Does anyone else get upset??

[Wilhelm]

One of the things that I like about the franchise is that is told like if they had made a lot of movies and adventures with references as backstory. Beloq-Indy antagonism, the search for Nurachi, Cross of Coronado in Portugal, grave-robber in Honduras, Sultan of Madagascar, spies during WWII...

We only see selected episodes from this adventures. Maybe they could make 20 movies like the James Bond series, but we only get 4 of his more representative adventures. You could imagine that this was an old serial form the 30s-50s and the rest of the episodes were destroyed or lost in a warehouse.

I think KOTCS is a great final to the series, much better as entertainment-fun than the Star Wars prequels.

 

[Darth Vile]

Uh, no. The movie has detractors because it's not a good movie.

There's a wide spectrum of opinion about the movie, but at least I can acknowledge that everyone doesn't share my point of view without trying to come up with half-assed and utterly inaccurate psychoanalysis for why people may think differently.

I don't like the film because it's not a good film. The release date is irrelevant.

I think there is enough diversity of opinion here, to demonstrate adequately, that it's not as black and white as the movie simply being “good” or “bad”. To simply label the movie as “not a good film” when evidently so many people think it is, undermines the significance of how we interpret/perceive something. I don’t think there is much mileage in labeling KOTCS “great” or indeed “crap”, because the truth is invariably somewhere in the middle.

What was it that Da Vinci said, “The greatest deception men suffer is from their own opinions.”... which of course applies to all of us, and is something we should all recognize.

 

[Lance Quazar]

And it seems you completely missed my point. I said if Indy 4 and 5 were made as completely SEPARATE adventures and Indy 6 was Kingdom, it would've been more loved by the general public. But since Indy 4 took 2 decades, it was never going to please no matter what it was.

Forget everything else I said. Let's focus on this. You have made an utterly unprovable hypothetical hypothesis. It is foolish to debate in either direction. Your assertion cannot be proven in the slightest.

What I can say, however, is that I have not met a single person who actually liked KOTCS. Anecdotal evidence, of course, and I'm not trying to use it to prove a larger point about the film's relative quality, since, as we've all said, opinions vary.

However, I do know that not a single one of those opinions was swayed affected in the slightest by the delay between LC and KOTCS.

That group encompasses a wide spectrum of opinions about the franchise as a whole. Some, like myself, were die hard fans who wanted the love the movie. Others were entirely indifferent. Expectations were as diverse as possible. But not a single friend or even casual acquaintance I spoke to in person (as opposed to on-line) had a nice thing to say about the film and it has diddly all to do with where their expectations were.

 

[lao che & sons]

It doesn't make me mad I just find it interesting. The thing with them making Indy 5 is that they made enough money off KOTCS that they can want to make Indy5. If Indy5 is poorly written and gets bad reviews then That will be the last Indy movie because it will show them that the public doesn't want Indy. It will take alot for them to get it right this time because most people other than indy fans don't want indy 5. i bet that if this was made in like 1996/1997 then the movie would have gotten better thoughts. But star wars also had a huge gap in between movies and I think that episode 1 is very weak an silly.

 

[deckard24]

Originally Posted by Darth Vile
LOL - This is sounding like Monty Pythons "what have the Romans ever done for us?" sketch.

LOL!

Originally Posted by Darth Vile
You rightly mention some other very good movies/performances. Being über critical, what I meant was that Harrison Ford had the potential, more so than any other recent movie star, to surpass his earlier work and perhaps outdo his Solo and Jones characters (although Ford's still got a few years in him yet to do that).

I can't really ever see Ford topping Indy, and after all Indy topped Han, which is his second most iconic role.

Most well respected actors have one really iconic role, two if they're lucky, ie. Clint Eastwood as Dirty Harry and The Man With No Name, Humphrey Bogart as Rick Blaine and Dobbs, John Wayne as Rooster Cogburn and Sean Thornton, etc....but rarely do they come along 30 years later in their careers and eclipse those roles.

Yeah he has potential, but I would see him taking on and bringing to life roles of a more diverse nature, roles like Allie Fox in The Mosquito Coast, or Henry in Regarding Henry, but not necessarily anything as iconic as Indy.

Originally Posted by Darth Vile
Re. "Spielberg and Lucas dragging their heels". I was actually positing that regardless of when Indy IV was made, be it 10, 15 years ago... its probably one movie too many (IMHO). So for me, timelines are largely academic. That's not of course to say I don't enjoy Kingdom and wouldn't enjoy a possible Indy V.

I see where you're coming from, and to be honest, three films took the character as far as he needed to go. Not to mention, I highly doubt they could ever top the ending of LC.!

 

[James]

Yeah he has potential, but I would see him taking on and bringing to life roles of a more diverse nature, roles like Allie Fox in The Mosquito Coast, or Henry in Regarding Henry, but not necessarily anything as iconic as Indy.

To his credit, he did make quite an attempt to branch out during the late 90s/early 00s. The projects simply ended up being very hit-and-miss. He also has Jack Ryan, which is a somewhat iconic character in its own right, and one that could possibly be revisited.

However, I do agree that he will always be best known as Indiana Jones. Eastwood has come a long way since his early days at Warner Bros., but he's still Dirty Harry in the minds of the public.

The only recent example of an actor managing to escape his iconic role (late in life) would probably be William Shatner. He's somehow managed to eclipse the role of Captain Kirk by donning a new role as...William Shatner.

(Of course, Denny Crane was no doubt a factor as well.)

 

[Indy's brother]

I'll admit it. It pisses me off that they could have made more, but didn't. I feel a little strange confessing this, however. It's not like it was owed to me, or that I wasn't able to enjoy the hell out of what has been done. I guess it's just pure greed on my end for more Indy adventures that I can never have. Pissed, regardless.

 

[AtomicAge]

I was just watching a recent interview with Harrison Ford and for some reason I get angry and I don't know why. So I sit there and think about it. I really enjoyed Indy 4, but I get upset thinking about all the time they "wasted" when they could've been making more. I understand that they didn't want anything rushed and didn't want to make a movie just to make it. But I feel that with all the talking they did about making another one, we could've had one in the early 2000s or something...idk. I don't want to sound ungrateful...I just wish I could get more Indy.

Let me hear your opinions.

I think they were all busy doing other things and who can blame them for that? Sure I'd like to have seen more Indy films, but it seems to me that Lucas, Spielberg and Ford were all pretty much done at the end of Last Crusade. If it took 17 years for them to get excited about it again so be it. I'm just happy to have another film, and seems to be another one on the way.

Doug

 

[AtomicAge]

I get where you're coming from.

Even though I enjoy KOTCS, I've learned that many fans have sort of "settled" for it. A lot didn't necessarily love it unconditionally when it was first released.

And when you read or watch interviews with Ford or Spielberg, they really chose their words beautifully, because they truly make you think it's going to be the best film in the series (even now over a year later lol) when it really...isn't. Which is only natural. I mean, they do want you to go see it.

But, yeah, Ford always said how they were trying to find the right story and how "this is it". And then when I seen KOTCS for the first time it made me ask, "Really? It took them 20 years to write this?".

KOTCS's downfall is that it took simply too long to get made. If it was released, say, 1994 or 95, I'm sure it would've gotten a bit better reception.

So all in all KOTCS basically made us ask, "You made us wait 20 years for something a bit underwhelming. So why did it take you so long and couldn't you've made it sooner so we get some more redeeming Indy films in the future?"

I'm not sure I would call $786,636,033 at the box office a bad or underwhelming reception.

Doug

 

[DocWhiskey]

I'm not sure I would call $786,636,033 at the box office a bad or underwhelming reception.

Doug

Please.

Money has nothing to do with quality.

Transformers 2 made a killing at the box office and it was one of the worst movies I'd ever seen.

Go visit the "Rate the Indiana Jones Series" thread. KOTCS is ranked lowest by pretty much ever user. You know exactly what I mean by what was said.

 

[lao che & sons]

Please.

Money has nothing to do with quality.

Transformers 2 made a killing at the box office and it was one of the worst movies I'd ever seen.

Go visit the "Rate the Indiana Jones Series" thread. KOTCS is ranked lowest by pretty much ever user. You know exactly what I mean by what was said.

Yep. In fact the last crusade got the lowest box office money of the indy films but it is still a favorite among many fnas. KOTCS was great but it still wasn't nearly the beast or even 3rd best.

I'm sorry temple actually had the lowest box office profit. But temple is still my favorite.

 

[AtomicAge]

Please.

Money has nothing to do with quality.

Transformers 2 made a killing at the box office and it was one of the worst movies I'd ever seen.

Go visit the "Rate the Indiana Jones Series" thread. KOTCS is ranked lowest by pretty much ever user. You know exactly what I mean by what was said.

I didn't say quality....I said it got a good reception.

Personally I don't care how fanboys rated the movie.

Doug

 

[DocWhiskey]

I didn't say quality....I said it got a good reception.

Personally I don't care how fanboys rated the movie.

Doug

And in my original post I wasn't taking about reception...I was talking about quality.

And the "fanboys" rating the films are members of this board.

You joined to discuss the subject of Indiana Jones with them.

So what does that make you?

 

[AtomicAge]

You may not have meant reception, but that is the word you used.

It also generally got good reviews from the critics with a 76% rating at rottentomatoes.com

Doug

And in my original post I wasn't taking about reception...I was talking about quality.

And the "fanboys" rating the films are members of this board.

You joined to discuss the subject of Indiana Jones with them.

So what does that make you?

 

[deckard24]

To his credit, he did make quite an attempt to branch out during the late 90s/early 00s. The projects simply ended up being very hit-and-miss. He also has Jack Ryan, which is a somewhat iconic character in its own right, and one that could possibly be revisited.

However, I do agree that he will always be best known as Indiana Jones. Eastwood has come a long way since his early days at Warner Bros., but he's still Dirty Harry in the minds of the public.

The only recent example of an actor managing to escape his iconic role (late in life) would probably be William Shatner. He's somehow managed to eclipse the role of Captain Kirk by donning a new role as...William Shatner.

(Of course, Denny Crane was no doubt a factor as well.)

You make a good point, and Ryan could have been a good character for Ford to have taken further, but unfortunately they decided to reinvent the franchise, leaving Ford out of the picture. Not to mention, even though he played a different character, Ford's role as the president in Air Force One was pretty much another incarnation of Ryan, and marked the beginning of Ford playing one too many roles like this:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/M9GwtRsOYSI&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/M9GwtRsOYSI&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Shatner is a good example of a late career comeback and reinvention. The only difference I would say is, Denny Crane is a TV character, and as impressive as it is, he really only had one major iconic film role with Capt. Kirk, and he was originally from TV as well.

 

[James]

Not to mention, even though he played a different character, Ford's role as the president in Air Force One was pretty much another incarnation of Ryan, and marked the beginning of Ford playing one too many roles like this:

I do think the Ryan character embodies- almost as much as Indy- the qualities that audiences associate with Ford. This is certainly true among older audiences, and one reason why I think he should've made The Sum of All Fears. It was a different script back in 2000, but even a weak Ryan film would've provided him with a decent hit.

Ford could easily return to the role, imo. Few associate Baldwin or Affleck with it, and as you note, he was basically playing the same character in Air Force One and Firewall.

However, I'm not so sure we can place his familial woes at the feet of Tom Clancy. He was already headed in that direction by the time of Patriot Games: The Mosquito Coast, Frantic, Presumed Innocent, and Regarding Henry. (Even Witness and Last Crusade were variations on the theme.)

 

[Lance Quazar]

The only recent example of an actor managing to escape his iconic role (late in life) would probably be William Shatner. He's somehow managed to eclipse the role of Captain Kirk by donning a new role as...William Shatner.

Brilliant.

 

[The Drifter]

I was just watching a recent interview with Harrison Ford and for some reason I get angry and I don't know why. So I sit there and think about it. I really enjoyed Indy 4, but I get upset thinking about all the time they "wasted" when they could've been making more. I understand that they didn't want anything rushed and didn't want to make a movie just to make it. But I feel that with all the talking they did about making another one, we could've had one in the early 2000s or something...idk. I don't want to sound ungrateful...I just wish I could get more Indy.

Let me hear your opinions.

What; me worry?

 

[Darth Vile]

Go visit the "Rate the Indiana Jones Series" thread. KOTCS is ranked lowest by pretty much ever user. You know exactly what I mean by what was said.

I think if one were being truly objective, one would see that the majority of pollsters on the "Rate the Indiana Jones Series", still gave KOTCS a good score. If we're rating the movies, one of them has to come bottom... and on that particular poll, it appears KOTCS is ranked number 4... but we shouldn't automatically assume that those casting their votes thought it was rubbish, or that they didn't enjoy it for what it was.

Personally, I think TOD is the weakest Indy movie, but it's still leagues above 99.9% of all the other action/adventure movies that get churned out each summer.

 

[Darth Vile]

LOL!
I can't really ever see Ford topping Indy, and after all Indy topped Han, which is his second most iconic role.

Most well respected actors have one really iconic role, two if they're lucky, ie. Clint Eastwood as Dirty Harry and The Man With No Name, Humphrey Bogart as Rick Blaine and Dobbs, John Wayne as Rooster Cogburn and Sean Thornton, etc....but rarely do they come along 30 years later in their careers and eclipse those roles.

Oh I agree... I wouldn?t expect Harrison Ford to ever create another character that eclipses the iconogography of Indiana Jones or Han Solo. What I meant was that he has/he has had the potential to make a better movie than Star Wars and Indiana Jones. Clint Eastwood is a good example, as he will always be remembered for the spaghetti westerns and for Dirty Harry, but he has also made several better and more significant movies in his later years, which will stand the test of time. As much as I enjoy them, I?m not sure anyone will be watching Air Force One or Presumed Innocent in 30/50 years.

Interesting that you cite Bogart and John Wayne, as they too made some seminal movies towards the end of their careers (thinking African Queen, The Caine Mutiny, True Grit and The Shootist). I?d hope that Ford could do another ?classic? movie before he retires from screen roles.