[quote]inthego wrote:
WolBarret wrote:
To everyone: Just go see the movie. It’s only $9.50 or so. Watch the movie in A MOVIE THEATER and have fun.
Would you much rather spend your money on a Matthew McCaunehey movie?
Like Reign of Fire?[/quote]
No, more like Fool’s gold or Sahara.
[quote]WolBarret wrote:
inthego wrote:
WolBarret wrote:
To everyone: Just go see the movie. It’s only $9.50 or so. Watch the movie in A MOVIE THEATER and have fun.
Would you much rather spend your money on a Matthew McCaunehey movie?
Like Reign of Fire?
No, more like Fool’s gold or Sahara.[/quote]
lol
I saw it this afternoon and I thought it was GREAT! I was totally satisfied and thoroughly entertained, worth every penny in my opinion.
I just don’t know why anyone is so upset over this movie, it was everything Indiana Jones is supposed to be, great action, great acting, and that familiar Indiana Jones charm.
All the haters need to STFU, it was a great movie and a great ending to the Inidana Jones series.
It’s not a great movie. It’s possibly not even a good movie, but it did keep me entertained for 2 hours. Some parts, as mentioned by Shaved, are so over the top or superfluous that they are laughable. I didn’t think they quite played up the evil Russian angle, as they did with the Nazis.
[quote]skaz05 wrote:
I saw it this afternoon and I thought it was GREAT! I was totally satisfied and thoroughly entertained, worth every penny in my opinion.
I just don’t know why anyone is so upset over this movie, it was everything Indiana Jones is supposed to be, great action, great acting, and that familiar Indiana Jones charm.
All the haters need to STFU, it was a great movie and a great ending to the Inidana Jones series.[/quote]
Are you sure we watched the same movie?
[quote]buck mulligan wrote:
Some parts, as mentioned by Shaved, are so over the top or superfluous that they are laughable. [/quote]
Like…say…
Independence Day?
Spiderman?
Transformers?
Mission: Impossible?
Jurassic Park?
Star Wars?
Are all these movies not in reality 'Over the top?" None of it is even remotely possible so what makes them any different? I saw it last night and I also thought the movies as a whole was great. I though Shia Lebouf did a good job and gets better every time I see him. There was a preview of his new movie “Snake Eyes” that look really good. I will say the end is a little out there but all -in-all the movie was it was suppose to be.
as a side note the first 30 - 45 min were just as much for Lucas him self than they were for any one. If you have seen American Graffiti you know what im talking about.
[quote]skaz05 wrote:
All the haters need to STFU, it was a great movie and a great ending to the Inidana Jones series.[/quote]
whos says it was 'The End"?
[quote]Mick28 wrote:
skaz05 wrote:
I saw it this afternoon and I thought it was GREAT! I was totally satisfied and thoroughly entertained, worth every penny in my opinion.
I just don’t know why anyone is so upset over this movie, it was everything Indiana Jones is supposed to be, great action, great acting, and that familiar Indiana Jones charm.
All the haters need to STFU, it was a great movie and a great ending to the Inidana Jones series.
Who said it was the ending? [/quote]
lol I beat you 2 it
I’m just assuming it is the end to the series, I feel confident that Harrison Ford wont want to do another Indiana Jones movie.
Anyways, this was a great movie. I think the haters are just upset that it wasn’t done in their image. I still don’t know what everyone was expecting from this movie. I was expecting an Indiana Jones movie, and that’s what I got. No complaints here.
Maybe the story was a little out of place, with the aliens and shit, but it’s not like the other Inidiana Jones movies weren’t way out there either.
This Indiana Jones snobbery is completely unwarranted. Did you guys see Die Hard 4? I didn’t see anyone complaining about McClane surfing on the top of an F-16 fighter jet. Everyone was giving rave reviews.
The bottom line: it was a great movie. It totally felt like Indiana Jones, and I was thoroughly entertained.
[quote]skaz05 wrote:
I’m just assuming it is the end to the series, I feel confident that Harrison Ford wont want to do another Indiana Jones movie.
Anyways, this was a great movie. I think the haters are just upset that it wasn’t done in their image. I still don’t know what everyone was expecting from this movie. I was expecting an Indiana Jones movie, and that’s what I got. No complaints here.
Maybe the story was a little out of place, with the aliens and shit, but it’s not like the other Inidiana Jones movies weren’t way out there either.
This Indiana Jones snobbery is completely unwarranted. Did you guys see Die Hard 4? I didn’t see anyone complaining about McClane surfing on the top of an F-16 fighter jet. Everyone was giving rave reviews.
The bottom line: it was a great movie. It totally felt like Indiana Jones, and I was thoroughly entertained.[/quote]
As far as Die Hard 4 goes this is John Mclane we are talking about the “greatest” action star there is. what ever. But I agree Indy was exactly what it was sapos to be and Ford has said he would like to make another one. He always said Indy was his fav char.
I’m sorry but at least in Die Hard 4 they made it look vaguely like he was surfing an F-16, the graphics in Indiana Jones were well off the mark, ie. the sword fight!!! Such a joke of a scene! Shia Labeof is a good actor and does some characters well don’t get me wrong, but i couldn’t buy him as a hard nosed kid who rode a motor cycle, everytime he pretended like he was angry i thought he was just as likely to start crying!
I know that Indiana Jones has always been elaborate and fun but it seems like they were trying too hard at times here, some of the ideas were good but were poorly exectuted! Definately one of the biggest let downs ever!
Minor Spoiler, maybe.
I thought the whole point of the film was to hand over to Indy’s son for the future films.
Ford might crop up in cameo roles, as Connery did, but the new ‘hero’ is the son.
[quote]WelshBoy wrote:
Minor Spoiler, maybe.
I thought the whole point of the film was to hand over to Indy’s son for the future films.
Ford might crop up in cameo roles, as Connery did, but the new ‘hero’ is the son.[/quote]
I haven’t heard anything like that, but there’s no way Shia Lebeouf could take over the lead in the Indy movies. I don’t see anyone buying it.
[quote]Blaze_108 wrote:
I heard that the whole beginning/middle was great, but the end’s a total letdown. [/quote]
Thats about right. I have to say the best part was when Indy had to climb into a ***** to escape a ***** testing area and well…if you saw it you`ll know what I mean. That really had me on edge because he had nowhere to run to. I dont think anybody would have thought of that.
This was just another movie I have seen that I am totally disappointed with. What a waste of money!
[quote]DanErickson wrote:
This was just another movie I have seen that I am totally disappointed with. What a waste of money![/quote]
I wouldnt go that far but it was nothing comapred to teh first 3. Nazis make cooler bad guys. The onyl part I really enjoyed is the…wahtever…testing with teh fridge and the one-on-one fight between him and the russian guy in the middle of the jungle with the fire ants.
(Trying real hard not to spoil the movie) I will tell you this though,…if your making out with your girlfriend and feeling her up for the first 30 minuetes,your going to be lost on the story…(Which I foolishly did)
I thought the plot was weak and the bad guys were not evil enough. The Nazi’s and the guys in Temple of Doom were evil. The Russians didn’t live up to the latter IMO.
It was missing something compared to the original trilogy. I’ll possibly go see it again because I more than likely had too high expectations.
There were good points though and I was entertained.
Like most people, I agree the movie isn’t the best, but I think it was pretty good.
A bit further fetched than the other ones, but so was Die Hard 4. so maybe it just goes with the times.
I immediately thought the car chase scene and subsequent waterfalls would make a great Disneyland style ride… Maybe they were written in that style JUST TO MAKE a ride, although that’s a bit conspiratorial.
Also, the crazy guy character totally felt like it was written for Sean Connery, but he probably wouldn’t have been crazy. It wouldn’t have taken a lot of extra writing to change the movie to fit him in.
At the very end, when LaBoeuf catches the *** (ultra minor, but probably obvious if you’ve seen it spoiler) I was wondering if he’d continue the franchise, but with a different main character. Like Terminator.
Also, perhaps the 1930s were just a better time period than the 1950s for the styling of a movie.
If you liked the other ones, totally go see it.
If you didn’t like the others, don’t go.
If you are on the fence… and like this style of movie… probably go see it.
[quote]LankyMofo wrote:
What’s with all of these old timers redoing all their old movies?
Rocky
Rambo
Die Hard
Indiana Jones
I’m sure I’m missing a couple.[/quote]
Terminator
Aliens Versus Predator, to an extent.
[quote]MODOK wrote:
i just got back from watching the movie. Its just a terrible, terrible, horrible plot, bad special effects, and the Harrison Ford didn’t feel like he was even trying to be Indiana Jones. The plot didn’t make any sense.
Indiana Jones was a Coloniel in the US Army in WWII, “fighting the nazis in Europe?” Wasn’t he running around finding the Holy Grail and Ark of the Covenent during WWII, and not on the Western Front of the war?
I’m sorry, but that entire screenplay sucked such major ass I can’t even put it into words. I’m going to purge it from my mind, and remember the first three, which were up until tonight my favorite three action adventure movies of all time.[/quote]
So now we are bitching about Indy being a war hero? Think about what you just said and then go watch the original three again while thinking about what you just said.
Now where in any of those movies do they talk about a war? Where in the Last Crusade do you see any of Mussolini�??s troops in Venice? There were Nazi’s b4 WWII started and America didnt join the War till '41. The first 3 movies take place between '33 and '38. And why would this movie affect how you feel about the first 3?
So what Im going to do is and I’m sorry, but that entire comment sucked such major ass I can’t even put it into words. I’m going to purge it from my mind.