Jump to content

Indiana Jones 4


Zombie
 Share

Recommended Posts

This would mean that it's so realistic that suspension of disbelief is unnecessary.

Also, I don't see how people can say this one's ridiculous but Raiders isn't. Are people so mired in American Christian culture that they can't tell fact from fiction anymore?

I find the timing of recent announcements by the Vatican suspiciously convenient in that respect.

As for suspension of disbelief, the only part of the film that I thought defied common sense where it mattered was the fridge scene.

Is that even possible?

(Damn this is hard to do without saying too much)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 119
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Just saw this.

I'd say 8/10. I enjoyed it, I left satisfied.

However, as far as Indy movies go, I think it's the worst one. In the realm of Indiana Jones movies, I'd give it a 6 or 7.

Honestly, if this movie had been made 10 years ago, for a number of reasons, I think it would have been up to par with the others, and maybe could have surpassed them, and that's pretty much the only major thing that held it back... The spark wasn't there quite as much as before.

Don't get me wrong, a lot of the action was great, and the fast paced moments in acting were good too, although a lot of the slower dialog, especially early on, seemed a little forced.

I enjoyed the chase scenes a lot. The fighting was great too, from the stuntmen to the actors. But I do think that when someone (Harrison especially) was explaining some plot device... I just wanted to space out. When things got slow, they really got slow.

Like in the Diner... I found myself not even pay attention to what Indy was saying, I payed attention the beer and the reactions of the people in the background. Then again maybe I wasn't supposed to follow what he meant? I heard key words and that was enough? Maybe so, who knows.

Another thing that bugged me was how disjointed the pacing seemed. I hardly remember where they went or why they were supposed to go there, which seems weird because they spent so much time explaining everything! Some things just seemed pointless and probably could have been cut IMO.

One last thing that really bugged me... The monkeys the monkeys the monkeys... wtf... I mean really lol. Does George Lucas have to have a moment like this in every damn post CGI movie? The prairie dogs were enough!

BUT I don't think I've laughed as much as I did in any Indy film as I did in the snake/rope scene, and the nuclear family part was ridiculous but I didn't care. In Temple of Doom, I think three people jumping out of a crashing plane with an inflatable raft in the mountains, and ending up down river in some Indian Jungle is ridiculous beyond belief, and why I love Indiana Jones movies in the first place. They are supposed to be like this.

I also enjoyed the diner part, and the motorcycle chase, the waterfall had me cracking up too...

Also I'm not exactly sure why, but I laughed at that picture of Sean Connery... Probably shouldn't have.

As for the plot... I didn't mind it, just some scenes that seemed a little arbitrary in comparison to the other films... Just some things missed their mark to me.

But overall, good movie. Worth seeing.

Oh yeah and the score... Not that great. I can remember Temple of Doom having a certain theme to it, as Raiders had the Ark theme (which we hear reprised in the warehouse) and Last Crusade had an awesome theme... But I can't even remember it the Crystal Skull had anything thematic behind it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(not a spoiler) Why were there so many moles in the beginning?

Overall a decent movie. One of the movies to come out in the past year or two.

It's Indiana Jones. You know what to expect, and it doesn't deviate much from the working formula, though I feel that where it did deviate, it went a little overboard, but not in a completely bad way - just another facet of the 1950s.

And Jones says "nukyular" instead of nuclear. It seems no one can ever get that right -_-

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This was the first movie to truly disturb me as far as tombs/artifacts go. I thought the crystal skulls were really creepy. The refrigerator thing was out there, but still hilarious. I'm more worried about people's ability to survive three waterfall drops.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

groundhogs

Was I the only one to hear the notes from Encounters at the end, during the big twister ?

I didn't catch it, but the whole scene was a very obvious Encounters homage (perhaps even a direct crossover), and it doesn't surprise me that Spielberg couldn't resist throwing in the musical cue to complete the reference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still haven't seen it, but to people ragging on its pacing and editing:

Go back and watch Raiders of the Lost Ark. I watched it a few days ago for the first time in 15 years, and was amazed at how utterly lost I was. Protags are here -- bam they're there -- wait where are they now? -- who was that? -- what just happened?

Its linearity seems extremely compromised, as it just jumps at random and only makes sense cognitively if you've seen it multiple times.

Unlike Temple of Doom/Last Crusade, which are both so incredibly easy to follow that they're just far more enjoyable. The characters don't just randomly appear in a new location, you see the journey there or at least have it mentioned before they make it.

That's why I rank Ark dead last in the original trilogy. Is the editing in that regard more similar to Ark or the other two?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find the timing of recent announcements by the Vatican suspiciously convenient in that respect.

As for suspension of disbelief' date=' the only part of the film that I thought defied common sense where it mattered was the fridge scene.

Is that even possible?

(Damn this is hard to do without saying too much)[/quote']

I could give you the whole "anything is possible" blah blah blah, but:

No, he should have been dead three times over from that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would have watched that. And enjoyed it more than Indy 4.

Do you even know how to enjoy movies anymore?

Indy 4, or any Indiana Jones movie are not movies you should think too much about. The trick is to turn off your brain and enjoy the ride. And as that kind of movie, it worked perfectly.

If you want to have a debate about the intellectual worth of a movie, go in a small theater where you can eat an apple and read the Serbian subtitles.

They never promised anything more than an adventure movie about an dude with a whip. They delivered. The plot wasn't any worse than any other Indiana Jones movie. It was on the same levels as the other, however you saw the first three with the eyes of a kid, and you never actually judged them as harshly as people are judging Indiana Jones 4 here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When they introduced the psychic and the premise of psychic military might, it reminded me of Metal Gear. At the moment I'm going through MGS3, so with the jungle setting it made me think of what a Metal Gear movie may be like if Indiana Jones replaced Solid Snake. The characters are kind of similar, but Indy isn't as bitter as Snake.

Then there's a scene where it suddenly felt kind of like a Metroid movie.

All around, this film reminds me more of Temple of Doom than Raiders or Last Crusade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you even know how to enjoy movies anymore?

Indy 4, or any Indiana Jones movie are not movies you should think too much about. The trick is to turn off your brain and enjoy the ride. And as that kind of movie, it worked perfectly.

If you want to have a debate about the intellectual worth of a movie, go in a small theater where you can eat an apple and read the Serbian subtitles.

They never promised anything more than an adventure movie about an dude with a whip. They delivered. The plot wasn't any worse than any other Indiana Jones movie. It was on the same levels as the other, however you saw the first three with the eyes of a kid, and you never actually judged them as harshly as people are judging Indiana Jones 4 here.

I agree with all this. Sure, it wasn't an amazing, groundbreaking movie, but it did what it set out to do: entertain. I don't think I could really rank the Indiana Jones movies if I wanted to, but Indy 4 was definitely on par with the older ones, in my opinion.

I mean, seriously. All the other movies had equally ridiculous parts in them. They're not trying to be believable. They're trying to be entertaining.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem was is that I was willing to believe it, but after a certain point they began not trying. I did enjoy the movie, but I would have enjoyed it more if it were less like a B-Movie and more like Indiana.

Indiana Jones is SUPPOSED TO BE A B MOVIE.

That's he big idea: A simple relaxing movie. The first ones were made as a parallel to adventure films, this one would have betrayed its origins if it has been any different, and it would have been a bad Indiana Jones movie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Indiana Jones is SUPPOSED TO BE A B MOVIE.

That's he big idea: A simple relaxing movie. The first ones were made as a parallel to adventure films, this one would have betrayed its origins if it has been any different, and it would have been a bad Indiana Jones movie.

No. The first ones were homages to 1930s serials. This one was an homage to 50's b-movies. I didn't like the change in style, so sue me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No. The first ones were homages to 1930s serials. This one was an homage to 50's b-movies. I didn't like the change in style, so sue me.

What was so different with this one?

The pacing? It seemed pretty close.

The plot? Mystical artifact with supernatural powers, sounds about right.

The action? Fight scenes, kinda gross types of deaths, and traps in a ruin, there again.

What was so different between this and all three other movies (which I watched fairly recently thanks to global.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the record, I don't disagree the movie was mildly entertaining, but it failed completely as an Indy movie.

A B movie is not a "simple relaxing movie." A B movie is a cheap, half-assed flick made for people who want to go to the drive-in and not feel bad about missing most of it. Indy is based on the action serials of the 30s and 40s, not the SciFi horror crap in the 50s.

The B-movie feel might have worked given the timeframe, except that they took it to the point of absurdity.

Indiana Jones always stuck to the realm of the plausible, mixing in a little fantastical of which Indy was always skeptical until the end. This movie gives the plausible the finger in the first 15 minutes. A 5 year old knows that fridge thing is bullshit.

Indiana Jones was always supposed to be an ordinary guy who happened to get into trouble when out digging in the dirt. He got out of his scrapes with mostly luck and quick wit. In this movie, he's just superhuman. This script would've been far better served for a James Bond movie than an Indy film.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the record, I don't disagree the movie was mildly entertaining, but it failed completely as an Indy movie.

A B movie is not a "simple relaxing movie." A B movie is a cheap, half-assed flick made for people who want to go to the drive-in and not feel bad about missing most of it. Indy is based on the action serials of the 30s and 40s, not the SciFi horror crap in the 50s.

The B-movie feel might have worked given the timeframe, except that they took it to the point of absurdity.

Indiana Jones always stuck to the realm of the plausible, mixing in a little fantastical of which Indy was always skeptical until the end. This movie gives the plausible the finger in the first 15 minutes. A 5 year old knows that fridge thing is bullshit.

Indiana Jones was always supposed to be an ordinary guy who happened to get into trouble when out digging in the dirt. He got out of his scrapes with mostly luck and quick wit. In this movie, he's just superhuman. This script would've been far better served for a James Bond movie than an Indy film.

While I don't deny the fridge was a stretch, they did show that it was Lead lined, and it was blown away at the first shock wave, and not the second. However, in the second movie, he survived someone having his hand in his chest. That one was a lot less plausible if you know a bit of medicine.

Also, as for the plot in general, visitors bringing knowledge is not only a frequent theory, it is a respectable one considering the unique spikes in technological evolution mankind has known. The pre-colombian religions in south america have interestingly common references to celestial beings, chariots made of gold, and other "alien-like" elements. I personally believe that the proof of the existence of aliens may very well rest in our past, rather than in the sky.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the record, I don't disagree the movie was mildly entertaining, but it failed completely as an Indy movie.

A B movie is not a "simple relaxing movie." A B movie is a cheap, half-assed flick made for people who want to go to the drive-in and not feel bad about missing most of it. Indy is based on the action serials of the 30s and 40s, not the SciFi horror crap in the 50s.

The B-movie feel might have worked given the timeframe, except that they took it to the point of absurdity.

Indiana Jones always stuck to the realm of the plausible, mixing in a little fantastical of which Indy was always skeptical until the end. This movie gives the plausible the finger in the first 15 minutes. A 5 year old knows that fridge thing is bullshit.

Indiana Jones was always supposed to be an ordinary guy who happened to get into trouble when out digging in the dirt. He got out of his scrapes with mostly luck and quick wit. In this movie, he's just superhuman. This script would've been far better served for a James Bond movie than an Indy film.

I think it's pretty much a given that you fail at movie-going.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...