lot. But still, it was terribly unbalanced. After awhile I quit message boards. Boy, that was a good time! I could watch TOD or KOTCS and not have to think about how everyone hates those movies and that I’m an “idiot or have no brain cells” if I enjoyed them.

However, it’s gotten so bad that I cannot read an article, watch a video or visit a website that discusses anything about Indiana Jones without the author making snarky remarks or trashing the hell out of the film. It’s really pissing me off. They say “Critics panned it…as we ALL know…” Whereas I know that is not the truth. A 77% on RT does not equal a panning! Nor does mostly positive reviews! People seem so hell bent on making this film go down as a failure. And people are starting to believe it.

Fans seem to believe the “Filmmakers owe me personally an apology” and that they are personally insulted at what they’ve done. I remember being on boards and reading “Temple of Doom SUCKS!” and “ROTLA and LC are the TRUE INDY films!”. Well, once KOTCS came out, TOD all of the sudden is holy, sacred, flawless and a true classic. I fail to see what caused the universal Temple of Doom love. In my opinion, KOTCS broke new ground in the franchise, and that cause a $hitstorm. I read a lot of the time “Indy only goes after Christian relics!” or “He’s not Sci-Fi!”. Well, it seems that after 20 years we, as fans, have written in our minds what we think the laws and boundaries of the Indy universe is. Hate to tell you guys that it isn’t so. Things aren’t traditional or a rule because you’ve made up in your head that it is. Sorry people, but it’s not true. For example, I hear people talk about the lack of puzzle’s in KOTCS. Well…what Indy film was abundant in puzzles?!?! I can only think of Last Crusade. That seems more of a staple for an Indiana Jones game than a movie! Or another example; “Indy hardly used his whip and he didn’t do anything important in the last act/he only followed Oxley’s work and not his own.” Well…Indy used his whip as much as he did in LC, he didn’t do anything important in ROTLA, if he hadn’t been there, the Nazi’s would’ve found the Ark and burned anyway. And in LC, he followed his dad’s work most of the film too. So…where’s the arguments there? Stuff like that makes me think that people wanted all the elements from the previous 3 films to be thrown together into 1 film and have it contain all the elements instead of being its own movie and creating its own. Well, that didn’t happen. Sorry guys! As far fetched as Indy is, this film is hardly any more ridiculous. All of your complaints are usually silly and can be put against the first three films. CGI is bad? Well how about those clay miniatures in Temple of Doom? Those looked great huh? Or the blue screen plane shots in LC? So real it made me j!zz...

I titled this “Goodbye Indy” because I’m officially done with this series. I’m tired of arguing over it with people and tired of reading articles bashing a worthy entry to the series. It’s really hindered how I see the sequels. Especially TOD and KOTCS. I can’t believe fans can be so vicious. I’m tired of the condescending people who are hindering my enjoyment of this series. It’s annoying. Sure I hate the monkey scene too, and believe that the script could’ve been a lot better but something’s gotta give. We didn’t get The Phantom Menace. Watching the special features for KOTCS I can tell a lot of work and heart went into this film, and I would dare you to say those vicious and hostile things to the people who were quite proud of this film. Indy fans, you need to remove the stick from the sphincter! They act as if KOTCS is a complete travesty, and that TOD and LC are sacred, holy achievements in film. Whereas, while I love the 3 sequels, I have to admit that they are not anywhere near the pop culture status and film achievement classic status of ROTLA. They are not worthy to lick the boot of Raiders. And I’m fine with that. But don’t tell me that TOD and LC are incredible sequels, because they failed to live up to Raiders as well. God, what can?! Long live Indy, and KOTCS rocks!

When I weigh these, it would seem that most fans and critics/audiences really liked KOTCS.

Pro-KOTCS

BoxOfficeMojo fans gave a majority “A” rating
High DVD Sales(Only 1 or 2 left at most stores I go to!)
77% rottentomatoes
TV Spot and Tribute comments highly positive
CinemaScore-B
Good internet reviews
Cannes reception positive
Alot of people want Indy 5
Applause at theater
Bootleg comment websites positive
Good Yahoo Movies Score "B"
KOTCS official myspace has overwhelmingly positive comments

Anti-KOTCS

Internet articles trash it occasionally/comments
Youtube comments
Divided Fans (A la Temple of Doom style)
South Park/Shia Trash Talk"

Can't say I disagree much. The hate is largely on the Internet, it seems. But I don't think he should let trash talkers hinder his enjoyment of the films.
 
Last edited:

kongisking

Active member
Dr.Jonesy said:
Found this on some guy's blog, I can't say I disagree with most of the stuff he says. It's a good quick read;

"Goodbye Indy.

I?ve watched Indiana Jones since I can remember, growing up with VHS copies of the series as a kid. Raiders being my absolute favorite of course. I was always excited at the idea of Indy IV; however I never got too excited. When 2007 rolled around, I was deep into the making of The Dark Knight, and I really let Indy go on the backburner. However, when I saw the first teaser trailer, I was ecstatic! And I got into the online craze, so to speak. When May rolled around, I was super excited. And May 22nd, I sat in that theater and couldn?t have been happier. When the lights went out, that was a great feeling. When the credits rolled and the lights lifted, I felt pleased. I thought it was great, but not as great as I wanted. But still, great! And the theater did too, with applause from the audience members who had been into the film the whole way through. I only got to see it twice, with the second time being A LOT better and I ranked it 3rd best in the series at that point. Most everyone I know that saw the film thought it was great or at least good. Most even ranked it above TOD or some (rarely) above LC. This pleased me, definitely.

However, I always was the type of Indy fan that really wanted other people to enjoy these films as much as I do. The downfall of this movie came from the first day I went on the internet in June. I was reading message boards on IMDB and AICN, and?wow?they were just ripping this film that I thoroughly loved to shreds. I mean, really?I was pleased that I got another Indy film and out of nowhere I?m reading ?Rape my childhood?, ?SHIA DIE!?, ?Too old!? ?Fridge sucks!?, ?ALIENS?!?! REALLY?! OMG!?, ?Ruined another series, thanks ****ing LUCAS!?.

I was so pissed, to say the least. Even if you are a die hard Indiana Jones fan, I at least expected the people who dislike the film to at least be calm and respectful towards the makers of the film and the fans of it. How far from wrong I was. I can?t understand how this film could be so despised. Sure, I could see how someone could say ?Well?wow, I really expected it to be better. That was pretty bad.? But the amount of hostility, anger, profanity, insults, and exaggeration that has come to be associated w/ this film is appalling. I got into countless arguments on numerous message boards over this film. Sure, this film had plenty of it?s supporters on the net, there were a lot. But still, it was terribly unbalanced. After awhile I quit message boards. Boy, that was a good time! I could watch TOD or KOTCS and not have to think about how everyone hates those movies and that I?m an ?idiot or have no brain cells? if I enjoyed them.

However, it?s gotten so bad that I cannot read an article, watch a video or visit a website that discusses anything about Indiana Jones without the author making snarky remarks or trashing the hell out of the film. It?s really pissing me off. They say ?Critics panned it?as we ALL know?? Whereas I know that is not the truth. A 77% on RT does not equal a panning! Nor does mostly positive reviews! People seem so hell bent on making this film go down as a failure. And people are starting to believe it.

Fans seem to believe the ?Filmmakers owe me personally an apology? and that they are personally insulted at what they?ve done. I remember being on boards and reading ?Temple of Doom SUCKS!? and ?ROTLA and LC are the TRUE INDY films!?. Well, once KOTCS came out, TOD all of the sudden is holy, sacred, flawless and a true classic. I fail to see what caused the universal Temple of Doom love. In my opinion, KOTCS broke new ground in the franchise, and that cause a $hitstorm. I read a lot of the time ?Indy only goes after Christian relics!? or ?He?s not Sci-Fi!?. Well, it seems that after 20 years we, as fans, have written in our minds what we think the laws and boundaries of the Indy universe is. Hate to tell you guys that it isn?t so. Things aren?t traditional or a rule because you?ve made up in your head that it is. Sorry people, but it?s not true. For example, I hear people talk about the lack of puzzle?s in KOTCS. Well?what Indy film was abundant in puzzles?!?! I can only think of Last Crusade. That seems more of a staple for an Indiana Jones game than a movie! Or another example; ?Indy hardly used his whip and he didn?t do anything important in the last act/he only followed Oxley?s work and not his own.? Well?Indy used his whip as much as he did in LC, he didn?t do anything important in ROTLA, if he hadn?t been there, the Nazi?s would?ve found the Ark and burned anyway. And in LC, he followed his dad?s work most of the film too. So?where?s the arguments there? Stuff like that makes me think that people wanted all the elements from the previous 3 films to be thrown together into 1 film and have it contain all the elements instead of being its own movie and creating its own. Well, that didn?t happen. Sorry guys! As far fetched as Indy is, this film is hardly any more ridiculous. All of your complaints are usually silly and can be put against the first three films. CGI is bad? Well how about those clay miniatures in Temple of Doom? Those looked great huh? Or the blue screen plane shots in LC? So real it made me j!zz...

I titled this ?Goodbye Indy? because I?m officially done with this series. I?m tired of arguing over it with people and tired of reading articles bashing a worthy entry to the series. It?s really hindered how I see the sequels. Especially TOD and KOTCS. I can?t believe fans can be so vicious. I?m tired of the condescending people who are hindering my enjoyment of this series. It?s annoying. Sure I hate the monkey scene too, and believe that the script could?ve been a lot better but something?s gotta give. We didn?t get The Phantom Menace. Watching the special features for KOTCS I can tell a lot of work and heart went into this film, and I would dare you to say those vicious and hostile things to the people who were quite proud of this film. Indy fans, you need to remove the stick from the sphincter! They act as if KOTCS is a complete travesty, and that TOD and LC are sacred, holy achievements in film. Whereas, while I love the 3 sequels, I have to admit that they are not anywhere near the pop culture status and film achievement classic status of ROTLA. They are not worthy to lick the boot of Raiders. And I?m fine with that. But don?t tell me that TOD and LC are incredible sequels, because they failed to live up to Raiders as well. God, what can?! Long live Indy, and KOTCS rocks!

When I weigh these, it would seem that most fans and critics/audiences really liked KOTCS.

Pro-KOTCS

BoxOfficeMojo fans gave a majority ?A? rating
High DVD Sales(Only 1 or 2 left at most stores I go to!)
77% rottentomatoes
TV Spot and Tribute comments highly positive
CinemaScore-B
Good internet reviews
Cannes reception positive
Alot of people want Indy 5
Applause at theater
Bootleg comment websites positive
Good Yahoo Movies Score "B"
KOTCS official myspace has overwhelmingly positive comments

Anti-KOTCS

Internet articles trash it occasionally/comments
Youtube comments
Divided Fans (A la Temple of Doom style)
South Park/Shia Trash Talk"

Can't say I disagree much. The hate is largely on the Internet, it seems. But I don't think he should let trash talkers hinder his enjoyment of the films.

An excellent article. But, then again, I think so just because I love the film too. So I'm biased, yeah. Still, this fella has a great point, so I'm very pleased by this post
 

AndyLGR

Active member
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fKeqD8w2fb0


Funny how people take comfort in the fact that some of the cinema goers at this screening liked the film too. Surely you must be more confident in your own opinions than relying on others to back you up? Does it really matter what others think?

The blonde was funny who said she'd never get the time back. Interesting that Speilbergs sister gets interviewed too.
 
Top