Indiana Jones IV or Iron Man

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.



laser7455
Which one do want to see the most?

ragesRemorse
out of nostalgia, Indiana jones

Out of interest and expectance of quality, Iron Man.

The trailer for Indy didnt do anything for me. Seeing Harrison in the fedora was nice to see again, but the overall trailer looked bad. For some reason i trust favreau and downy to deliver more than i do harrison ford and spielberg. I would never expect myself to say that either haha

T.M
Originally posted by ragesRemorse
out of nostalgia, Indiana jones

Out of interest and expectance of quality, Iron Man.


Ditto.. exactly what I was going to say.

vintageSW77
INDY for a good old fashioned cinema experiance without any guest rap stars or hip hop on the soundtrack

Iron Man im looking forward to because the CGI looks good
unusual for a 00s superhero flick( mind you its a man in iron suit)

ill go for INDY

MildPossession
Definitely Indy. Iron Man is one I want to see, but Paltrow is a negative for me, ugh.

Toku King
Completely "Iron Man". I'm not even watching "Indiana Jones IV" this summer.

MildPossession
Why not?

SpaceMonkey
I like the idea of a new Indiana Jones movie, but Harrison Ford is too old. I'll watch it though, for nostalgia.

Iron Man, however, is just going to be awesome.

WrathfulDwarf
Indiana Jones.

BruceSkywalker
Iron Man, although I will be seeing Indiana Jones

sithsaber408
Indy. thumb up

I'm seeing Iron Man, and I'm sure it'll rock, but if I had to pick which of the two I'd want to see... it's Indy.

The trailer was good, but it's all the new pics and reviews and interviews that have come out lately that have me very confident that the Berg and the Beard are going to flip it on everybody.

And the "Ford looks too old" nonsense is weak. Look in the Indy forum for a ton of pics that show him in action (different than the trailer) and you'll see.

Toku King
Originally posted by MildPossession
Why not?

It's all poorly used nostalgia. The story's not going to be anything besides 'He's doing the same thing he did in the other movie...... But he's old now!"
Just not very interesting to me.

exanda kane
Doesn't matter, it's Indy.

sithsaber408
Indeed. Hardly looks old here at all:

http://www.theraider.net/films/indy4/gallery/screens/ij4_32.jpg

cool

Toku King
Originally posted by exanda kane
Doesn't matter, it's Indy.

Doing the exact same thing he always does.

Toku King
Originally posted by sithsaber408
Indeed. Hardly looks old here at all:

http://www.theraider.net/films/indy4/gallery/screens/ij4_32.jpg

cool

That wasn't my point.

ragesRemorse
I dont think people should concern themselves on whether or not Ford is to old to reprise his role as the swashbuckling Archaeologist. This was obviously one of the primary concerns of the filmmakers. Which is why im sure this has all been addressed. Not only in the script, but as well with the assistance of technology, the most fine stunt doubles and the inclusion of a young cast mate. Ford know's Indiana's character probably better than George Lucas...,he is Indy. Im sure his age will be focused upon in the film as a joke as well as a point of character development. Speilberg and his team are masters of filmmaking. I would not let the the whole age thing get in the way. As long as the story written well enough in a way that justifies another installment, nothing else matters.

ragesRemorse
Originally posted by Toku King
It's all poorly used nostalgia. The story's not going to be anything besides 'He's doing the same thing he did in the other movie...... But he's old now!"
Just not very interesting to me.

even if that is the case, it is a fan movie. Speilberg said himself that it was not just his sons nagging him to make another, but the decades worth of cries from the fans that really made him and Lucas truly consider another movie. Of course it will be Indiana doing much of the same thing he has done in the previous other movies. That is not the point. You would be going to see Indy 4 to see Indiana jones character once again as well as escape into some top notch action/adventure. It is much of the same reason people enjoy James Bond. It is the character they enjoy as well as the situations he gets himself out of. The James Bond movies for all intents and purposes are the same thing with each installment...,it is a fan thing

I would also put much faith in Harrisons decision to accept the Script. Ford is not one to take a Script on face value. If he thought it was good enough to put himself through the physical work and risking his stature. Im sure it will, at the very least feel like an Indiana Jones movie and not just a parody of a once young and strong character

jaden101
for me it's indy...Favreau has no talent as a director or even an actor in my opinion...

ragesRemorse
really, not as a Director? I can dig the Acting comment, he is only tolerable when he has the chemistry of Vaughn. you didnt think he did a good job with made or Zathura though?

jaden101
didn't like "made"...haven't seen zathura...

Strangelove
Iron Man

Toku King
Originally posted by ragesRemorse
even if that is the case, it is a fan movie. Speilberg said himself that it was not just his sons nagging him to make another, but the decades worth of cries from the fans that really made him and Lucas truly consider another movie. Of course it will be Indiana doing much of the same thing he has done in the previous other movies. That is not the point. You would be going to see Indy 4 to see Indiana jones character once again as well as escape into some top notch action/adventure. It is much of the same reason people enjoy James Bond. It is the character they enjoy as well as the situations he gets himself out of. The James Bond movies for all intents and purposes are the same thing with each installment...,it is a fan thing

I would also put much faith in Harrisons decision to accept the Script. Ford is not one to take a Script on face value. If he thought it was good enough to put himself through the physical work and risking his stature. Im sure it will, at the very least feel like an Indiana Jones movie and not just a parody of a once young and strong character

I love Indy, but watching him doing the exact same thing, only now with old jokes, is just boring to me.

Iron Man, on the other hand, has me excited to the max.

exanda kane
You have a very obscure definition of boring.

vintageSW77
Originally posted by Toku King
I love Indy, but watching him doing the exact same thing, only now with old jokes, is just boring to me.

Iron Man, on the other hand, has me excited to the max.

Well i hope Iron Man does do the same old now boring "guy becomes super hero takes on the villian rescues the girlfreind and sets everything up for part 2 whch will include far more action now they have got the origin out of the way in pt 1 " with a bit more style than 75% of the other Super Hero flicks that have come out recently

Since the death of Heston and apart from Eastwood INDY is the ony beleivable action hero out there for me

ROLL ON MAY!

McLovin
Indy

ScarletSpeed
Iron Man

MildPossession
Too old, ha ha. What rubbish. You can see in the trailer that they play with that angle.

=Tired Hiker=
Originally posted by ragesRemorse
out of nostalgia, Indiana jones

Out of interest and expectance of quality, Iron Man.

The trailer for Indy didnt do anything for me. Seeing Harrison in the fedora was nice to see again, but the overall trailer looked bad. For some reason i trust favreau and downy to deliver more than i do harrison ford and spielberg. I would never expect myself to say that either haha

Your post almost expresses my thoughts exactly . . . almost. You took the words right out of my mouth, except instead of referring to Harrison Ford as 'Harrison', I would have said 'Mr. Ford.'

exanda kane
I'm not on first name terms with Mr.Ford either.

SpaceMonkey
Originally posted by MildPossession
Too old, ha ha. What rubbish. You can see in the trailer that they play with that angle.

They do use that to the movie's advantage, i'm sure, but it still doesn't deny that he is, in fact, old. I liked seeing Indiana Jones as a swashbuckling adventurer. Now he's lost a step, and it kind of kills it for me.

exanda kane
Originally posted by SpaceMonkey
They do use that to the movie's advantage, i'm sure, but it still doesn't deny that he is, in fact, old. I liked seeing Indiana Jones as a swashbuckling adventurer. Now he's lost a step, and it kind of kills it for me.

Well, you've got your mind set it seems, so fair enough, but the dilemma that Indy is now 65 or so and how they will address that in the film is what I'm looking forward too. Ageist.

Heat_Vision
I'll end up seeing both sooner or later.

Toku King
Originally posted by exanda kane
You have a very obscure definition of boring.

Because I don't want to see the exact same thing I did a thousand times under a different title?

Toku King
Originally posted by vintageSW77
Well i hope Iron Man does do the same old now boring "guy becomes super hero takes on the villian rescues the girlfreind and sets everything up for part 2 whch will include far more action now they have got the origin out of the way in pt 1 " with a bit more style than 75% of the other Super Hero flicks that have come out recently

Since the death of Heston and apart from Eastwood INDY is the ony beleivable action hero out there for me

ROLL ON MAY!

Iron Man does indeed follow that scenario, but he does it Stark style.
And it always feels good to see the hero fulfill his destiny and save the day.

MildPossession
If a 83 year old can do water skiing here in the UK in reality, I'm sure a 65 or so year old in FICTION, can do whatever. stick out tongue

Toku King
Originally posted by MildPossession
If a 83 year old can do water skiing here in the UK in reality, I'm sure a 65 or so year old in FICTION, can do whatever. stick out tongue

Who said they couldn't. For the billionth time, that's not my point.
My point is that the only really new thing is that he's older. I could watch the old schools films for half the price of a ticket, and just enjoy what the new one will most likely not be as good as.

exanda kane
You don't really have a very good point though. Y'know, Indy's adventures are serialised to an extent like the pulp B movie's that inspired it, so much so that it doesn't matter if it is the same Chase The McGuffin malarkey; it is still the nuts. Any film that has Spielberg in its credits is a Must Watch by my standards, that may be a flawed logic considering some of the poorer films he has been associated with, but in my opinion it is worth it (considering he and Lucas changed Hollywood Cinema more than anyone since Selznick.)

To someone like me it seems you're just getting angsty over all the hype.

Toku King
Originally posted by exanda kane
You don't really have a very good point though. Y'know, Indy's adventures are serialised to an extent like the pulp B movie's that inspired it, so much so that it doesn't matter if it is the same Chase The McGuffin malarkey; it is still the nuts. Any film that has Spielberg in its credits is a Must Watch by my standards, that may be a flawed logic considering some of the poorer films he has been associated with, but in my opinion it is worth it (considering he and Lucas changed Hollywood Cinema more than anyone since Selznick.)

To someone like me it seems you're just getting angsty over all the hype.

So, I'm angsty because I noticed that everything Indy did in the trailer was almost exactly what he did before?
I'd rather save my ticket money than pay $10 for something I could watch at home. That sound reasonable to me.

exanda kane
No, you're just angsty. Stop listening to The Smiths already.

MildPossession
Don't judge a film by its trailer, or at least wait for the full trailer to come out. I've seen a number of shitty trailers and the films turned out rather good. Same for amazing trailers turning out crap.

Stun
Ok, this age thing is annoying me now. Newsflash - 60+ is no longer considered 'old'. People in their 60's are far more capable physical wise then they were, say, 20 years ago? it's a fact.

P.S -

Iron Man - boy's film
Indiana Jones - man's film

laughing out loud

Admiral Akbar
Yeah this old age buisness is starting to annoy me too. Mr.Ford is in top shape for this film and he streched the limits of his body to get it there.

Admiral Akbar
Originally posted by Toku King
I love Indy, but watching him doing the exact same thing, only now with old jokes, is just boring to me.

Iron Man, on the other hand, has me excited to the max.

What same thing do you have in mind? Give me one example of what Indy is doing the same in this movie with the limited knowledge you have about the current film. Things like "another adventure" don't count.

What makes Iron Man more exciting than Indy?

moviebuff1084
Both look great i will be seeing both on opening day.

Toku King
Originally posted by Admiral Akbar
What same thing do you have in mind? Give me one example of what Indy is doing the same in this movie with the limited knowledge you have about the current film. Things like "another adventure" don't count.

How about his enemies? Or how about the car stunt? Oh, but what about the artifact chasing?
Man, so many to choose from!



Better action, better acting(excusing Ford, obviously), better story, something not seen in theaters before, and generally badass on all sides.

Toku King
Originally posted by Stun
Ok, this age thing is annoying me now. Newsflash - 60+ is no longer considered 'old'. People in their 60's are far more capable physical wise then they were, say, 20 years ago? it's a fact.

For the love of Christ! NO ONE IS COMPLAINING THAT HE'S TOO OLD!
How many times do I need to say that?

Toku King
Originally posted by MildPossession
Don't judge a film by its trailer, or at least wait for the full trailer to come out. I've seen a number of shitty trailers and the films turned out rather good. Same for amazing trailers turning out crap.

Or how about I ignore the film, and watch something not riding on a movie franchise made decades ago, and ended in a way where a sequel was not necessary?

Endrict Nuul
Doesn't matter, I am seeing both.

MildPossession
How can you know it's better acting when you haven't seen the film yet? There isn't much acting in the trailer to judge it.

exanda kane
Originally posted by Toku King
Better action, better acting(excusing Ford, obviously), better story, something not seen in theaters before, and generally badass on all sides.

Better acting? You are aware that Cate Blanchett, Jim Broadbent, Karen Allen, Ray Winstone & -the best of them all - John Hurt are in Indy? That's not even mentioning that Shia Lebeauf is turning into quite a fine dandy thespian. By other Summer blockbuster standards, Iron Man has a good ensemble - but this good? No way.

Stun
Originally posted by Toku King
For the love of Christ! NO ONE IS COMPLAINING THAT HE'S TOO OLD!
How many times do I need to say that?

I said this because people in GENERAL (and not from this thread) are complaining about his age, and i'm speaking out against those people.

Stun
Originally posted by exanda kane
Better acting? You are aware that Cate Blanchett, Jim Broadbent, Karen Allen, Ray Winstone & -the best of them all - John Hurt are in Indy? That's not even mentioning that Shia Lebeauf is turning into quite a fine dandy thespian. By other Summer blockbuster standards, Iron Man has a good ensemble - but this good? No way.

Agreed. You aint' beating that line-up!

ragesRemorse
Originally posted by =Tired Hiker=
Your post almost expresses my thoughts exactly . . . almost. You took the words right out of my mouth, except instead of referring to Harrison Ford as 'Harrison', I would have said 'Mr. Ford.'

well, he has been in my house more than most of my friends. Whether he is aware of it or not we are homie's. When ever i get caught in the middle of a forest fire i yell "Harrison, i need your whirly bird ass!!"

casper_rific
I'm definitely going for iron man. the superhero genre's just taking off, and with the advances in technology they are definitely gonna be more realistic. Besides, i'm a big fan of robert downey jr. hehe.

Admiral Akbar
Originally posted by Toku King
How about his enemies? Or how about the car stunt? Oh, but what about the artifact chasing?
Man, so many to choose from!



Better action, better acting(excusing Ford, obviously), better story, something not seen in theaters before, and generally badass on all sides.

His enemies are russians not nazi's. What car stunt? you mean the one he pulled off in ROTLA? I can 100% assure you that won't be seen in this upcoming movie. Artifact chasing is part of the "adventure." You "love" Indy which makes me believe you liked the first three films. They were all similar to one another, as is this film to the other three. Steven said he made sure to stick the the formula of success. If you "loved" the last three why not like this one?

Yeah, so many..so many stupid examples you provided. Try again.

Ah yes, better action and acting. And you got this notion from what? The trailer? You haven't watched either of the two movies yet, so you can't really comment on the action. The same goes to the rest you provided. I'm sorry to say pal, but I think the world is on my side when I say Indiana Jones is far on top of the badass scale compared to Iron Man.


EDIT: On second thought, I doubt you enjoy Indiana Jones in general. Factoring in your lame reasons for not wanting to watch the movie, of course.

exanda kane
Originally posted by Toku King
Or how about I ignore the film, and watch something not riding on a movie franchise made decades ago, and ended in a way where a sequel was not necessary?

So instead you're going to see a film riding on the success of a comic-book first published decades ago - where an adaptation is not neccesary - by the Director of 'Elf' and 'Zathura,' with second-rate-Cate-Blanchett Gwenyth Paltrow, Get Rich or Die Trying' lumiere Terence Howard and Downey Jr. in one of his least exciting roles to date. As good as that ensemble is, despite their faults, you think they can match up to a franchise - with a lot more depth than Star Wars truth to be told - whose main character - with a lot more depth than Han Solo also - can be distinguished purely from his silhoutte?

Paramount are just laughing though; they are distributing both.

Admiral Akbar
Yep, Paramount is going to make big bucks this summer.

vintageSW77
Originally posted by casper_rific
and with the advances in technology they are definitely gonna be more realistic.

i take it you havent seen THE HULK trailer then

exanda kane
Hah, looks awful.

Toku King
Originally posted by exanda kane
So instead you're going to see a film riding on the success of a comic-book first published decades ago - where an adaptation is not neccesary - by the Director of 'Elf' and 'Zathura,' with second-rate-Cate-Blanchett Gwenyth Paltrow, Get Rich or Die Trying' lumiere Terence Howard and Downey Jr. in one of his least exciting roles to date. As good as that ensemble is, despite their faults, you think they can match up to a franchise - with a lot more depth than Star Wars truth to be told - whose main character - with a lot more depth than Han Solo also - can be distinguished purely from his silhoutte?

Yup. Because Iron Man hasn't been done on the big screen yet, while Jones has been doing it for decades, only now doing the exact same damn things.

exanda kane
That's faulty logic. It's not even illogical logic. It's just stupid.

Admiral Akbar
Originally posted by exanda kane
That's faulty logic. It's not even illogical logic. It's just stupid.

lol, agreed, Indiana Jones fan my ass.

I wonder if he is going to respond to my post.

Stun
Originally posted by casper_rific
I'm definitely going for iron man. the superhero genre's just taking off, and with the advances in technology they are definitely gonna be more realistic. Besides, i'm a big fan of robert downey jr. hehe.

Frankly i'm bored to death of 'superhero' movies, and i'm bored with CGI.

exanda kane
Aye, there only seems to be a small handful of directors who can handle CGI with finesse at the moment - and one of the most prominent happens to be Spielberg. CGI has been a bit of a houseguest, who pays his dues, but often leaves the toilet seat up, or drinks all the milk. It's a cruel beast to temper and the fact that it exists shouldn't be the reason why dozens of potentially enjoyable superhero movies are shoved into factory production.

I can't wait for a bit of the old skool B-movie schtick.

janus77
Iron Man. wasn't that big of a fan of Indy back when I was a child and the hokey "archaeology" wasn't interesting enough because of the nature of the movie. if they'd ever gone in-depth into that stuff, or immersed themselves in some real archaeological/mythological stream, then I'd be fascinated by the combination of action and story.

IronMan looks to be shaping up as a really funny, action packed and well acted first instalment of a franchise. Robert Downey Jnr's usually a good laugh in light roles, and Tony Stark is both playboy and "hero". like Batman but with a few pills big grin.

as for their respective formulaic natures, Indy +has+ to be formulaic - "respectful of its heritage" - whilst IronMan will only be formulaic in the sense that it is a conventional Summer Bluckbuster action movie narrative, stunts, explosions, a little romance, some big villain and a moment of truth which changes a character's destiny.

also, Indy has been somewhat done to death through the progressively worse Mummy movies, though Rachel Weisz adds a little something.

P23
its hard to choose. not only iromn man or indy but also the dark knight incredible hulk.! all i godda say is all these films have a huge fanbase but also indy 4 may be the victor to do indy being 2 generations. i was born in 84 so.

Mr Parker
Definetely Indiana Jones since hollywood has screwed up the majority of marvel comicbook films and they're usually always shit where all the Indiana Jones films were great.Although from looking at the trailers of Iron man,I have a feeling THIS time around,Iron Man may break that trend of crappy marvel hollywood films.Heres hoping.

Admiral Akbar
Originally posted by janus77
Iron Man. wasn't that big of a fan of Indy back when I was a child and the hokey "archaeology" wasn't interesting enough because of the nature of the movie. if they'd ever gone in-depth into that stuff, or immersed themselves in some real archaeological/mythological stream, then I'd be fascinated by the combination of action and story.

IronMan looks to be shaping up as a really funny, action packed and well acted first instalment of a franchise. Robert Downey Jnr's usually a good laugh in light roles, and Tony Stark is both playboy and "hero". like Batman but with a few pills big grin.

as for their respective formulaic natures, Indy +has+ to be formulaic - "respectful of its heritage" - whilst IronMan will only be formulaic in the sense that it is a conventional Summer Bluckbuster action movie narrative, stunts, explosions, a little romance, some big villain and a moment of truth which changes a character's destiny.

also, Indy has been somewhat done to death through the progressively worse Mummy movies, though Rachel Weisz adds a little something.

Indy is the same way. The Formula has always been narrative, stunts, explosions, romance, and moment of truth. Anyone who has watched the 3 movies would know that. How is Indy done to death? How many "hero" like characters do you see today in mainsteam movies? You don't have people coming up with figures like James Bond, Indiana Jones, MacGyver, ect...

janus77
Originally posted by Admiral Akbar
Indy is the same way. The Formula has always been narrative, stunts, explosions, romance, and moment of truth. Anyone who has watched the 3 movies would know that. How is Indy done to death? How many "hero" like characters do you see today in mainsteam movies? You don't have people coming up with figures like James Bond, Indiana Jones, MacGyver, ect...
I didn't say Indy wasn't like that, just highlighting how Iron Man will most likely be "formulaic" in the most generalised sense of that word (as applied to Blockbuster movies), Indy obviously is of the same genre and thus the same "formula" applies.

what Indy has on top is the need to be in the very specific mould of the three predecessors, to have the same gags continue (the occasional moments were Indy's mug is in close up for a rueful grin or a "gee wizz" gape etc) ... it's much more formula driven than I expect Iron Man to be. that is all. it should be a fairly simple argument to understand - "Indy fans" are fans of what, after all, but the elements common to the movies and the character's persona as established in the first 2?

I said it had "somewhat" been done to death in that the Mummy movies quite heavily borrowed from the Indy films in structure, theme and content (period setting, locations, Nazis, the elements of adventure, comedy and "archaeology" ... come on, the subtle as a hammer to the head).

as for Franchise worthy characters, which is what I presume you're talking about, well there's Jason Bourne of course, but the material is more adult and to my liking than previous Bond films (Casino Royale being rather good and more grown up than most of the recent predecessors). generally though, I'm not interested in franchise films, there's plenty of invention and innovation in movies... when I want nostalgia, I hunt out Ox Tales on youtube yes.

exanda kane
Originally posted by janus77
what Indy has on top is the need to be in the very specific mould of the three predecessors, to have the same gags continue (the occasional moments were Indy's mug is in close up for a rueful grin or a "gee wizz" gape etc) ... it's much more formula driven than I expect Iron Man to be. that is all.


Indiana Jones has its formula, but it works; three great, memorable films have been made that are iconic of 'new' New Hollywood, exemplary of the unique talents of Harrison Ford and the way in which Spielberg and Lucas changed Hollywood Cinema.

You aren't shooting down Indiana Jones, that I get, but to expect more from another kind of formula we have gotten used to (Super-Hero origins), that has only rarely produced a good film in the last ten years, is overly optimistic. As it stands now, Iron Man has recieved a lukewarm reception.

Mr Parker
yeah and you look at all the marvel films and your like thinking-Man when are they ever going to make a great marvel comicbooks movie that measures up to the greatness of Dc's comicbook films batman begins or superman? sadly,it just hasnt happened yet.

janus77
the first X-men film was good, not great but good. the 3rd Spiderman film was a hoot, really enjoyable and very well acted. Ang Lee's Hulk was pretty great as a film, not so great as a Hulk story because of its pacing and the fact that it was an origin story.

Iron Man has an excellent lead actor, a gorgeous and fairly talented lead actress (Gwyneth Paltrow) and so far, from the trailers, I see a Tony Stark who will be a riot on screen... I'm looking forward to it.

as for Batman, the very first Burton directed Batman and the Christopher Nolan directed "reboot" are the only two decent movies, add to them the first genuinely interesting Superman film - Superman Returns - and you have 3 very good comic-to-film translations for DC.

staying with comics, but outside of the superhero genre, there's the awesome Sin City and the engrossing and epic 300...

I think there's been quite a few good/great comic-to-film translations and most of the shitty ones have been squarely aimed at, and directed by, non-enthusiasts.

oh and can't wait to see the new Hulk movie either.

Admiral Akbar
The new Hulk movie looked like it took a step back into the past. The CGI is not as impressive as I have seen from movies like 300, Transformers, ect..

SpaceMonkey
Originally posted by exanda kane
Indiana Jones has its formula, but it works; three great, memorable films have been made that are iconic of 'new' New Hollywood, exemplary of the unique talents of Harrison Ford and the way in which Spielberg and Lucas changed Hollywood Cinema.

You aren't shooting down Indiana Jones, that I get, but to expect more from another kind of formula we have gotten used to (Super-Hero origins), that has only rarely produced a good film in the last ten years, is overly optimistic. As it stands now, Iron Man has recieved a lukewarm reception.


See, that's another thing i'm afraid of. Hollywood has a way of ruining good things. Indiana Jones has a reputation. Whether we like ot or not, Star Wars wasn't quite the same, all these rehashes of old TV shows and movies have been letdowns, for the most part. At least with Ironman there is no precedent. It's all new.

exanda kane
The thing that coculd possibly let down Indiana Jones is the script. But considering it has taken a decade or so for the right one, hopefully it won't impede. The reason why I don't feel it is right to compare then or even throw Star Wars into the mix is that Star Wars and these Supepr-hero adaptations are at the cutting edge of special effects technology. Even if Star Wars is not set in a contemporary universe, it is still pushing for new technologlical heights.

Indiana Jones isn't, on the other hand; it's in keeping with its own fictionalised history and universe that isn't determined cinematically by special effects of the digital age (or not applicable in that age) but by its B movie influences and credentials.

Mr Parker
I cant believe IRON MAN is actually coming out this week on a THURSDAY! There is a theatre near me where on weekdays they show the films for only 4 bucks.Thats really cheap so I'll probably see it on opening night thursday.

Robtard
Originally posted by Mr Parker
I cant believe IRON MAN is actually coming out this week on a THURSDAY! There is a theatre near me where on weekdays they show the films for only 4 bucks.Thats really cheap so I'll probably see it on opening night thursday.

It's stated to be released on May 2nd, which is a Friday.

WrathfulDwarf
I've waited for more than a decade for another Indy sequel. Iron Man is just a big MEH!

"Dr Jones!!!!!!"

Toku King
Originally posted by Mr Parker
yeah and you look at all the marvel films and your like thinking-Man when are they ever going to make a great marvel comicbooks movie that measures up to the greatness of Dc's comicbook films batman begins or superman? sadly,it just hasnt happened yet.

They go by the names "Spider-Man" and "Spider-Man 2".

exanda kane
No, he meant good films. Personally, I couldn't really care for Spiderman.

SpaceMonkey
Yeah, Spider-Man blows hardcore. The X-Men films were much , much better!

Mr Parker
Originally posted by Robtard
It's stated to be released on May 2nd, which is a Friday.
oh.well where I am,theres some theaters thats showing it thursday so I think I'll see it then MAYBE.

Mr Parker
Originally posted by SpaceMonkey
Yeah, Spider-Man blows hardcore. The X-Men films were much , much better!

thats the understatement of the century.my sig says it all. big grin Yeah the xmen films were 10 times far better written than those piece of shit spider-man films.

Toku King
Originally posted by SpaceMonkey
Yeah, Spider-Man blows hardcore. The X-Men films were much , much better!

That's like saying McDonalds food is healthier than apples.

Toku King
Originally posted by exanda kane
No, he meant good films. Personally, I couldn't really care for Spiderman.

Woah. There is more Spidey movie hate on this forum than anywhere I have ever gone before.
Anywhere else I go, the trilogy(mostly the first two) is considered to be the best superhero movie saga of all time. Here, it's constantly bashed(though most does come from MP, but still).

Mr Parker
Originally posted by Toku King
That's like saying McDonalds food is healthier than apples. '

thats by far the dumbest post you have EVER made. laughing

Mr Parker
Originally posted by Toku King
Woah. There is more Spidey movie hate on this forum than anywhere I have ever gone before.
Anywhere else I go, the trilogy(mostly the first two) is considered to be the best superhero movie saga of all time. Here, it's constantly bashed(though most does come from MP, but still).

Thats funny,other than this superhero site I used to post at that promotes the film,pretty much everywhere I go they feel the same as the three of us do.

exanda kane
Originally posted by Toku King
Woah. There is more Spidey movie hate on this forum than anywhere I have ever gone before.
Anywhere else I go, the trilogy(mostly the first two) is considered to be the best superhero movie saga of all time. Here, it's constantly bashed(though most does come from MP, but still).

I'm not bias against the character or a big fan or anything such as the like. The films just didn't really hit a note for me. In all fairness, I thought Spiderman 3 was the best, purely because what it lacked in cohesion and neccesity, it gave back in humour and flair.

SpaceMonkey
Originally posted by Toku King
Woah. There is more Spidey movie hate on this forum than anywhere I have ever gone before.
Anywhere else I go, the trilogy(mostly the first two) is considered to be the best superhero movie saga of all time. Here, it's constantly bashed(though most does come from MP, but still).

Wow, I actually feel proud to be on this forum. Must be a collection of Magistrates and Noblemen here who actually know good movies.

Thanks Toku! big grin

Mr Parker
Originally posted by exanda kane
No, he meant good films. Personally, I couldn't really care for Spiderman.

yeah thank you.I meant GOOD films NOT shitty films. roll eyes (sarcastic) Like we were talking about before,if were talking about GOOD marvel comicbook films,then yeah that would be the first two xmen movies.Those are 10x better written than those horrible spider-man movies. sick The only real problem with them is that the movies should have been called Wolverine since they were mostly all about HIS character with most the sceentime devoted to him and they didnt go into the details of the origins of the other characters at all except for Rogue.

Mr Parker
Originally posted by Toku King
That's like saying McDonalds food is healthier than apples.

Now that would be an accuarate statement if he had said that the spider-man movies were much better written films than the xmen movies.

Mr Parker
Originally posted by exanda kane
That's faulty logic. It's not even illogical logic. It's just stupid.

thats pretty much how ALL his posts are. laughing

Kazenji
Originally posted by Mr Parker
The only real problem with them is that the movies should have been called Wolverine since they were mostly all about HIS character with most the sceentime devoted to him

Did you even watch the X-men movies because all the character to me seem to have enough screentime and plus the second movie was more about wolverine with all the weapon X stuff and plus you about Rogue and Jean's character development..........so yea the x-men movies were really about wolverine roll eyes (sarcastic) roll eyes (sarcastic)

Admiral Akbar
Personally the two films were similar for me. Neither of the two were more interesting than the other. That's just me though.

janus77
c'mon, the "X-men" movies were mostly about Wolverine. the first one had Wolverine as the emotional center, even though it pretended to explore the Xavier - Magneto relationship. Wolverine was the one with the quips, the meatiest moments of action and the one whom Magneto utilised/antagonised the most. you never saw much of Cyclops even though he was the supposed leader of the X-Men.

the second one was mostly Wolverine-Jean Grey, Wolverine-Mystique, Storm and Kurt.

the third one ... god knows why I actually paid to watch that pile of crap no. it actually managed to suck worse than Electra!

Kazenji
which 2 films, X-men or spider-man ?

Kazenji
Originally posted by janus77

the third one ... god knows why I actually paid to watch that pile of crap no. it actually managed to suck worse than Electra!

You actually compare X-men 3 to a shit superhero movie laughing

X-men 3 is gold compared to elektra

Mr Parker
Originally posted by janus77
c'mon, the "X-men" movies were mostly about Wolverine. the first one had Wolverine as the emotional center, even though it pretended to explore the Xavier - Magneto relationship. Wolverine was the one with the quips, the meatiest moments of action and the one whom Magneto utilised/antagonised the most. you never saw much of Cyclops even though he was the supposed leader of the X-Men.

the second one was mostly Wolverine-Jean Grey, Wolverine-Mystique, Storm and Kurt.

the third one ... god knows why I actually paid to watch that pile of crap no. it actually managed to suck worse than Electra!

thats PRETTY much what I said.

janus77
Originally posted by Kazenji
You actually compare X-men 3 to a shit superhero movie laughing

X-men 3 is gold compared to elektra
no, it's a turd coated in a sheen of ... well shit really.

its despicable, I really did hate that movie.

Electra at least gave you some truly silly moments to guffaw at (the Hand ninjas, the "OCD kid" ...) and of course Jeniffer Garner in some sexy costume (and before you start, no painting Rebecca Rominj blue or making Hally Berry an albino does not accentuate their appeal).

janus77
Originally posted by Mr Parker
thats PRETTY much what I said.
I was responding to the poster who seemed to believe that there was some parity in screen time and focus, between the X-Men.

it was obviously playing to the Wolverine fans, even the casting made sure that Wolverine would be the "lead actor", since the old duffers are hardly likely to carry a film no matter their acting talent and the women are secondary...

Mr Parker
Originally posted by janus77
no, it's a turd coated in a sheen of ... well shit really.

its despicable, I really did hate that movie.

Electra at least gave you some truly silly moments to guffaw at (the Hand ninjas, the "OCD kid" ...) and of course Jeniffer Garner in some sexy costume (and before you start, no painting Rebecca Rominj blue or making Hally Berry an albino does not accentuate their appeal).

the god ugly looking Halle Berry as storm was one thing about the x men films that turned me off on those movies.although she was better looking with the wig on I thought. big grin

Admiral Akbar
Wha...Halle is hot. You have bad taste lol.

janus77
lol, I really did like her before and after (Swordfish!), but she was mis-cast imo. Storm needs to look more striking, like Grace Jones but sexy, and the hair ... messed that just made her like Tina Turner and Andy Warhol's lovechild.

she's hot I think, not up to the hype but definitely pleasing to the eye.

Mr Parker
Originally posted by Admiral Akbar
Wha...Halle is hot. You have bad taste lol. sick sick sick

Now Janet Jackson SHE'S hot.she should have been cast for that role.

exanda kane
I think Rutger Hauer should have been Magneto.

Robtard
Lunacy... he's a "so-so" actor at best, while Ian is great. Rutger does look the role though, but I think they were going with the Magneto pre-young-invigoration-thing in the films.

exanda kane
Not lunacy. It's reasonable - can't fault Ian McKellen as an actor or in the role - but Hauer has a certain physicality to him that McKellen, of course, lacks.

Maybe it was just the weak third act of X-Men, but Magneto never really looked that dangerous.

Robtard
Though not physically imposing, McKellan has a way of looking at the camera in the most sinister of ways, e.g. his role in Richard III.

X-3 was crap from start to finish, not one single redeeming quality.

janus77
I found McKellan to be a good piece of casting as Magneto because he exuded the humanity and gentleness of Magneto.

Magneto's a "believer", he is the definition of "ends justify the means" pragmatism.

such people are GOOD people, they're caring, loving and passionate, and they're DANGEROUS because of it.

evil is not some robotic/analytical type, it's good intentions, it's egocentricism, it's arrogance and overreaching.

that's what Magneto is. he see's the obvious stupidity in Xavier's method and creed, but instead of trying to find a more reasoned and rational position, he takes a high horse morality of protecting "his people" against the stupid and insecure homo-sapien.

nobody would follow Magneto if he didn't have a kernal of moral truth and "rightness" to his position, it's just that he becomes too passionate, too righteous and too blind to the consequences.

like the witch hunters, the inquisition and fundamentalists... perverted goodness is far worse and far more potent than outright wickedness.

ragesRemorse
I agree, even though McKellen didnt fit the appearance of Magneto what so ever. He proved that acting is more important in the casting of comic book characters than aesthetic appeal. I can now, see Magneto in my mind as both a very genuine and passionate jaded old man, or a young arogant dictator.

Kazenji
Originally posted by Robtard

X-3 was crap from start to finish, not one single redeeming quality.

It was'nt that ****en bad as some people are making it out to be....

exanda kane
Nah, Hauer would have been a better villain. McKellen can pull sinister, sure, but Magneto isn't a sinister villain in the true sense of the word. Granted, McKellen and Patrick Stewart have a great rapport, but Hauer is perfection gone wrong, which is exactly what Magneto is. He would be the perfect tutor for the X-Men but his pragmatism tragically causes him to be their most important nemesis. I can't criticise McKellen, but I can't help but think that the lack of 'Bang!' in the X-Men films was a result of his casting.

MildPossession
ARGH the new trailer for Indy looks fab!! and finally some clips of Allen speaking in the trailer, yay!!

Admiral Akbar
Hopefully all this talk about Indy being lame will cease when the new HD trailer comes out in a day or two. My personal opinion of the bootleg version is that it's "good." It's what I expect to see from Steven in terms of content. He didn't want to reveal too much, but at the same time gave us a whole plenty to look at. I might go see Iron Man just for Indy's sake. I've never seen Indy in the Cinemas, so I wouldn't mind a nice trailer preview.

Stun
I cant believe Iron Man is winning the poll 13/12 - i guess i never realised how excited people were for it. I never even heard of Iron Man until a few weeks ago! well, i suppose i could give it a go (and that's quite a huge step for such a huge Indy fan) stick out tongue

P.S - Indiana Jones reminds me of the way Hollywood used to be - now frickin' look at it! transport me back in time! laughing out loud

Alpha Centauri
Haven't seen the new Indy yet, but it'll have to be something special to top my opinion of Iron Man.

-AC

Admiral Akbar
Well apparently Indy has competition because Ironman is getting very good reviews.

janus77

socialcrawl
Indiana Jones by far!

exanda kane
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Haven't seen the new Indy yet, but it'll have to be something special to top my opinion of Iron Man.

-AC

That's hilarious Alpha Centairi. Never knew you could pull sarcasm as off such.

Alpha Centauri
It's hard to see what I'm capable of from that far inside Harrison Ford.

-AC

Blax_Hydralisk
Pwnt.crylaugh

exanda kane
Someones feeling sore.

Alpha Centauri
Yeah, Harrison did look a little sore in the trailer.

Probably easy up a bit, Exanda.

Alternatively, recognise that your adoration of Harrison Ford is probably your own. I don't think anyone here is denying he is the man when he's at his best, but you should respect that not everyone here thinks he could fit every role ever made, and be the best at it.

-AC

exanda kane
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I don't think anyone here is denying he is the man when he's at his best, but you should respect that not everyone here thinks he could fit every role ever made, and be the best at it.


Calm down Les Dennis. No one, not even yours truly, has expressed such an opinion and wouldn't even try it.

BetrayedUnicorn
im not a big fan of the cast of iron man...Indy IV definently.

Spartan005
Indiana Jones by a longshot

but I'm still seeing iron man tonight, it looks pretty good eek!

Stun
no offence to Robert downey Jnr, but when you compare him to Harrison Ford? ok, so he might be a great actor (no seriously i havent actually seen him in anything - probably because i only see about 3 or 4 new films a year because i'm lazy) but he has a long way to catch Harrison or even amount to his kind of status. I'm not saying Harrison is the greatest actor ever, and it wouldnt be wrong to call him overated - but to me? he's an Iconic legend. Why? i honestly dont know, it's just his screen presence. Like whenever i'm in the mood for a good old fashioned action flick i'll go rent out an Arnold Schwarzenegger film (cant act for shit) but it was his funny - but likeable presence that got me. Actors like Ford, Scharzenegger, Willis, Stallone are the guys that got me into movies, personally.....

......and i've just realised how FAR i've gone from the subject matter....umm, go Iron Man! ?big grin

Blax_Hydralisk
Something tells me I'll like Iron Man more then Indiania Jones. I'll withhold judgement considering we've only seen some previews, but from what I've seen of Indy.. he looks meh to me.

Stun
I used to like comics, but for me it just got a little kiddish for my liking. Shortly afterwards though, i found a sex life and never went back! which is unfortunatelaughing out loud i just think there are too many comic book films coming out at the moment, maybe if they had one for each year i could digest it all - just a bit too much for me though

Blax_Hydralisk
Well... ya know. I don't have a sex life.

So comics work good for me.

McLovin
Originally posted by Blax_Hydralisk
Well... ya know. I don't have a sex life.

So comics work good for me.

Hahaha.

*Big surprise*

Quiero Mota
Originally posted by laser7455
Which one do want to see the most?

Indy by default. I've always been a Dr. Jones fan, and there's no way in hell I'm spending money on a movie based on a comic book.

The Temple of Doom and Return of the Jedi were my favorite in both trilogies. The Star Wars prequels were a severe disappointment, and I hope it doesn't happened with the The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. And Harrison Ford was on Leno earlier tonight; good interview and I'm looking forward to it.

WrathfulDwarf
I haven't seen Iron Man yet (but eventually I'll see it)

I did see Indy last night. I'm NOT disappointed. It was awesome to see Indiana in action again. Different settings...but same loveable Dr. Jones. At this time I'm going with Indy. He's just too damn enjoyable.

Alpha Centauri
I've not seen Indy, so naturally I will say Iron Man is better.

I'm joking, of course I will wait to see them both, like a sensible person. Definitely looking forward to Indy, though I can't help but feel like I'm going to see it as a bit dated.

-AC

Fallen
saw indy last night, and i'm pretty sure its safe to say that iron man was the superior flick. i'm certain most people will agree with me.


indy definitely had its moments, and it was exciting to see harrison ford take up the role again, but the plot went over the top in some points, even for an indy film. indy surviving an atomic explosion by hiding in a refrigerator, and the force of the impact hurtling him out of harm's way? no one is that lucky. the ending took a weird turn. i guess you should expect it from the buildup of the plot, but to actually see it played out leaves a bad after taste that makes you question the movie itself. the UFO thing was tolerable until the last 10 minutes. a council of 13 extraterrestrials? a flying saucer rising out of an ancient temple? or rather, an ancient temple build to hide the existence of a flying saucer? either way, it went overboard.


the film had a different feel to the rest of the indy installments, but overall, a fun movie experience. i wouldn't expect too much.

Admiral Akbar
I agree, it was rather fun. Iron Man was the superior flick for sure, but I was more riled up watching Indy than Iron Man.

ragesRemorse
Originally posted by Stun
no offence to Robert downey Jnr, but when you compare him to Harrison Ford? ok, so he might be a great actor (no seriously i havent actually seen him in anything - probably because i only see about 3 or 4 new films a year because i'm lazy) but he has a long way to catch Harrison or even amount to his kind of status. I'm not saying Harrison is the greatest actor ever, and it wouldnt be wrong to call him overated - but to me? he's an Iconic legend. Why? i honestly dont know, it's just his screen presence. Like whenever i'm in the mood for a good old fashioned action flick i'll go rent out an Arnold Schwarzenegger film (cant act for shit) but it was his funny - but likeable presence that got me. Actors like Ford, Scharzenegger, Willis, Stallone are the guys that got me into movies, personally.....

......and i've just realised how FAR i've gone from the subject matter....umm, go Iron Man! ?big grin

I dont know man, i'd say Robert Downey and ford are in the same league when it comes to acting ability. I might even say that Downey is superior. Harrison has just had the benefit of being involved in two mega franchises and a slew of additional movies which is why he has that instant screen presence.

I saw Indy 4 last night and i have to say that if i hadn't grown up with the series i probably wouldn't have liked it. Someone here said it didn't feel like Indiana Jones and i have to agree. Other than Ford's portrayal of Indy i didn't really feel like i was watching an Indiana jones movie. That is probably only because i have grown up and Cinema has evolved. But, where the sillyness fit Iron man like a glove, it felt unwelcome in Indy 4, maybe because it was so over the top this time around. I did leave the theater with a smile though and i even got some goose bumps a couple times when i heard Indy's hero song (the raiders march) So, i guess thats all that counts. It was definitely not as bad as i feared, but it also wasn't as good as i hoped. However, it was a good movie and i suppose one can't ask for anymore. The movie is driven primarily by nostalgia, never trying to be more than the other movies in the series and sometimes it becomes to little to handle

Neo Darkhalen
Very true, if you did not like the first set of Indy films then you would not like this one, it was too OTT and to flashy not enough character development like previous films...overall Iron man was the better option.

SelinaAndBruce
Iron Man was a better movie but I had more fun at Indy.

S_D_J
Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
I haven't seen Iron Man yet (but eventually I'll see it)

I did see Indy last night. I'm NOT disappointed. It was awesome to see Indiana in action again. Different settings...but same loveable Dr. Jones. At this time I'm going with Indy. He's just too damn enjoyable.

You haven't seen Iron Man yet?!

what are you waiting for? the DVD?


I just saw Indy IV, and I gotta say Iron Man it's the better movie. Indy still retains it's adventurous side, but the plot doesn't make sense at some points.Originally posted by Fallen
saw indy last night, and i'm pretty sure its safe to say that iron man was the superior flick. i'm certain most people will agree with me.


indy definitely had its moments, and it was exciting to see harrison ford take up the role again, but the plot went over the top in some points, even for an indy film. indy surviving an atomic explosion by hiding in a refrigerator, and the force of the impact hurtling him out of harm's way? no one is that lucky. the ending took a weird turn. i guess you should expect it from the buildup of the plot, but to actually see it played out leaves a bad after taste that makes you question the movie itself. the UFO thing was tolerable until the last 10 minutes. a council of 13 extraterrestrials? a flying saucer rising out of an ancient temple? or rather, an ancient temple build to hide the existence of a flying saucer? either way, it went overboard.


the film had a different feel to the rest of the indy installments, but overall, a fun movie experience. i wouldn't expect too much.

and what about Mutt swinging in vines with the monkeys, and the monkeys attacking the bad guys, wtf it looked rather cool, but.... C'mon..

I knew about the plot, and the ending was something I figured out before watching the movie, but still didn't think it was going to be as it was.. . It does end up rather ridiculous... and pointless, not to mention it creates plot holes...

still Indy IV is a good movie, and a good way to say goodbye to the character... it has its moments, Harrison Ford can still pull off Indy very well, and that I liked a lot... the plot, not so much

Alpha Centauri
I thought the movie was ridiculous.

Fun, at the beginning and throughout the middle. It just completely went to pieces in some parts, and there was absolutely no reason for some of the stuff to happen. I guess Spielberg has a habit for massive, unnecessary CGI parts that convey nothing that's needed.

I thought the actors were good, as expected. Harrison Ford was funny and I suppose "charming". My biggest criticism is the timing, though.

I do not think Indiana Jones is relevant today, and even if he was, that kind of character isn't meant to be old and unable to do all the things he used to, adventurers are meant to have that impact that I didn't really get from this movie, unlike the earlier masterpieces.

It's fun, and worth seeing obviously, before judging. All in all, I think it was a bit of a let down. There will be people who say it's the best because they've invested a lot in saying it's the best before hand, but to compare it to Iron Man, to me personally, is silly.

-AC

MildPossession
I thought he wanted to turn away from lots of CGI in movies...

I read Karen Allen was good, but she was pretty much pointless and had nothing of importance to do thanks to the script?

WrathfulDwarf
Originally posted by S_D_J
You haven't seen Iron Man yet?!

what are you waiting for? the DVD?




I'm in no rush to see Iron Man.

Alpha Centauri
Shouldn't this thread be for people who've seen, and can therefore judge, both?

-AC

Mr Parker
Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
I'm in no rush to see Iron Man.

what are you tallking about wind? you already posted that you have seen Ironman and even wrote a review of it? laughing

Alpha Centauri
Oooh, it's all coming out, now.

-AC

WrathfulDwarf
Originally posted by Mr Parker
what are you tallking about wind? you already posted that you have seen Ironman and even wrote a review of it? laughing

I saw parts of Iron Man on Youtube.

I still need to see the entire movie in theaters. Again, no rush to see it.

Mairuzu
Seen both

Iron Man wins

<< THERE IS MORE FROM THIS THREAD HERE >>