Linespider5ALL HAIL KING KILLMONGERRegistered Userregular
Pretty sure if they'd stuck to Roswell-style aliens, it would've been a lot better.
Then they could've had, like, the Americans and the Russians discover a hidden underground alien bunker in the desert and put aside their differences to survive a scary, sci-fi themed Temple of Doom style scenario. We still get a cool villain, and don't feel that weird uneasy sensation of trying to vilify a nation we never officially went to war against or bombed the crap out of, although they did represent a massive threat during that time.
Indy, looking at alien artifact: "The pilot wasn't trying to get home. He was trying to get...here. These creatures had an outpost hidden in the Gobi desert. For all we know it could still be running..."
Done.
0
Options
Alfred J. Kwakis it because you were insultedwhen I insulted your hair?Registered Userregular
I don't know, I just don't think aliens and Indiana Jones go together very well
I was going to ask if anyone else has seen the Plinkett Indiana Jones 4 review, but it looks like I'm running a little late
the beginning of part 2 of the review really nailed it for me - Indy as a character just isn't interesting (love interest? son? who cares!), everyone wants to see him do cool shit. Plus, the alien plot was just silly, and all the stupid CGI scene (or basically anything that happens in the jungle) completely ruined the movie for me.
I'm watchin' it
per usual skipping past the "gross comedy" stuff
sigh
I love it when he has commentary footage to work with though, heh
So It Goes on
0
Options
Linespider5ALL HAIL KING KILLMONGERRegistered Userregular
I don't know, I just don't think aliens and Indiana Jones go together very well
As long as the Spirit of Adventure is there, and there's proper needs to both Real Danger and Villainy, I think it could work.
Think of Temple of Doom. Weird underground maze of death, danger, slavery, torture and cult-based events and rituals.
Now, take that maze, and make it an ancient, well-tunneled complex with quasi metallic trim. Make the cult leaders marooned extraterrestrials who have gone a bit batshit trapped on the earth so long and have slide to barbarism, cannibalism, and abduction. Give them human pets or cronies who serve them on the surface and ensure a quiet flow of human resources into the complex while maintaining a low profile for the general region.
All we need's an artifact plot device, and in this case the artifact leads Indy to this underground city. Just so happens the artifact also is something the aliens actually need, but in the end of the movie it's revealed the underground city is home to an intergalactic war criminal and the 'good' aliens show up and collect the bad ones.
No secret 'aliens were the gardeners of humanity' subplot. No 'let's invalidate modern archaeology/history of the planet' vibe. Just evil, marooned aliens who decided they could wait out the warrants on them by holing up under a desert and eating people until everything blew over. Indy and friends walk into an unexpected situation waaaay over their head, hijinks ensue, deus ex machina, artifact for the museum-which, by the way, somehow ceases to have any unusual qualities and instead seems to be an intricately carved stone and nothing more.
0
Options
Casually HardcoreOnce an Asshole. Trying to be better.Registered Userregular
So I watched
YellowBrickRoad
All in all...I liked it...I think.
I mean they have some good things going for it. But it also have some bad things going for it. The ending was pretty much yuck plastered all over the storyboard.
I don't know, anyone else seen it?
0
Options
Casually HardcoreOnce an Asshole. Trying to be better.Registered Userregular
Read it, it was well done. It's sad that they had to remake that movie simply to make the leads more attractive to the American moviegoer.
Skimmed it and I honestly don't like what I'm seeing.
The main lead female in the book (I only read the first book), was by far one of the strongest point of the book. Once you get past the horror (there are scenes where I almost had to put the book down in disgust) and honestly think about what makes her different from other female leads....well you just realize that it's simply brilliant and you'll wonder why there isn't more female leads like this.
Speaking of old movies/musicals;
Around the Christmas season, my family usually gets together and watches a few old Bing Crosby movies (my Dad really likes them). White Christmas, Going My Way, etc. Last night it was The Bells of St Mary's.
The happy ending is literally a woman finding out that she has tuberculosis. It works in context, but it's still a bit of a wtf moment, especially because you know that it's what the film is leading to. I like to think someone took a bet that they couldn't make a legit happy ending based around someone finding out they have a serious illness.
Tonight, it's going to be a bit of a change of pace; Die Hard.
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
the beginning of part 2 of the review really nailed it for me - Indy as a character just isn't interesting (love interest? son? who cares!), everyone wants to see him do cool shit. Plus, the alien plot was just silly, and all the stupid CGI scene (or basically anything that happens in the jungle) completely ruined the movie for me.
I think the observation that the entire movie blows its wad in the first 10 minutes is rightly why this movie is a huge ball of suck. Everything is laid out, nothing after that moment is a mystery, and from there on it's just a series of pretenses to get from set piece to set piece. There's no sense of danger or discovery because you already know everything coming your way. It's a rail-shooter, which is ironic coming from a series that literally had moments of actual rail-shooting (the finale of Temple of Doom).
Then, you add in the fact that you have this cumbersome and rather large supporting entourage (LaBeouf, Allen, Hurt, Winstone) that largely do fuck-all. They have no role in the plot at almost any point, and are given nothing to do. At least the first time Marion showed up Indy needed her for her ornament that led to Tanis, and then she became entangled in Belloq's plot. KOTCS, however, is like an endless parade of characters that don't mean shit.
There's so many things wrong with this film, but I think at least rectifying just these would have gone quite a long way.
The jungle stuff ruined it for me. I mean, I wasn't keen on aliens but whatever, I can live with that. But just the entire jungle sequence was so... so painfully stupid looking and meaningless. I wish people would figure out that CGI effects still look way too fake to be used so extensively.
I don't know, I just don't think aliens and Indiana Jones go together very well
They don't, and something much better could have been used, but Lucas was apparently adamant that it HAD to be aliens, despite the fact he had no fucking story in his head to explain why. I'm disappointed, but no longer shocked at this point in his fundamental ineptitude.
Still, despite aliens in a Jones film being much like a square peg in a round hole, you can sometimes take a hammer to that square peg, meaning that if Spielberg could have replicated the sense of fun and adventure that made the first three films so effortlessly charming, we probably would have forgiven something as weird as aliens. Instead, Spielberg saw that square peg, reached for a hammer, but pulled out a putty knife and a shoe polisher instead.
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
CGI usually much more expensive than practical filmmaking. That's one of the big reasons I hate Robert Zemeckis' ceaseless stream of photorealistic CG horrors.
"Hey, we're going to pay Angelina Jolie lots of money to do mo-cap for our movie, then spend a lot more money to make it look like she's a golden demon that looks exactly like Angelina Jolie."
Aliens in that capacity don't work in Indiana Jones because the Indiana Jones universe is one in which Christian mythology is largely true. The Ark is real, the Holy Grail is real. And if these things are real, then how can you also have space aliens being the architects of humanity? The film would have worked much better if it was a stand-alone piece that had nothing to do with Indy. Still flawed for various reasons, but you at least wouldn't have had the stark thematic inconsistencies to deal with.
Temple of Doom is a little awkward for similar reasons, though at least it still revolves around religious mythology and you can kinda-sorta pretend Kali is the devil or some evil demon not inconsistent with Christianity.
Crystal Skull is like if the final Harry Potter film/book had Harry running around trying to tag Voldemort with laser guns.
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
It is like when those old serial characters and comic book characters attempted to evolve with the times and started introducing retarded crap like aliens. They didn't work because those characters were built for completely different adventures and not shitty science fiction. For example, the Shadow didn't work when they gave him a robot body.
0
Options
The JudgeThe Terwilliger CurvesRegistered Userregular
Had EuroTrip on while wrapping some gifts last night. Forgot about the standard residual effect of 'Scotty Doesn't Know' getting stuck in my head for a few days.
Last pint: Turmoil CDA / Barley Brown's - Untappd: TheJudge_PDX
Had EuroTrip on while wrapping some gifts last night. Forgot about the standard residual effect of 'Scotty Doesn't Know' getting stuck in my head for a few days.
That scene is the best part of the film. One of the funniest thing I've seen in ages.
I just saw a Mickey Mouse cartoon from 1937 that happened to be on television. I'm always amazed when I see these. How was an entire empire built on this? I guess the animation is good but they're never remotely funny, interesting, or entertaining. I can't even see kids liking that stuff.
But then I have to remind myself of the era. There was no television, people were listening to the radio. Any sort of moving picture and sound combination must have been amazing.
Snow White and Wizard of Oz came out in the 30's. Casablanca came out in '42. Transformers: Dark of the Moon, and Fred 2: Night of the Living Fred, came out in 2011. Just sayin'!
Linespider5ALL HAIL KING KILLMONGERRegistered Userregular
edited December 2011
I've probably said too much about my willingness to accept extraterrestrials in an Indy flick. Thing I don't get, though, is this weird idea that Indiana Jones movies would graduate from their pulpy serial origins to becoming sci-fi B-movies. That's just dumb. It expresses an assumption that what an Indiana Jones movie is has an integral relationship to how action/adventure movies were actually portrayed in the time of the movie's setting. That's a conceit that does nothing to enhance or maintain the reasons why people go to see an Indiana Jones movie, and I'm not sure I can think of a situation where the idea would be true. I hesitate and shudder to think of what an Indiana Jones movie would be in the seventies or eighties by the logic provided in this concept. I suppose it would be Mutt Williams doing a Die Hard pastiche. As an Indiana Jones movie.
I've probably said too much about my willingness to accept extraterrestrials in an Indy flick. Thing I don't get, though, is this weird idea that Indiana Jones movies would graduate from their pulpy serial origins to becoming sci-fi B-movies. That's just dumb. It expresses an assumption that what an Indiana Jones movie is has an integral relationship to how action/adventure movies were actually portrayed in the time of the movie's setting. That's a conceit that does nothing to enhance or maintain the reasons why people go to see an Indiana Jones movie, and I'm not sure I can think of a situation where the idea would be true. I hesitate and shudder to think of what an Indiana Jones movie would be in the seventies or eighties by the logic provided in this concept. I suppose it would be Mutt Williams doing a Die Hard pastiche. As an Indiana Jones movie.
that line is just George Lucas trying to justify his stupid stupid ideas
it makes no sense and Spielberg definitely held his nose and did it anyway because George is his friend or something
he must be nicer these days cause it sounds like in the past he was more willing to say no to those dumb ideas
I watch Plinkett's reviews in large part because of the comedy, the voice, the character/world he creates so I'm surprised that lots of people complain about that aspect of the work.
Sometimes the sketches do go on a little long, I guess.
"Hey, we're going to pay Angelina Jolie lots of money to do mo-cap for our movie, then spend a lot more money to make it look like she's a golden demon that looks exactly like Angelina Jolie."
Fuck that stupid shit right in the nostrils.
Let us not forget to fuck Avatar in its blue nostrils, a movie that spent gobs of money to make photorealistic New Zealand forests and photorealistic people in blue makeup.
So I get why these early musicals and Disney cartoons were popular. They were better than reading the newspaper. But it still doesn't explain why these things still have fans today. They're god awful. I put silent films in this category too. Although, I suppose silent films do have only a small group of real enthusiasts today. But still, quite a few people still like musicals and old Disney shorts today. I don't think that's something that I'll ever understand.
Is that difficult to grasp why people appreciate silent films? There's a lot that have amazing imagery. Same with musicals from eras past, like the Umbrellas of Cherbourg(sing talking).
it's like when someone refuses to watch anything in black and white
"Hey, we're going to pay Angelina Jolie lots of money to do mo-cap for our movie, then spend a lot more money to make it look like she's a golden demon that looks exactly like Angelina Jolie."
Fuck that stupid shit right in the nostrils.
Let us not forget to fuck Avatar in its blue furry nostrils, a movie that spent gobs of money to make photorealistic New Zealand forests and photorealistic people in blue makeup.
That didn't bother me nearly as much as the jungle chase in Indiana Jones 4
Cause going in you know the whole movie is CG and a whole different planet with giant monsters etc! and they did the whole movement/face capture thing which was pretty neat
0
Options
VariableMouth CongressStroke Me Lady FameRegistered Userregular
I think saying aliens couldn't work with indiana jones is ignoring the actual problems with the 4th movie. I don't see any reason that a good indiana jones movie can't involve aliens.
a shit movie is going to be shit whether it's aliens or nazi's with the shroud of turin
I mean they have some good things going for it. But it also have some bad things going for it. The ending was pretty much yuck plastered all over the storyboard.
I don't know, anyone else seen it?
I watched this and really, really enjoyed the first two thirds of it. I just didn't think it paid off quite strongly enough in the end. The mood built was incredible, probably peaking when the girl hordes food and the aftermath.
There's a lot to like in this. A lot. But I think some of what they were implying about what was going on went just a tiny bit over my head.
Question to anybody who has seen both the Swedish Dragon Tattoo film and the Fincher remake:
Which film is better if you take into account that you have to read the entirety of the foreign one and thus lose a big chunk of the quality of acting?
Which is better if you can get past that aspect of it?
I would probably have seen the original by now if I hadn't heard Fincher was doing a remake, but the idea of being able to watch the film rather than read it is appealing.
Is this really a problem? Every single person I ever try to take to a subtitled movie says this. Is it really that hard to read from your peripheral vision? I'm NOT fucking with you, real question here put before the crowd.
If so, do you think there might be a way of titling a movie that would mitigate it?
I'm not convinced that the fourth movie couldn't have turned an iconic archetype into an actual character. I'd argue that's exactly what happened with Kirk when he moved from the series to the movies. The 4th film could have been perfectly used to focus on that transition. And I think the first third or so of the movie seems to follow that direction, and works because of it.
But I agree that once they leave Harvard the whole film becomes a huge disappointing mess. At first it's just because the movie loses any thematic resonance, because there's really no theme there anymore. But largely, because none of the characters serve any purpose, thematically or story-wise. They're not even there to be a sounding board for Indy or to get him into trouble. They're just there for no other reason than to pay those actors it seems.
I think saying aliens couldn't work with indiana jones is ignoring the actual problems with the 4th movie. I don't see any reason that a good indiana jones movie can't involve aliens.
a shit movie is going to be shit whether it's aliens or nazi's with the shroud of turin
Really, the issue over the aliens is kind of like bitching about pistachios in your strawberry ice cream, where your strawberry ice cream is actually made of gorilla feces and sheep brains.
There's an issue about how the pistachios may not mesh with the fruit, but there are bigger problems than just that.
0
Options
VariableMouth CongressStroke Me Lady FameRegistered Userregular
I think saying aliens couldn't work with indiana jones is ignoring the actual problems with the 4th movie. I don't see any reason that a good indiana jones movie can't involve aliens.
a shit movie is going to be shit whether it's aliens or nazi's with the shroud of turin
Really, the issue over the aliens is kind of like bitching about pistachios in your strawberry ice cream, where your strawberry ice cream is actually made of gorilla feces and sheep brains.
There's an issue about how the pistachios may not mesh with the fruit, but there are bigger problems than just that.
Question to anybody who has seen both the Swedish Dragon Tattoo film and the Fincher remake:
Which film is better if you take into account that you have to read the entirety of the foreign one and thus lose a big chunk of the quality of acting?
Which is better if you can get past that aspect of it?
I would probably have seen the original by now if I hadn't heard Fincher was doing a remake, but the idea of being able to watch the film rather than read it is appealing.
Is this really a problem? Every single person I ever try to take to a subtitled movie says this. Is it really that hard to read from your peripheral vision? I'm NOT fucking with you, real question here put before the crowd.
If so, do you think there might be a way of titling a movie that would mitigate it?
Yes. With subtitles on, I read the subtitles instead of watching the actors. You don't read from your peripheral vision. Even if the words are at the edge of where you are looking, you are concentrating on them.
0
Options
AstaerethIn the belly of the beastRegistered Userregular
I didn't mind the aliens, because to me a big element of the first three films is the juxtaposition of human evil with immense, unknowable supernatural power. Each of the original trilogy features everybody, including Indy, running around stealing, cheating, lying, and murdering in the service of vanity and greed--but when they finally arrive at the object they've been searching for, they find it vastly above their pay grade. It dwarfs them, in a spiritual sense. The end of the first one isn't an action finale, it's Indy tied to a post while God does His thing.
So I felt like the aliens served the exact same purpose: you think they'll give you knowledge, but they will explode your face instead, you can't handle it. And the shot of the UFO flying off was the only part of the whole movie that really felt on a par with the previous three, a true moment of wonder and awe at how the universe is so much larger than one guy in a hat.
It was everything else that was wrong with the movie, not the basic decision to include aliens.
That didn't bother me nearly as much as the jungle chase in Indiana Jones 4.
The really infuriating thing about how bad the jungle chase looks is that the production actually went to Hawaii (as a stand in for Peru), found some jungle-ish land, cleared paths for filming the chase, dressed the set with additional jungle folliage to beef up the look, and filmed. On location.
And then in post they add so much CGI crap that they might as well have just done it on a green screen for all you can tell.
Question to anybody who has seen both the Swedish Dragon Tattoo film and the Fincher remake:
Which film is better if you take into account that you have to read the entirety of the foreign one and thus lose a big chunk of the quality of acting?
Which is better if you can get past that aspect of it?
I would probably have seen the original by now if I hadn't heard Fincher was doing a remake, but the idea of being able to watch the film rather than read it is appealing.
Is this really a problem? Every single person I ever try to take to a subtitled movie says this. Is it really that hard to read from your peripheral vision? I'm NOT fucking with you, real question here put before the crowd.
If so, do you think there might be a way of titling a movie that would mitigate it?
Yes. With subtitles on, I read the subtitles instead of watching the actors. You don't read from your peripheral vision. Even if the words are at the edge of where you are looking, you are concentrating on them.
this is weird
I had zero problems watching the movie with subtitles and being able to watch the actors
How could anyone not like this Silly Symphonies short?
Because it's pointless nonsense? I could only skim that, but the "story", such as it is, seems to be some sort of romance between humanoid instruments. There were loads of these pointless musical shorts in the early goings of animation. They're all unbearable.
I watched a clip of Fantasia on YouTube about a week ago. The Sorcerer's Apprentice one. What a steaming pile of pretentious crap that was. And boring as the day is long. Though not as dull as these completely pointless musical shorts like the one you embedded.
As a kid, I went to see Fantasia as part of a school trip. And even then, I was falling asleep and thinking how ridiculously up it's own ass this movie is. "Why can't we just watch Willie Wonka and the Chocolate Factory" or something? Everything had to be a fucking "educational" thing. Fantasia was being passed off as high art, cultural stuff. No. It was just boring and pointless and had no story.
I missed Tamara Drewe when it came out a couple of years ago, but caught it last night on TV. It's a wicked little comedy about writers and sex in a gorgeous bit of the English countryside, starring Gemma Arterton's glorious bum. Based on a quite wonderful graphic novel by Posy Simmonds, I liked it a lot.
How could anyone not like this Silly Symphonies short?
Because it's pointless nonsense? I could only skim that, but the "story", such as it is, seems to be some sort of romance between humanoid instruments. There were loads of these pointless musical shorts in the early goings of animation. They're all unbearable.
I watched a clip of Fantasia on YouTube about a week ago. The Sorcerer's Apprentice one. What a steaming pile of pretentious crap that was. And boring as the day is long. Though not as dull as these completely pointless musical shorts like the one you embedded.
As a kid, I went to see Fantasia as part of a school trip. And even then, I was falling asleep and thinking how ridiculously up it's own ass this movie is. "Why can't we just watch Willie Wonka and the Chocolate Factory" or something? Everything had to be a fucking "educational" thing. Fantasia was being passed off as high art, cultural stuff. No. It was just boring and pointless and had no story.
Saying something is pointless nonsense doesn't really seem to be saying much. Same with pretentious and/or boring.
Posts
Then they could've had, like, the Americans and the Russians discover a hidden underground alien bunker in the desert and put aside their differences to survive a scary, sci-fi themed Temple of Doom style scenario. We still get a cool villain, and don't feel that weird uneasy sensation of trying to vilify a nation we never officially went to war against or bombed the crap out of, although they did represent a massive threat during that time.
Indy, looking at alien artifact: "The pilot wasn't trying to get home. He was trying to get...here. These creatures had an outpost hidden in the Gobi desert. For all we know it could still be running..."
Done.
I'm watchin' it
per usual skipping past the "gross comedy" stuff
sigh
I love it when he has commentary footage to work with though, heh
As long as the Spirit of Adventure is there, and there's proper needs to both Real Danger and Villainy, I think it could work.
Think of Temple of Doom. Weird underground maze of death, danger, slavery, torture and cult-based events and rituals.
Now, take that maze, and make it an ancient, well-tunneled complex with quasi metallic trim. Make the cult leaders marooned extraterrestrials who have gone a bit batshit trapped on the earth so long and have slide to barbarism, cannibalism, and abduction. Give them human pets or cronies who serve them on the surface and ensure a quiet flow of human resources into the complex while maintaining a low profile for the general region.
All we need's an artifact plot device, and in this case the artifact leads Indy to this underground city. Just so happens the artifact also is something the aliens actually need, but in the end of the movie it's revealed the underground city is home to an intergalactic war criminal and the 'good' aliens show up and collect the bad ones.
No secret 'aliens were the gardeners of humanity' subplot. No 'let's invalidate modern archaeology/history of the planet' vibe. Just evil, marooned aliens who decided they could wait out the warrants on them by holing up under a desert and eating people until everything blew over. Indy and friends walk into an unexpected situation waaaay over their head, hijinks ensue, deus ex machina, artifact for the museum-which, by the way, somehow ceases to have any unusual qualities and instead seems to be an intricately carved stone and nothing more.
YellowBrickRoad
All in all...I liked it...I think.
I mean they have some good things going for it. But it also have some bad things going for it. The ending was pretty much yuck plastered all over the storyboard.
I don't know, anyone else seen it?
Skimmed it and I honestly don't like what I'm seeing.
The main lead female in the book (I only read the first book), was by far one of the strongest point of the book. Once you get past the horror (there are scenes where I almost had to put the book down in disgust) and honestly think about what makes her different from other female leads....well you just realize that it's simply brilliant and you'll wonder why there isn't more female leads like this.
Around the Christmas season, my family usually gets together and watches a few old Bing Crosby movies (my Dad really likes them). White Christmas, Going My Way, etc. Last night it was The Bells of St Mary's.
The happy ending is literally a woman finding out that she has tuberculosis. It works in context, but it's still a bit of a wtf moment, especially because you know that it's what the film is leading to. I like to think someone took a bet that they couldn't make a legit happy ending based around someone finding out they have a serious illness.
Tonight, it's going to be a bit of a change of pace; Die Hard.
I think the observation that the entire movie blows its wad in the first 10 minutes is rightly why this movie is a huge ball of suck. Everything is laid out, nothing after that moment is a mystery, and from there on it's just a series of pretenses to get from set piece to set piece. There's no sense of danger or discovery because you already know everything coming your way. It's a rail-shooter, which is ironic coming from a series that literally had moments of actual rail-shooting (the finale of Temple of Doom).
Then, you add in the fact that you have this cumbersome and rather large supporting entourage (LaBeouf, Allen, Hurt, Winstone) that largely do fuck-all. They have no role in the plot at almost any point, and are given nothing to do. At least the first time Marion showed up Indy needed her for her ornament that led to Tanis, and then she became entangled in Belloq's plot. KOTCS, however, is like an endless parade of characters that don't mean shit.
There's so many things wrong with this film, but I think at least rectifying just these would have gone quite a long way.
like they didn't have the budget for it, come on
They don't, and something much better could have been used, but Lucas was apparently adamant that it HAD to be aliens, despite the fact he had no fucking story in his head to explain why. I'm disappointed, but no longer shocked at this point in his fundamental ineptitude.
Still, despite aliens in a Jones film being much like a square peg in a round hole, you can sometimes take a hammer to that square peg, meaning that if Spielberg could have replicated the sense of fun and adventure that made the first three films so effortlessly charming, we probably would have forgiven something as weird as aliens. Instead, Spielberg saw that square peg, reached for a hammer, but pulled out a putty knife and a shoe polisher instead.
CGI usually much more expensive than practical filmmaking. That's one of the big reasons I hate Robert Zemeckis' ceaseless stream of photorealistic CG horrors.
"Hey, we're going to pay Angelina Jolie lots of money to do mo-cap for our movie, then spend a lot more money to make it look like she's a golden demon that looks exactly like Angelina Jolie."
Fuck that stupid shit right in the nostrils.
Temple of Doom is a little awkward for similar reasons, though at least it still revolves around religious mythology and you can kinda-sorta pretend Kali is the devil or some evil demon not inconsistent with Christianity.
Crystal Skull is like if the final Harry Potter film/book had Harry running around trying to tag Voldemort with laser guns.
That scene is the best part of the film. One of the funniest thing I've seen in ages.
Snow White and Wizard of Oz came out in the 30's. Casablanca came out in '42. Transformers: Dark of the Moon, and Fred 2: Night of the Living Fred, came out in 2011. Just sayin'!
that line is just George Lucas trying to justify his stupid stupid ideas
it makes no sense and Spielberg definitely held his nose and did it anyway because George is his friend or something
he must be nicer these days cause it sounds like in the past he was more willing to say no to those dumb ideas
Sometimes the sketches do go on a little long, I guess.
it's like when someone refuses to watch anything in black and white
That didn't bother me nearly as much as the jungle chase in Indiana Jones 4
Cause going in you know the whole movie is CG and a whole different planet with giant monsters etc! and they did the whole movement/face capture thing which was pretty neat
a shit movie is going to be shit whether it's aliens or nazi's with the shroud of turin
I watched this and really, really enjoyed the first two thirds of it. I just didn't think it paid off quite strongly enough in the end. The mood built was incredible, probably peaking when the girl hordes food and the aftermath.
There's a lot to like in this. A lot. But I think some of what they were implying about what was going on went just a tiny bit over my head.
Is this really a problem? Every single person I ever try to take to a subtitled movie says this. Is it really that hard to read from your peripheral vision? I'm NOT fucking with you, real question here put before the crowd.
If so, do you think there might be a way of titling a movie that would mitigate it?
I host a podcast about movies.
But I agree that once they leave Harvard the whole film becomes a huge disappointing mess. At first it's just because the movie loses any thematic resonance, because there's really no theme there anymore. But largely, because none of the characters serve any purpose, thematically or story-wise. They're not even there to be a sounding board for Indy or to get him into trouble. They're just there for no other reason than to pay those actors it seems.
Really, the issue over the aliens is kind of like bitching about pistachios in your strawberry ice cream, where your strawberry ice cream is actually made of gorilla feces and sheep brains.
There's an issue about how the pistachios may not mesh with the fruit, but there are bigger problems than just that.
sure, that works
Yes. With subtitles on, I read the subtitles instead of watching the actors. You don't read from your peripheral vision. Even if the words are at the edge of where you are looking, you are concentrating on them.
So I felt like the aliens served the exact same purpose: you think they'll give you knowledge, but they will explode your face instead, you can't handle it. And the shot of the UFO flying off was the only part of the whole movie that really felt on a par with the previous three, a true moment of wonder and awe at how the universe is so much larger than one guy in a hat.
It was everything else that was wrong with the movie, not the basic decision to include aliens.
The really infuriating thing about how bad the jungle chase looks is that the production actually went to Hawaii (as a stand in for Peru), found some jungle-ish land, cleared paths for filming the chase, dressed the set with additional jungle folliage to beef up the look, and filmed. On location.
And then in post they add so much CGI crap that they might as well have just done it on a green screen for all you can tell.
this is weird
I had zero problems watching the movie with subtitles and being able to watch the actors
edit: Or this Disney cartoon?
Because it's pointless nonsense? I could only skim that, but the "story", such as it is, seems to be some sort of romance between humanoid instruments. There were loads of these pointless musical shorts in the early goings of animation. They're all unbearable.
I watched a clip of Fantasia on YouTube about a week ago. The Sorcerer's Apprentice one. What a steaming pile of pretentious crap that was. And boring as the day is long. Though not as dull as these completely pointless musical shorts like the one you embedded.
As a kid, I went to see Fantasia as part of a school trip. And even then, I was falling asleep and thinking how ridiculously up it's own ass this movie is. "Why can't we just watch Willie Wonka and the Chocolate Factory" or something? Everything had to be a fucking "educational" thing. Fantasia was being passed off as high art, cultural stuff. No. It was just boring and pointless and had no story.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3