Indiana Jones And The Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull - Review Thread

[MATTYBLU2]

Originally Posted by stockstar1138

i gave him credit for his older work and his advances in movie making. i don't see what your argument is against my post. however, for everything good this man has done, he has done something equally as awful.

Jar Jar Binks and Howard the Duck cancel out pretty much anything good he has done.

sorry but i disagree. all directors make crappy movies once in awhile. they are human for god sakes if those 2 movies is what you got against him thans thats pathetic after all his other accomplishements, sorry but thats how i feel

remember its nothing against you, we all have our own opinions and thoughts.

[stockstar1138]

Originally Posted by MATTYBLU2

sorry but i disagree. all directors make crappy movies once in awhile. they are human for god sakes if those 2 movies is what you got against him thans thats pathetic after all his other accomplishements, sorry but thats how i feel

remeber its nothing against you, we all have our own opinions and thoughts.

no, i have much more against him than those two movies.

The entire prequel trilogy of star wars is against him.

Adding all the CGI into the OT of Star Wars

Howard the Duck. duh.

Horrible ideas like Hayden Christiansen at the end of ROTJ (theres more than just that, but im not going to list them all)

CGI cutsie animals in other films such as the prarie dogs and swinging monkeys in KOTCS

The two ewok movies that came out after ROTJ

There is 9 movies right there (3 which he had right and then somehow managed to screw them up).

[MATTYBLU2]

Originally Posted by stockstar1138

no, i have much more against him than those two movies.

The entire prequel trilogy of star wars is against him.

Adding all the CGI into the OT of Star Wars

Howard the Duck. duh.

Horrible ideas like Hayden Christiansen at the end of ROTJ (theres more than just that, but im not going to list them all)

CGI cutsie animals in other films such as the prarie dogs and swinging monkeys in KOTCS

The two ewok movies that came out after ROTJ

There is 9 movies right there (3 which he had right and then somehow managed to screw them up).

WOW!! are you an angry person.... maybe you should write to george and tell him ho wyou feel

Always remember those are his works and because you dont agree does not mean they were wrong to do. To him they are all stepping stones to accomplishments through out his career and you or anyone else cant take that away from him.

how silly was jurassic park 3? very!! how silly was die hard 4? well... and i could go on and on. nobody is pefect man.

well back to the thread and what it was intended for.

hoping to see this one this weekend and then i can give some thoughts to it

[stockstar1138]

Originally Posted by MATTYBLU2

WOW!! are you an angry person.... maybe you should write to george and tell him ho wyou feel

Always remember those are his works and because you dont agree does not mean they were wrong to do. To him they are all stepping stones to accomplishments through out his career and you or anyone else cant take that away from him.

how silly was jurassic park 3? very!! how silly was die hard 4? well... and i could go on and on. nobody is pefect man.

well back to the thread and what it was intended for.

hoping to see this one this weekend and then i can give some thoughts to it

You can say that thing about it is somebody's work about any movie, that doesn't excuse bad ideas from critiscim. I am not alone on the thought that Lucas has some horrible ideas. Just because he made ILM doesn't excuse him from critiscm.

Im not angry, just disappointed that Lucas continues to make the same mistakes, that his fans have told him many of times, that very few people find his affection for CGI animals, dry dialogue, and cheesy humor as a plus to his movies. Im disappointed that I pay 25 bucks for a night out at the movies only to have things be not as good as they could have been by mistakes that could have easily been avoided (unlike JP3 which was a total disaster anyway you slice it) such as Shia swinging around like tarzan, but not only does Lucas come up with these ideas, he insists they are put in the movies.

[BStecke]

Originally Posted by WriteSimply

Which scenes were these?

[Show spoiler]The first was Shia's swordfighting scene. It started off ok, but it got so overblown and unbelievable, mostly because of the CGI, that is was laughable. I can dig two people swashbuckling between cars. That aspect of it is cool, and is acceptable in the same way that Indy was basically "battling" a tank on horseback in Last Crusade. But that was REAL!! Indy was on a f***** horse and that was a f***** tank! This was like, Cate Blanchett, Shia LaBeouf, an empty room and a computer, and a few REALLY over the top moments.

The second was the :shudder: Tarzan vine swingin' scene. Like I said later on in my review, the action in Indiana Jones is usually within the realm of things a regular human being could be conceived doing (and LOOKS real). I could get on board with him swinging from one vine back onto the jeep. That would be a good mirror for Indy's proficiency with the whip. But traversing a good portion of the jungle by vine, complete with an army of monkeys? My wife looked at me during that scene and I almost felt I had to apologize for bringing her.

A third, and lesser offense to me, was Marion driving off the cliff onto the tree. And this has to do with Karen Allen as well, because she didn't sell the scene very well. In a lot of her scenes she came of as kind of ditzy, and I think that scene was one of her worst moments. She delivers her line almost like, "Tee hee, trust me," where I was expecting more of "Marion", ie, "Trust me!", like, get off my ass about it. I don't know, the scene was a little over the top and Karen Allen didn't make it any more believable.

I think this was during the first few weeks of finalizing the deal prior to prepro. After seeing the first teaser then trailer, I knew that CGI use is going to be more prominent than the trilogy. But that's to be expected considering how much time they have to shoot, the amount of expectations modern audience have and the fact that Ford is in his sixties. On a side note, the ending that befall Walter Donovan in Crusade was achieved through digital composition and of course looked fake.

I was expecting the CGI use to be more prominent than the originals, and I think the cinematography has something to do with this as well, but I thought the whole thing looked sterile. Honestly, I found nothing wrong with Ford's performance. I didn't look at him once and think, 'damn . . . he's showing his 65 years.' I actually thought at a couple points, 'he's 65 doing stuff I probably couldn't do'. I thought it was great that they didn't rely on CGI to "cheat" his age.

The opening sequence right up to the gates are shot for real except for THE BURROWER.

I shouldn't have said opening scenes, sorry. The

[Show spoiler]"race"

scene actually had me pretty excited because I was like, wow, they're outside shooting this, and it feels like an Indy movie from the get go. Then when they got to the gates it got that sterile, plastic look that was prevalent throughout most of the film.

The hangar sequences apart from being augmented by digital set extensions, which is far more dynamic in that it frees the camera to move freely unlike what you can do with matte paintings, were also shot for real. In fact the production notes said that they had to use several studios to shoot the hangar scene because the hangar was supposed to be vast. Why was it so vast? Blame that on the ending shot of Raiders.

I thought the hangar portion was fantastic. CGI wasn't that noticeable, and they didn't use the CGI to make anybody do anything they "shouldn't" be doing, in the context of the realistic action of previous Jones movies.

But here's where watching the trilogy first gave me some perspective on the use of CGI for Skull. Some of the SFX and VFX in Raiders, Doom and Crusade show their age. The death of Satipo (Alfred Molina), the burning heart in Mola Ram's (Amrish Puri) hand, and the giant snake that scared Indy are all examples of cheesy SFX. For VFX, mostly it's about sky replacement though in Crusade there is that Leap Of Faith.

I didn't really have any problem with the VFX or SFX, except for when they were used as a backdrop to the action. I can dig the CG on the

[Show spoiler]crystal skeletons, the alien, the UFO.

Again, it comes back to the CG being so pervasive that it makes the scenes look sterile. Most of the "interior" scenes I thought were great because they looked and felt real. But I'm watching some of the jungle stuff and I'm like . . . couldn't you have found a jungle and maybe toned down the corny action a bit?

I understand where you're coming from but the stunts in the trilogy is not perfect either. How did Jones travel from Egypt to the German submarine port - which is an unseen stunt that is also a plot hole - aboard the submarine? How did Jones, Short Round and Willie stay on that entire roller coaster ride at that speed? How did the Joneses survived skipping/riding the tank's steel tracks?

But while they're both daunting/somewhat implausible, it's conceivable that Indy could swim to the submarine and find someplace to hide. The mine cart scene, while again, somewhat hard to believe, was shot in a way that it LOOKS real, and isn't really pushing the boundaries of human capability THAT far. The tunnel behind the cart, the cart itself all LOOK like the tunnel that came before it and the real cart. If the most implausible physical feat in the original trilogy is the mine cart jump, I can live with that. But in the scenes I mentioned above I think they trump that tenfold.

The main differences between the stunts and action sequences of the trilogy and Skull is that for Skull, the environment has been enhanced. The stunt work is still for real - I didn't notice digital doubles - except that the environment is augmented. It may have been augmented too fantastically though.

I didn't notice any doubles really either, but the scenes I mentioned above took it WAY too far. And, I know I've said it a million times now, there was so much CGI in a lot of the scenes, especially exteriors, that it made everything look plastic.

My bone with Skull (ahem) is still about the story arch.

I enjoyed the story quite a bit. I do wish Marion had a bigger part though. The scenes between them that were good were really good, but, as I mentioned above, she had some pretty poor moments.

[MATTYBLU2]

Originally Posted by stockstar1138

You can say that thing about it is somebody's work about any movie, that doesn't excuse bad ideas from critiscim. I am not alone on the thought that Lucas has some horrible ideas. Just because he made ILM doesn't excuse him from critiscm.

Im not angry, just disappointed that Lucas continues to make the same mistakes, that his fans have told him many of times, that very few people find his affection for CGI animals, dry dialogue, and cheesy humor as a plus to his movies. Im disappointed that I pay 25 bucks for a night out at the movies only to have things be not as good as they could have been by mistakes that could have easily been avoided (unlike JP3 which was a total disaster anyway you slice it) such as Shia swinging around like tarzan, but not only does Lucas come up with these ideas, he insists they are put in the movies.

i hear ya, but they are his work and he can do with what he wants with it. none of us have any affect on that.

than you should not go to the theater than and wait till they come out on blu so you wont spend so much money to waste your time, sorry but thats life man

I cant tell you how may movies i have been to the theater to see that totally sucked and i said boy did i waste my money on this one, but it happens.

again none of this was directed towards you ok

[Pseudoblu]

wow... really stirred up the hornets nest... Good Ole George... or as I like to think of him as "Randall Curtis".. but he is responsible directly for many things that have benefited the film industry, no doubt about it.. But the man does and continues to infuriate me with his ... lack of helping or listening to his true fans and that is based solely on the "want" of the "original trilogy" in a format that is the here and now..
His hack job of the "Special Editions" did not improve them imo.. I personally loved them just as they were. But to release the DVD's again from the laser disc version and not even include 5.1 sound..... it's just something I will never forgive him for.. and then has the nerve to get upset when the sales of those dvd's were not so good...


Indy 4 is really getting knocked around... this might help me as my expectations have been lowered now and might end up liking it more..

[tigtat77]

Were there any new trailers for big releases in front of Indy?

[BStecke]

Originally Posted by tigtat77

Were there any new trailers for big releases in front of Indy?

A new Shia movie called Eagle Eye, Wall-e . . . There were a lot of trailers, but nothing I'd call "big."

[cj-kent]

Originally Posted by Steverhcp02

ya know.....i saw this at midnight and my friends and I are huge Indy fans. First of all we all loved it and plan on seeing it again in theaters. But we heard many people complaining saying it was a waste of money.

Got me thinking, Indy always has those over the top moments such as


SPOILER

Shia swinging with monkeys, Indy surving the Nuke

SPOILER

But then it kicks you right back with a badass action sequence. And as far as the MAIN complaint.

SPOILER

How much more far fetched and terrible is the UFO and Alien subplot compared to the Arc of the Covenant, or a temple of doom or some witch doctor? Compared to Downey Junior creating a function Iron suit in the middle of a terrorist camp. I just think people too harshly judge things on perception rather than taking the movie for what it is...Indy is non fictional, its a fictitious fantasy with realistic undertones of archeology. Its a superhero movie shrouded as a realistic action series.

SPOILER

It isn't just that the topic of the movie is far-fetched. It's the fact that the pursuit doesn't feel very Indy. Indy goes after strange super-natural things. We all expect that. But we don't expect to find him pursuing something that Agent Mulder would be better suited to find.

[stockstar1138]

Originally Posted by cj-kent

It isn't just that the topic of the movie is far-fetched. It's the fact that the pursuit doesn't feel very Indy. Indy goes after strange super-natural things. We all expect that. But we don't expect to find him pursuing something that Agent Mulder would be better suited to find.

imo what indy is persuing is more believable than any of the other 3 movies.

we don't even know the other stuff he has gone after even exists in real life, at least crystal skulls have been found. now the power that they hold is disputed as is the origin, however, the alien thing didn't come out of nowhere, as many believe the skulls are of alien origin Go search some of the stuff archeologists have found down in south america, stuff like golden trinkets that look like airplanes, drawings of men that look like they are in space suits, stuff like that just doesn't come from nowhere and alien interactions are a very plausible and valid theory.

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by Pseudoblu

...Chuck Norris once uppercut a Horse, hence the creation of the Giraffe

Now THATS funny.

[DC_Street]

Originally Posted by cj-kent

It isn't just that the topic of the movie is far-fetched. It's the fact that the pursuit doesn't feel very Indy. Indy goes after strange super-natural things. We all expect that. But we don't expect to find him pursuing something that Agent Mulder would be better suited to find.

you know the very first thing to pop in my head when

[Show spoiler]the spaceship blasts off

was did I just see the ending to the X Files movie cut into a Indy movie?

[Show spoiler]I mean even Indy was just staring at it like Mulder did in X Files and of course it only focused on him and it looked like no one else saw it because he was the only one in the shot standing there and then in the very end plays it off like nothing happened

[Sith]

Originally Posted by stockstar1138

i gave him credit for his older work and his advances in movie making. i don't see what your argument is against my post. however, for everything good this man has done, he has done something equally as awful.

Jar Jar Binks and Howard the Duck cancel out pretty much anything good he has done.

Equally as awful, Howard the Duck maybe, but Jar Jar Binks is one character
in a smash hit blockbuster movie.....

Your opinion is just that, yours....And a very bad one at that.....

If it wasn't for George Lucas, and Lucasfilms sci-fi movies would be nowhere
near the quality that were getting today....

[stockstar1138]

Originally Posted by Sith

Equally as awful, Howard the Duck maybe, but Jar Jar Binks is one character
in a smash hit blockbuster movie.....

Your opinion is just that, yours....And a very bad one at that.....

If it wasn't for George Lucas, and Lucasfilms sci-fi movies would be nowhere
near the quality that were getting today....

im not going to get into an episode I argument, but there was so much more wrong with episode I than just Jar Jar Binks, in fact the fans didn't even vote Jar Jar the worst character in TPM, that went to the two headed pod race announcer. Episode I would have been a smash hit, no matter how poor of a movie it was.

[Sith]

Originally Posted by stockstar1138

im not going to get into an episode I argument, but there was so much more wrong with episode I than just Jar Jar Binks, in fact the fans didn't even vote Jar Jar the worst character in TPM, that went to the two headed pod race announcer. Episode I would have been a smash hit, no matter how poor of a movie it was.

Episode 1 for all it's flaws which we won't go into, is still a very worthy
cinematic experience, and the special effects for a 9 year old movie
show how good Lucasfilms is.....

[stockstar1138]

Originally Posted by Sith

Episode 1 for all it's flaws which we won't go into, is still a very worthy
cinematic experience, and the special effects for a 9 year old movie
show how good Lucasfilms is.....

and i compeltely acknowledge and give credit to lucas for the advancements he has made in the industry. however, just because he has done good things, doesn't cover up for his many mistakes in regards to writting dialogue, developing characters, the over use of CGI, and the humor he puts into these films.

i really don't see what the issue is. GL is far from a perfect director/producer and while i acknowldege the good he has done, Im also going to acknowledge the bad and KOTCS seemed to show more of Lucas negative impacts on films.

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by Sith

Equally as awful, Howard the Duck maybe, but Jar Jar Binks is one character
in a smash hit blockbuster movie.....

Your opinion is just that, yours....And a very bad one at that.....

If it wasn't for George Lucas, and Lucasfilms sci-fi movies would be nowhere
near the quality that were getting today....

Lucas has done, and, given us a lot of good things. That said, after 3 minutes of Jar Jar, the movie was RUINED for me. I couldnt understand creating such anannoying character, nor could I understand that once on film, that they didnt re-think it and axe him from the film. I remember actually feeling a twinge of anger when he spoke....I was thinking to myself WTF? Who in their right mind would think Jar Jar would please more than .25% of moviegoers, LET ALONE franchise fans.

[becomingwater]

One of the best IMO! Can't really say much about the story, but the effects were really good and believable! I think Harrison Ford did a great job and Shia also did a great job. It was a great story and overall great movie! Can't wait for more!

For the ones that say the movie is awlful or unrealistic, its a fictional character with realistic archeology timeframes. It's all fantasy. It was a well put together story and a great movie. Same as National Treasure. It was not realistic, but all fantasy.

[Scooby Blu]

Originally Posted by stockstar1138

imo what indy is persuing is more believable than any of the other 3 movies.

we don't even know the other stuff he has gone after even exists in real life, at least crystal skulls have been found. now the power that they hold is disputed as is the origin, however, the alien thing didn't come out of nowhere, as many believe the skulls are of alien origin Go search some of the stuff archeologists have found down in south america, stuff like golden trinkets that look like airplanes, drawings of men that look like they are in space suits, stuff like that just doesn't come from nowhere and alien interactions are a very plausible and valid theory.

I second that. I remember watching a movie called Chariots of the Gods and a book of the same name as well. This was a big deal in the 1970's