Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Hey guys.

My first post to the Indy forum in a while now - feels good to be back .

Believe it or not, it's now been exactly one year since "Indy IV" hit the big screen, ending a wait of almost 20 years. My question is, how do you guys feel about it now, distanced from all the hype, excitement, and - for some - disappointment that made it difficult to judge objectively at the time?

For my part, I'm still somewhat conflicted about the finished film. Yes, it was never going to live up to the crushing weight of expectation that had built up over nineteen years, and it's far from a perfect film - but I still very much enjoyed it, and certainly don't regret it being made. In truth, I haven't actually watched it yet for a second time (though I did buy the DVD) - I guess I've just been waiting until I felt "ready" to see it again. And y'know what? Now feels like the perfect opportunity to re-visit it at last ...

What are your thoughts on it?

It burrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrnns....

It burrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrnnnnnnns....!!!!!!!

Very. we're still not very keen on liking KOTCS, I'm afraid. Watching it on Blu Ray didn't really help.

It does to the brain what the Ark did to those Raiders nazis.

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
It does to the brain what the Ark did to those Raiders nazis.

...turns the brain into some mushy gooey stuff?


I was disappointed with it...I mean seriously wtf!?! Indy survived a nuke via a led fridge and then they had aliens, why not just throw Peter Pan and Tinkerbell into the whole damn thing and then Indy can like fly into outer space and like beat up superman!! Whole movie was a mess...lets face it George and Steve were as high as a kite...they didn't go to the moon they went to f*cking Jupiter

I hated it the first time, I loathed it the second time but haven't come around to see it for a third time...

It's pretty simple: Spielberg wanted a classic Indy, Lucas wanted an absurd rediculous Indy. I don't mind the aliens (considering we already had the Grail & the Ark), but while the original stories were more about the search of the artifact, the new Indy was about ...well... stopping Commies? If they just had the alien-part in the end it would have worked much better (also, trim down or delete the last scene with the UFO flying off).
Oh and despite them saying they didn't use much CGI... it showed... badly.

Originally posted by steverules_2
...turns the brain into some mushy gooey stuff?


I was disappointed with it...I mean seriously wtf!?! Indy survived a nuke via a led fridge and then they had aliens, why not just throw Peter Pan and Tinkerbell into the whole damn thing and then Indy can like fly into outer space and like beat up superman!! Whole movie was a mess...lets face it George and Steve were as high as a kite...they didn't go to the moon they went to f*cking Jupiter

...From the Jupiter between Jupiters..........

Roger Eberts review summed up my thoughts nicely: If you eat four pounds of sausage, how do you choose which pound tasted the best? Well, the first one, of course, and then there's a steady drop-off of interest. That's why no Indy adventure can match "Raiders of the Lost Ark" (1981). But if "Crystal Skull" (or "Temple of Doom" from 1984 or "Last Crusade" from, 1989) had come first in the series, who knows how much fresher it might have seemed?

But you cannot compare LC and TOD to KOTCS.

Its just wrong.
They stand haead and shoulders in terms of entertainment above 'the aliens of shit' movie.

Noone wanted raiders reproduced note for note in the movie.
All we wanted was for it to be an Indy standard movie.

And it wasn't.


Besides. If what was tasted first will always be superior, then thats like saying Empire wasnt as enjoyable as A New Hope.

Or Godfather II compared to Godfather I.

It is possible ya know. But not if you just go out copying Raiders like tehy did on KOTCS, using teh excuse that that is 'what the fans want'. We don't a lame rip off of something that's been done before, we like something we HAVEN'T seen before.

If anything, LC was a blantant plagerization of "Raiders". And Sean Connery didn't do too much for me, neither did the other characters or the storyline. I like the movie, but I think its inferior to KOTCS. At least Indy IV has the virtue of being different. At worst, it's an interesting failure, but I liked it a lot.


It's hard to compare Indiana Jones to "Star Wars" or "The Godfather" because the latter two are more interested in their story arcs and characterization than Indy is. Indy is pure adventure, while the other two are bigger in scope.

Long story arcs.... from Young Indy all the way to the Last crusade....?

Some would say that that was a long ass arc.

(A lot longer hourswise than the Godfather trilogy.)


And I would defintely dispute the use of the word "interesting" that you popped in before the word "failure".

And why just use the one descriptive?

I admire your restraint sir, when you could have rightfully chosen any of:

"Sterile, uninspired and over cynical then overtly insipid."
"Catastrophic, souless and immensely boring"
"Glossy, shallow as a puddle and intellectually bankrupt."
"The pinnacle of the art of being 'the anus of filmaking'."
"The kids movie that immasculated Indiana Jones."

Not to mention the classic "shit".

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
Long story arcs.... form Young Indy all the way to the Last crusade....?

Some would say that that was a long ass arc.

(A lot longer that the Godfather trilogy.) Aren't the movies the only canon?

Not as far as I know, Queeq's the man to ask there, but I've always believed that the series was canon..

But its more canon than the Godfather TV series at least...

I've never even heard of it, fortunatly.

Exactly. There wasn't one.

An Indy canon? Never heard of it before. So all is included.

I still think its an okay film but yeah its nowhere on the level of quality of the other movies.

Agreed

Same here.

Its just not Indy grade.

Unless it was lowered.

To Indy Grade B+

hehehe

Yes....

As in 'B+ullshit'.

Its tone was as removed from Indy movieness as T3 was from dark and gritty feeling of the 1st movie, with its "humour for all the family(TM)" scenes with Elton John sunglasses etc.

It started from the moment of the "Bad to the bone" bit on T2 and sucked forth from there.

And thats similar to the big problem with Indy IV.

Bleakness is one of the first Terminators flaws, imo. As bad as the future may be, it's never a total dystopia.

It's not FLAW, it's a choice. One I like. Same as in Blade Runner for instance, or Dark City and several other great films.

Im talking about the tone of the 1984 stuff too.

There was a nightmarish yet beautiful portrayal of what had to be a threatening landscape. Like with NY in the movie 'The Warriors'.
The Terminator was a fearsome, nightmarish machine of death in the 1st movie.

Cameron the made the mistake of literally making that machine a laughing stock with that musical sequence.
And then killed the Terminator's fearsomeness by trying to bring too much humanity (Effectively making the T-800 'more Arnie than Machine') to it.

And the what part of living in a post nuclear holocaust with machines putting all humans in concentration camps would be UNbleak, Will..?

And still, T2 was by far superior to T3.

No argument there.

Many Many suckances there.

The same grievous error as the intro scene in T2 but squared, and the shitness of the garage shop scene was something Ive tried to block out for the good of the movie.

Still, there's the great scene in the hospital between Sarah and Arnie, the nuclear blast scenes. Many redeeming factors IMHO.

For sure, it wasnt garbage.... but it was just like a step in the direction that was typified by T3, that makes T1 still my favorite.

It's very good. The thing that gets me is that Arnie was in a stage where he didn't wanna play baddies anymore.

Well I guess 'baddie' is a relative term is what Cameron tried to imply in the next movie. Good 'morals and machines' point. But the fewer deaths/lighter tone detracted somewhat, for me.

That's what I meant. Arnie went soft, had mvoiebabies and stuff and decided to kill less... ergo so did T2.

The PUSSY...!!!!!

Quite and then he went and did Batman and Robin....

Well that just about puts it in perspective, doesnt it...?

That was his 'concrete fence'.

So when his career was over he went into politics.

I reckon you're right.

It began on film.


What would have made me laugh, would have been if he went in for the liberals, instead of the predictable Neo Conservative image that a terminator belies.

Originally posted by queeq
And still, T2 was by far superior to T3.

Hell even T4 is better then T3.

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
Well I guess 'baddie' is a relative term is what Cameron tried to imply in the next movie. Good 'morals and machines' point. But the fewer deaths/lighter tone detracted somewhat, for me.

And also the Tin Man finally got a heart as Cameron says it.

Yeah... right. T was not a Tin Man... he was a robot with a strict programme.

Indeed.

Connor just programmed him.

To be a dick.

Hehehe

Originally posted by queeq
Yeah... right. T was not a Tin Man... he was a robot with a strict programme.

Totally was'nt the point........

Cameron on changing the tone for Terminator 2-

The Terminator associated with being a killing machine this is his purpose in life. Devoid of any emotion, remorse, or any kind of human social order he suddenly finds himself in a strange dilemma of his career. He can't kill anybody and he does'nt know why. He's got to figure it out.....So the Tin Man gets his heart

Still, it doesn't make sense. How can a programmed machine have ANY dilemma? Don't get me wrong, I like T2 a lot, but this humanization of machines is a major pitfall. Spielberg didn't get it right in AI, neither did Cameron in T2. He kinda ruined the very thing that made T1 such a succes. T was the robo equivalent of the shark in Jaws... you just don;t want to shark having feelings or a heart now, do you?

HAL in 2001 was a good example of how programming conflicted with the response of it's users. But HAL didn't have a heart, he just did was he was told and didn't understand why Dave turned against him.

Originally posted by queeq
Still, it doesn't make sense. How can a programmed machine have ANY dilemma? Don't get me wrong, I like T2 a lot, but this humanization of machines is a major pitfall.

First of all skynet did'nt re-programmed the T-101 thats in T2 it was Future John that did the re-programming and the John in the past is the one that started teaching it the emotions




Obvisouly no........but with the Termi in T2 its explain how and shown how its manage to start learning its emotions rather then automatically resort back to its killer insticts that Skynet programs them with.

A machinen CANNOT have emotions... it can only simulate them. That's the whole point. And it doesn't matter WHO programmed him, the point is: it's a machine, it runs only by its programme.

Yeah Queeqs right.

The learn mode of the CPU was just so it could be allowed to function away from Skynet's command etc.

It is not to be confused with Data's emotion chip from ST.

T2: "I know now why you cry.. ..but it is something I can never do."

That line definitely suggests that his was an intellectual understanding of the Human facet, but not being human, he could not do likewise...being without emotion.

Yup

Leaving them very Vulcanesque.

I wouldn't want it any other way.

The only way I can think to improve it is to throw in Jolene Blalock from the Mirror universe enterprise episode, fighting/lezzing off with Megan Fox in a vat of yogurt.

You need a girl friend.

Whats that line from Jurassic Park...?

"Im always on the lookout for a future ex-missus-Sadako."

So you're a fervent proponent of chaos?

Looks like it.

Quantum Physics seems to agree with it to, so hell. Why not...?

Well... it's kinda messy.

Wouldnt be chaos other wise.

Very true.

Hippopotamus anchovy.































































Sorry. Chaos made me say that.

But you said in a very ordered manner...

Such is the nature of some levels of chaos.

Parliment can be clearly recognised as chaos and shitty disorder at best/evil at worst, yet as its communicated often to us by well spoken politians, chaos seems civilised.

Politics make everything crooked look straight.

Hahahahaa!!! Trueism right there.

Oh the humanity!!!

Or what's left of it.

Heh. Aint that the sad truth..?!!

Quite.

Politics are a lot simple to CG monkeys.

They just wake up, bang the old lady, have something to eat, poop, throw said CG poop, and sleep.

Politicians are that active????

Yes.




































































'Cause it takes a lot of time and effort to f*** the world up THIS badly.

I thought they did that by doing nothing.

That tends to be the local burroughs.

But higher up you go, the more of a more proactive a douchebag, you become.
(Like in a lot of walks of life really.)

Ah, well that's news to me.

What... you didnt see the illegal war in Iraq going on right now that took all that effort and death, that was entered into on lies...?

That took some doing.

THere was a lot of corporate effort in that.

In this day of politics, the corporate and the political are hand in hand, it seems.

Corporate makes the effort, politics pretend to be in power.

ENRON

Exactly my point.

Yep

AGREEMENT!!!!!

Apparently, lots of paperwork relating to that and Bush and his buddies was in World Trade 7...

WT7??? WT..?

Yup.

The third building that fell.

Ah, okay.

Well..... we say "fell"..........

And you mean?

That the central core of it was clearly helped by explosives.

Ah... but still it fell.

It did indeed. At the speed of gravity, aided by a vacuum (measurable by the lack of time for floors to collide then bare down on the next set of floors. It was the 3rd steel framed building apparently to collapse like that "from a fire"...

The 1st and 2nd were the other towers. (Which also fell at gravity speed with no resistance, and fell in their own footprints exactly -minus explosively ejected matter- and looked like their cores had been taken out first.. A thick molten slag of steel was below both buildings when Jet fuel is proven not to be able to melt steel.
Demolitions explosives/cutting agents like thermite DO do that to steel. )

You seem to know a lot about it. Fly airplanes a lot?

Nope. But I know that jetfuel is 4/5ths kerosene which burns way cooler than is needed to liquify steel....heard alot of testmony from explosives experts.

"One does not need to be an archeologist to cast an opinion on the events in an Indy movie." is the answer to your obviously loaded question, though.

Hardly.

Oh you agree...? Or disagree...?

I never know what you're talking about, so I gave vague answers. I was hoping you wouldn't notice... usually you don't. Guess you're not stoned for once.

Hehahaha I usually can converse when stoned.

No, you THINK you can converse.

Fine.

Hehehe

*says nothing*

You're improving!

.

But not for long....

.

.......euro

artist

Smilie Central

blowup










toot

fear

Good one.

2guns ghost2 ghost2

Originally posted by queeq
Good one.

It was the "reaction to Indy IV" emoti.

Spielberg, Lucas and Bay should collaborate on Indy IV.




















































Its the only way you can possibly outdo the epic fail of Indy IV.
And records need breaking.

And so does my heart?

Unfortunately, yours, mine and every other Fedora wearing former idoliser of the Indyness' will be taken out in the Baysplosions.

BOOOHOOOOOO....

Yup. The future seems neither bright, nor orange.

Orange actually yes, because that is one of Bay's favourite colours.

Euuuuuurrrrrrrgh! Well maybe it'll be orange in a cinema that I wont be in, then.

While people with low IQs are in possession of cash still, Bay will always have a repeat audience.

(And whilst greedy fatcats keep selling him the rights to anything with a good name with which Bay can have fun sullying...)

Bay will only think he is making art with a capital A.

He definitely makes something of himself beginning with a captial A, alright....

You think he can spell?

He sure can't spell "Brawl" judging by the 1st movie.

I thought the fourth film translated well to the small screen, away from the hype and hubris.

THere was a hype?

I thought the dvd translated very well into being an ashtray, also.

I used it as a frisbee.

This gives me an idea for a new Indy thread.

Saw it.

Yes....liked the coaster application.

Thanks.

You were very stategic in your stating them to be upsidedown.
That would be quite the social faux pass to have those on display, even when clearly being used in a way that is derogatory to the disc.

It would be the signal of who is IN and who is OUT.

If you see the indy disc....runnnnn awaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyyy.....

I realised the other day that its perfectly possible to interpret Event Horizon in the the manner that the crew were driven mad when they inadvertantly stumbled upon the aliens of shit.

This is a perfectly viable reason for the crew going mad, killing each other, and making sure that the ship's compliment of Comedy Gophers were cruelly ejected into space. (Which explains the lack of Gopheric prescence in the movie)

Makes sense. So they main puprose of the crew was in the end to prevent TAOS from being made... interesting.

Its also makes sense of the ripping out of eyeballs,
and the "deliver me from hell" message too.

Suddenly the movies turns out to be very deep.

Yeah that last act was the weakest of the three, I'd always thought......


...........until this realisation that it was an eerily prophetic masterpiece.

They're coming outta the goddamn walls

Is this a stand up fight, or just another bughunt...?