Kingdom of the Crystal Skull - initial impressions and casual discussion

Blue_Scholar

New member
Raider S said:
Actually, it was a movie prop that's probably sitting in a box at Lucasfilm....

Well, I thought you were inferring within the context of the story, not in reality. Of course its a prop, your tone comes off as though you think I don't know the difference. Anyway, whatever that doesn't matter. If its there, good find, a nice easter egg. I'll have to look for it next time.
 

ValenciaGrail

New member
Johnny Nys said:
Different people have different interpretations of what tidy means. I'm having a hard time finding direct replies to my comments when everything's mashed together in the same topic, which is already going towards 40 pages. Other boards, moderators encourage people to avoid that and make new topics. Here it's the other way around. Of course I have no problem adjusting to each board's own set of rules, but universal tidiness is hard to come by.

Well, think of it this way...would you rather:

1. A single, difficult to navigate, often redundant, bazillion-page thread ?
or
2. A bazillion, difficult to navigate, often redundant, individual threads?

It's an issue of pick your poison; this board has made a judgement that #1 is the best option of the two.

Six of one, half dozen of the other if you ask me
 

Perhilion

New member
daventry said:
I just came from the Movie and i must say that it was rather good, but its like a big blow with an Older Indy and now he has a Son. :(

Why wait almost 20 Years for another Indy Movie when Harrosen Ford is 65, why not make more Indy Movies after the third one. Now he's Married and you can sort of close the book and say the end. What a waste of 19 Years for a third Film where we could've gotton more. :gun: :whip:

Harrison looks very good for his Age, he really squashed Sylvester Stallone in Rambo 4 where he looked like a very tired buffed up Old Geaser with 10 lines in the Movie. :sick:

The references and Jokes were cool, but nothing was said about Willy or Shorty and Sallah. They probably werent his BEST Friends like Oxley and Mac, characters i never knew before. :confused:
it took a long time for them to come up with a decent script.
 

Grailseeker

New member
The Mystery Factor

Did anyone feel as though showing the aliens at the end went against every Indy movie before it?

They didn't show GOD in RoTLA, they didn't show Sheeba in TOD and they didn't show Jesus in LC. It was the mystery and awesome power behind those entities encapsulated in the artifacts that was so Indiana Jonesesque.

I enjoyed the movie somewhat but I think it would have been the movie we ALL wanted if the CGI was cut out and replaced with physical, motor working sets and they didn't show an alien or the ship...

What do you guys/gals think?
 

Johnny Nys

Member
The rotating saucer. I call it rotating, because I didn't see it fly. Did it fly? Did it lift off into the sky? Perhaps I blinked when it happened, but to me it looked as if it simply vanished. Like Ox said, it went into the space between.
 

AndyLGR

Active member
19 years older changes your expectations

I went to see the film last night (posted a quick review on here too in another thread).

Intitial thoughts (apart from an alien) was how rushed some of the story seemed and how quickly they explained the skull legend before setting off or how incidental Marion and arguably the villains seemed to the story.

Having had time to think about it today, I realised that in reality it was probably no different to how the original films were.

I'm 34 now and I think that now I look for something a bit more in films than just loads of action - like story and characters.

So after initiial disappointment - I think that this sits well with the other 3 movies and imo is very much in the same vein as them.

The proof of my thoughts now is that I took my son to see it with me, his favourite film is TOD, but he loved this new one.

So the point of my rambling is that having thought about it today, this film is probably not so different from the other 3, except I am now more older and more cynical.

19 years is a long time for us to grow up and see movies in a different light to when we were 10 years old which is what I was when I saw Raiders.
 

Blue_Scholar

New member
G-Man said:
Not sure if this has been mentioned... WTF was the point of Mutt taking his motorbike with them??

Because he is a greaser. And much like the Samurai and their swords, or cowboys and their horses. They simply cannot do without their wheels.
 

sparkyrules

New member
Grailseeker said:
Did anyone feel as though showing the aliens at the end went against every Indy movie before it?

They didn't show GOD in RoTLA, they didn't show Sheeba in TOD and they didn't show Jesus in LC. It was the mystery and awesome power behind those entities encapsulated in the artifacts that was so Indiana Jonesesque.

I enjoyed the movie somewhat but I think it would have been the movie we ALL wanted if the CGI was cut out and replaced with physical, motor working sets and they didn't show an alien or the ship...

What do you guys/gals think?

I can appreciate your stance...still trying to feel everything out myself. I will say, however that eliminating CGI and putting in puppets and melting wax dummies does not guarantee success. For the most part, the effects in this film were spot-on, and I would say the best thing to do would be pull back in certain places. To me, that's the real issue - moderation.
 

Jim Tigernuts

New member
Wow, I just got a three week ban from Club Obi Wan for posting the following in a "happy" thread:

Thus far I've seen it twice, and thinking about seeing it again tomorrow.

Was very ambivalent after the first viewing (although I had a massive grin on my face from the start to about the moment they get to the Russian jungle camp).

Second viewing I liked more, but still ambivalent. Specifically, when it was getting to the moment where the alien reconstitutes and glares at Spalko, I felt like yelling out to the whole theatre: "MARION, DON'T LOOK AT IT! COVER YOUR EYES, MARION!"

I didn't. But I should have.

I was also the only person there to laugh out loud at the "Space/space inbetween space" lines.


Guess they have short fuses. Seems pretty innocuous to me.
 

peterlally

New member
They really shouldnt have killed off Henry Snr what does anyone think?

Though I do like how in Places Ford was imitating Connerys role especially when Mutt laugh when Brody's head falls off and Ford gives him the same look Connery did in LC
 
Last edited by a moderator:

ValenciaGrail

New member
And while we're on LC references, Mutt's Tarzan ride seemed to be a reprise of Connery's seagull maneuver: "Let me armies be the birds in the sky..."
Except this time, the monkeys play the part of the seagulls...
 

Jim Tigernuts

New member
Indy being relegated to "old fuddy duddy" status did not sit well with me. It's like Lucas and Spielberg decided to metaphorically *****-slap the character. Just not cool.
 

sandiegojones

New member
peterlally said:
They really shouldnt have killed off Henry Snr what does anyone think?
I think it was okay given the Marion and Mutt storyline. Since his Dad is gone and Marcus is gone it makes him appreciate life more when he realizes Mutt is his son. Indy also has a bonding moment with his Dad at the end (even though deceased). Being a father himself makes him feel closer to Henry Sr. than ever. Once you become a father or mother yourself you'll understand.
 

sandiegojones

New member
Jim Tigernuts said:
...although I had a massive grin on my face from the start to about the moment they get to the Russian jungle camp.
Me too! My cheeks were getting sore (on my face). It seemed perfect at first and just couldn't live up to it's own set up.
 

Jim Tigernuts

New member
Maybe the next Indy film can have an emotional parent/offspring storyline for the villain too. Just think; we could have Mutt duke it out with Mola Ram's, Belloq's or Donavan's kid! Spalko's spawn wouldn't be old enough.
 
Top