http://gamingtrend.com
July 25, 2014, 09:38:55 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 8   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Indy IV: thoughts, reviews, spoilers galore!!  (Read 19534 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
naednek
Global Moderator
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4606



View Profile
« Reply #80 on: May 26, 2008, 05:29:14 PM »

Saw this movie last night, and after hearing various things about the movie, I was expecting to be disappointed. Thank God I still enjoy movies, this was a blast. Sure the plot was too out there, but the movie felt like all the other indy movies, which was probably their goal. I wasn't sure if the age of Ford was going to effect the movie negatively, to my surprise, he still has it, however there were some parts that were a little forgiving.

Overall, I enjoyed the movie, it was a fun mindless movie that brought back memories when I was a kid, sneaking bags of candy into the theatre while we watched the Last Crusade, watching my best friend eating and swallowing it whole.
Logged
PR_GMR
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3411



View Profile
« Reply #81 on: May 26, 2008, 05:37:26 PM »

I watched it on Saturday, and I thoroughly enjoyed it. I can see from taking a quick look at the first two posts on this page that some people are very disappointed with it. The movie's not perfect, and it does have some silly moments and plot elements. But it still so well embodies the spirit of 1940's serial adventure that was the inspiration of the series that I can't help to just be happy and see Indy back on the big screen. There are some over-the-top stunt sequences and the like, but it's an Indiana Jones flick, so they can get away with it. I loved the 'impossible stunt' moments in the movie and just went with the flow.

I don't want to post spoilers. There was more good stuff here than bad, so I'm satisfied with Indy IV.
« Last Edit: May 26, 2008, 05:45:36 PM by PR_GMR » Logged
PR_GMR
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3411



View Profile
« Reply #82 on: May 26, 2008, 05:41:15 PM »

Quote from: rshetts2 on May 25, 2008, 08:14:47 PM

Well Im sorry for those who didnt enjoy it.  I liked it a lot.  I understand it wasnt going to be able to live up to the origional Raiders.  Raiders was the first and nothing will ever live up to it. Still, it was a entertaining romp in spite of some of the "out there" plot points.  Of course Im willing to suspend believe and understand that this is based on the 1930's style pulp fiction such as Doc Savage and stuff like that.  I always suspend belief prior to walking into the theatre on these.  Campy?  Yes.  Unbelieveable escapes? Yes.  Fun?  Yes!  My advice is to watch it for the fun of it and try not to mentally pick it apart as you watch it.  If you can do that you will probably enjoy the ride, if you cant, you probably wont.

My thoughts exactly!  icon_biggrin
Logged
lildrgn
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1406


It's not the years, it's the mileage.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #83 on: May 27, 2008, 12:44:42 AM »

I'm going again tonight so it'll be interesting to see how it holds up on a second viewing.
Logged

SuperHiro
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1199

Pants on Fire


View Profile
« Reply #84 on: May 27, 2008, 02:02:16 AM »

Quote from: kratz on May 26, 2008, 05:25:24 PM

Man, I was super disappointed.  George Lucas really needs to be banned from making movies.

Spoiler for Hiden:
I was on board at the start... I thought all of the cold war stuff was fun and the action and chases were very physical and in keeping with what you expect from an Indiana Jones movie... then they hit the jungle and the entire thing came careening off the of rails... crappy green screen BS all over the place... it just became another shitty summer action adventure flick, devoid of the real physical stunts and charm of the previous films... the alien aspect was handled poorly, Karen Allen looked like an old leather handbag, the humor was too forced... sword fighting on the digital cars and swinging through the vines like a monkey are when I started getting pretty pissed off...  ugh.  They might as well re-title Speed Racer as American Graffiti Returns for how close they got to the feel of the originals.

YES! WORD!
Logged

Just Hiro will do.
Lassr
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 558



View Profile
« Reply #85 on: May 27, 2008, 02:31:15 AM »

Saw it today. It's not as good as the first 3 but I still had a good time.
Logged

Roll Tide!
Torfish
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 395


View Profile
« Reply #86 on: May 27, 2008, 02:27:07 PM »

Pretty good movie for a summer flick.  Very much enjoyed it.
Logged
madpeon
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 397



View Profile
« Reply #87 on: May 27, 2008, 03:18:41 PM »

Shia as the next Tarzan?   icon_cry

That part was just.... bad.
Logged
rickfc
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 5651


Why so serious?


View Profile
« Reply #88 on: May 27, 2008, 03:51:53 PM »

I really don't understand all the hate for this movie.  My wife and I saw it yesterday, and enjoyed it for what it was: An Indiana Jones movie.  The way some people are talking about the first three, they make them sound as they were Oscar-winning movies and this one is a summer popcorn flick.  ALL four are summer popcorn flicks.  The storylines are completely unbelievable, the action is over-the-top and the dialog is hammy.  I mean, seriously, what did you expect?  I think Shia LeBeouf did a good enough job going toe to toe with Harrison Ford.  Harrison Ford was Indiana Jones through-and-through.  Karen Allen could have dropped a few for the role, but that gave it a little more believability in the fact that she looked like a normal person rather than a supermodel.

All that being said, there were a couple of groan-inducing moments for me:

Spoiler for Hiden:
  • The whole monkey thing.  I leaned over to my wife and said "It's the ewok thing all over again"
  • Indy and Marion started calling each other by petnames such as "babe" as soon as she told him Mutt was his son

And there were also a few classic Indy moments:

Spoiler for Hiden:
  • When Mutt throws Indy the snake as a rope.  One word: CLASSIC
  • When he told Mac that the first thing he would do if the Russians let him out of his binding that he would break his nose.  And indeed that's what he did  biggrin

We had a really good time, and there were even some people that started clapping as the credits started rolling.   thumbsup
« Last Edit: May 27, 2008, 03:58:23 PM by rickfc » Logged
Gratch
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 12420


GO UTES!!


View Profile
« Reply #89 on: May 27, 2008, 03:55:45 PM »

Quote from: Kevin Grey on May 26, 2008, 12:03:40 AM

Damn, people, you do know that Spielberg had final script approval, final cut, had his pet screenwriter do the final write on the script, designs pretty much all of the action sequences himself, etc, right?  This damn internet tendency to blame everything they hate in the movie on Lucas is ridiculous.  From everything I've read about the making of the film, other than the core concept, the stuff people seem to hate the most came from Spielberg and Koepp. 

Hey, we'll have none of that sensible talk around here mister!  George Lucas is teh evil and is singularly responsible for every bad movie ever created since the original Star Wars.   This is a universally accepted internet truth, so you just deal with it! 

slywink
Logged

“My next great decision is just lying in wait.
The action might turn out to be the world's most grievous mistake."
- Bad Religion, Past is Dead
YellowKing
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2994



View Profile
« Reply #90 on: May 27, 2008, 04:49:28 PM »

Quote
The storylines are completely unbelievable

Some are more unbelievable than others. Those of us who didn't like the film were not going into the theater expecting an archaeological documentary. We're fans of the movies, and we understand that they are over-the-top. However, a lot of us felt that this movie went way too far - to the point that it not only distracted from the film, but also failed to remain consistent with the other movies.

Even fictional stories have to have an underlying internal consistency. There has to be a level of believability established, and then the film must be measured against that established baseline. It's the same principle that allows me to accept the existence of fairy tale creatures and magic in the Chronicles of Narnia, but would find them preposterous in No Country For Old Men. Indy 4's level of believability was established over the course of three movies. You can't just toss that aside and start over on a whole new level.

I'm no prude who doesn't enjoy a good popcorn movie. I just want a little consistency and common sense.

Quote
Hey, we'll have none of that sensible talk around here mister!  George Lucas is teh evil and is singularly responsible for every bad movie ever created since the original Star Wars.   This is a universally accepted internet truth, so you just deal with it!

I place a great deal of blame on Spielberg and even more on Koepp, but ultimately this is George Lucas' baby. It's his character, his core story. He's the one who even before the film opened was warning people it might fail to live up to expectations. He was ultimately responsible for placing his creation in the wrong hands. Hey may not have been the one who pulled the trigger and killed this movie, but he tied it up and placed the gun in the hands of the people who did.
« Last Edit: May 27, 2008, 04:53:00 PM by YellowKing » Logged
kratz
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4197



View Profile
« Reply #91 on: May 27, 2008, 04:59:18 PM »

We all understand that the movies are summer popcorn flicks, but up until now they have always been summer popcorn flicks where the supernatural has occurred in an over the top but believable and gritty 'real' world, which is what sets them apart from the 'OMG SUMMER BLOCKBUSTER' movie of the current decade. With the new one they totally failed at that with all this green screen crap... it lacks the physicality of the world and the stunts in the other movies.

And yes, Spielberg and Ford bear some responsibility too, but the story came from Lucas... the scary part is that this is the version that came out after four years of Spielberg and Ford telling Lucas that he was being too 'out there'... I shudder to think what his original idea entailed.  They also all had to come to an agreement, and it seems obvious that the crazy ideas came from Lucas while the other two tried to tone it down to something more Indy.  Would holding out have resulted in no Indy 4 being made?  Maybe so.  Maybe that would've been for the best.

After the first act, it just lost that Indy 'feel', and turned into the Mummy Returns with the budget to make the Scorpion King look better...
Logged
Eel Snave
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2753



View Profile WWW
« Reply #92 on: May 27, 2008, 05:15:41 PM »

Well, I liked it.  I thought it was just plain fun.  It's Indiana Jones; I thought we threw believability out the window before we opened the Ark of the Covenant.  It's like they threw up their hands and said, "Hey, why not?" and giddily added sequences of the group going over waterfalls.  At some point you have to just throw your hands in the air and just have as much fun as Lucas and Spielberg did when they were making the movie.
Logged
rickfc
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 5651


Why so serious?


View Profile
« Reply #93 on: May 27, 2008, 05:38:50 PM »

Quote from: YellowKing on May 27, 2008, 04:49:28 PM

Quote
The storylines are completely unbelievable

There has to be a level of believability established, and then the film must be measured against that established baseline. It's the same principle that allows me to accept the existence of fairy tale creatures and magic in the Chronicles of Narnia, but would find them preposterous in No Country For Old Men. Indy 4's level of believability was established over the course of three movies. You can't just toss that aside and start over on a whole new level.


How is finding a blue knight that has been 'alive' for over 1000 years any more believable than:

Spoiler for Hiden:
An alien race that taught one of our ancient races farming, etc?  There is no question that some of the things that the Incas, among other ancient races, did well well beyond their time and technology.  Whether they were assisted by an alien race is something that is debated by archaeologists today.

I fail to see the difference between the two.  Just because the 1st and 3rd movies are based on what can be considered religious fairy tales while this one is not, does not make one more believable than the other.  Sorry.
Logged
Covenant
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 535


View Profile
« Reply #94 on: May 27, 2008, 05:48:45 PM »

Spoiler for Hiden:
and how is surviving three waterfalls any more rediculous than jumping out of a plane in a FRIGGIN INFLATABLE RAFT and surviving without a scratch? Have you guys even watched the 2nd and 3rd Indy movies lately?
Logged
rickfc
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 5651


Why so serious?


View Profile
« Reply #95 on: May 27, 2008, 06:05:08 PM »

Quote from: Covenant on May 27, 2008, 05:48:45 PM

Spoiler for Hiden:
and how is surviving three waterfalls any more rediculous than jumping out of a plane in a FRIGGIN INFLATABLE RAFT and surviving without a scratch? Have you guys even watched the 2nd and 3rd Indy movies lately?


Thank you.
Logged
lildrgn
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1406


It's not the years, it's the mileage.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #96 on: May 27, 2008, 06:08:19 PM »

I watched IJ4 a second time last night and though I LOVE LOVE LOVE Indiana Jones, this movie did not do me so well. I thought I might like it more on a second viewing, but, sadly, it was pretty unremarkable.

I may have to watch Raiders again just to get the meh taste out of my mouth.
Logged

YellowKing
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2994



View Profile
« Reply #97 on: May 27, 2008, 06:08:47 PM »

Quote
I fail to see the difference between the two.  Just because the 1st and 3rd movies are based on what can be considered religious fairy tales while this one is not, does not make one more believable than the other.  Sorry.

More believable than another? Debatable. Consistent with the theme (religious fairy tales) of the other movies? Not so much. That inconsistency in theme leads directly (for me) to inconsistency with believability.

Spoiler for Hiden:
You could have probably changed the aliens to ancient Mayan gods bestowing knowledge and I'd have swallowed it hook, line, and sinker. The minute they took it into sci-fi territory, they lost me. Indiana Jones isn't a sci-fi movie, as much as Lucas and Spielberg have a raging hard-on for them.

As for Covenant's point, I never had a problem with that one. I didn't particularly have a problem with any of the action sequences besides the awful special effects.

Logged
rickfc
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 5651


Why so serious?


View Profile
« Reply #98 on: May 27, 2008, 06:17:29 PM »

Quote from: YellowKing on May 27, 2008, 06:08:47 PM


More believable than another? Debatable. Consistent with the theme (religious fairy tales) of the other movies? Not so much. That inconsistency in theme leads directly (for me) to inconsistency with believability.


How has the theme of the movies been consistent when ToD had nothing to do with religion?  If anything, it is part of a pattern and a departure from the religious tone was due for the next film.  Maybe you'll get 'Indiana Jones and Noah's Ark' for Indy V.   Roll Eyes
Logged
Kevin Grey
Global Moderator
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 13976


View Profile
« Reply #99 on: May 27, 2008, 06:31:12 PM »

Quote from: kratz on May 27, 2008, 04:59:18 PM

After the first act, it just lost that Indy 'feel', and turned into the Mummy Returns with the budget to make the Scorpion King look better...

'Cept the first act was all Lucas stuff.  Again, if you have a problem with the core concept then that did indeed come from Lucas.  But if the problem is the with execution of the movie, over the top action sequences, corny humor, dialogue, etc then that stuff is primarily from Spielberg and Koepp. 

Quote from: YellowKing on May 27, 2008, 04:49:28 PM

Hey may not have been the one who pulled the trigger and killed this movie, but he tied it up and placed the gun in the hands of the people who did.

I agree.  He should totally have told Spielberg he couldn't direct it and instead have hired Stephen Sommers for the job. 
Logged
msteelers
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1790



View Profile
« Reply #100 on: May 27, 2008, 06:38:43 PM »

Quote from: rickfc on May 27, 2008, 06:17:29 PM

Quote from: YellowKing on May 27, 2008, 06:08:47 PM


More believable than another? Debatable. Consistent with the theme (religious fairy tales) of the other movies? Not so much. That inconsistency in theme leads directly (for me) to inconsistency with believability.


How has the theme of the movies been consistent when ToD had nothing to do with religion?  If anything, it is part of a pattern and a departure from the religious tone was due for the next film.  Maybe you'll get 'Indiana Jones and Noah's Ark' for Indy V.   Roll Eyes

Is it a coincidence that the one movie out of the first three that strayed from the religious tones is the one that is widely considered to be the worst?
Logged

Tune in to hear me spout nonsense about Fantasy Football every Thursday evening at 6:08.
wonderpug
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 11247


hmm...


View Profile
« Reply #101 on: May 27, 2008, 06:41:52 PM »

Quote from: rickfc on May 27, 2008, 06:17:29 PM

How has the theme of the movies been consistent when ToD had nothing to do with religion?

There are more religions in the world besides Christianity.  Temple of Doom was (extremely loosely) based on Hindu mythology.
Logged
Kevin Grey
Global Moderator
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 13976


View Profile
« Reply #102 on: May 27, 2008, 06:46:06 PM »

To be fair, this one also had to do with religion as well: 
Spoiler for Hiden:
  They were worshiping the aliens as their gods

But I do think it's a good point- anecdotally it seems those who really liked ToD like KotCS more than others.  One of the reasons I like Temple of Doom as much as I do is because it resists following the exact formula from Raiders.  I also dislike Last Crusade more than most because it seems like after the whipping they took over Temple they went back with their tails between their legs and were content to make Raiders-lite. 
Logged
rickfc
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 5651


Why so serious?


View Profile
« Reply #103 on: May 27, 2008, 06:48:14 PM »

Quote from: msteelers on May 27, 2008, 06:38:43 PM


Is it a coincidence that the one movie out of the first three that strayed from the religious tones is the one that is widely considered to be the worst?

You're right.  Temple of Doom is rated 86% on Rotten Tomatoes.  The next lowest is Last Crusade at 89%.  That is a HUGE margin.

Quote from: wonderpug on May 27, 2008, 06:41:52 PM


There are more religions in the world besides Christianity.

Agreed.  I married a Sikh.  I should have worded my original post a little better.

Quote from: wonderpug on May 27, 2008, 06:41:52 PM


Temple of Doom was (extremely loosely) based on Hindu mythology.
Kingdom of the Crystal Skull was (extremely loosely) based on Incan mythology.  See what I did there?  slywink

I'm thinking about removing myself from your fanclub... biggrin
« Last Edit: May 27, 2008, 06:58:46 PM by rickfc » Logged
YellowKing
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2994



View Profile
« Reply #104 on: May 27, 2008, 06:59:50 PM »

I loved Temple of Doom (mostly because it was the first Indy film I ever saw as a kid - I didn't watch Raiders until much later - these were the days before VCRs and movie rentals, remember, so unless it came on TV you were shit out of luck).

Spoiler for Hiden:
I guess I just don't like peanut butter in my chocolate, and I sure as hell don't like aliens in my Indiana Jones movie. I wish Lucas and Spielberg would both just get abducted and have 6 months of hardcore alien butt sex until they got it out of their system. I assume next we'll get Jurassic Park 4, DINOSAURS IN SPACE!!!

I don't understand why this whole thing makes me so mad, but it clearly struck a nerve. The more I think about the movie, the more infuriated I get. What's odd is I never considered myself an Indiana Jones fanboy by any means. I liked the movies, but I never had posters on my wall or went out of my way to watch them when they came on. I don't even own any of the DVDs.

Logged
Kevin Grey
Global Moderator
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 13976


View Profile
« Reply #105 on: May 27, 2008, 07:01:42 PM »

Quote from: YellowKing on May 27, 2008, 06:59:50 PM

I loved Temple of Doom (mostly because it was the first Indy film I ever saw as a kid - I didn't watch Raiders until much later - these were the days before VCRs and movie rentals, remember, so unless it came on TV you were shit out of luck).

Technically Raiders was out on VHS in before ToD came out- IIRC that's where the first ToD teaser was. 
Logged
wonderpug
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 11247


hmm...


View Profile
« Reply #106 on: May 27, 2008, 07:04:31 PM »

spoilers probably coming

Quote from: rickfc on May 27, 2008, 06:48:14 PM

Quote from: wonderpug on May 27, 2008, 06:41:52 PM


There are more religions in the world besides Christianity.

Agreed.  I married a Sikh.

Huh?  You said Temple of Doom had nothing to do with religion.  All I'm saying is that it did, just not Christianity.

Quote from: rickfc on May 27, 2008, 06:48:14 PM

Quote from: wonderpug on May 27, 2008, 06:41:52 PM


Temple of Doom was (extremely loosely) based on Hindu mythology.
Kingdom of the Crystal Skull was (extremely loosely) based on Incan mythology.  See what I did there?  slywink

And I don't think anyone had a problem with the Mayan mythology parts; they had a problem with 1950s conspiracy nut mythology.  Indiana Jones is an archaeologist, which makes ancient folklore a perfect match for his adventures.

Indy 1: 1000+ year old religious folklore
Indy 2: 1000+ year old religious folklore
Indy 3: 1000+ year old religious folklore
Indy 4: several year old non-religious folklore

I did enjoy the movie but only because I had been thoroughly warned about the content.  I would've voiced many a "WTF?!" if I had gone to a midnight showing as originally planned.
Logged
Kevin Grey
Global Moderator
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 13976


View Profile
« Reply #107 on: May 27, 2008, 07:07:39 PM »

Quote from: wonderpug on May 27, 2008, 07:04:31 PM

Indy 1: 1000+ year old religious folklore
Indy 2: 1000+ year old religious folklore
Indy 3: 1000+ year old religious folklore
Indy 4: several year old non-religious folklore

Huh? 
Spoiler for Hiden:
  I believe the movie says that the Crystal Skulls are several thousand years old and they are certainly religious folklore to the Incans. 
Logged
wonderpug
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 11247


hmm...


View Profile
« Reply #108 on: May 27, 2008, 07:13:42 PM »

Quote from: Kevin Grey on May 27, 2008, 07:07:39 PM

Quote from: wonderpug on May 27, 2008, 07:04:31 PM

Indy 1: 1000+ year old religious folklore
Indy 2: 1000+ year old religious folklore
Indy 3: 1000+ year old religious folklore
Indy 4: several year old non-religious folklore

Huh? 
Spoiler for Hiden:
  I believe the movie says that the Crystal Skulls are several thousand years old and they are certainly religious folklore to the Incans. 

Right, but the idea of their Gods in the movie...
Spoiler for Hiden:
The various Area 51 alien conspiracy theories (aliens building the pyramids and all that) spawned in the early 50s, did they not?
  That's what I meant by several year old folklore: Indy 4 takes place in 1957.
Logged
msteelers
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1790



View Profile
« Reply #109 on: May 27, 2008, 07:15:36 PM »

Quote from: rickfc on May 27, 2008, 06:48:14 PM

Quote from: msteelers on May 27, 2008, 06:38:43 PM


Is it a coincidence that the one movie out of the first three that strayed from the religious tones is the one that is widely considered to be the worst?

You're right.  Temple of Doom is rated 86% on Rotten Tomatoes.  The next lowest is Last Crusade at 89%.  That is a HUGE margin.

A bad Indiana Jones movie is still better than 90% of the other crap out there  icon_wink
Logged

Tune in to hear me spout nonsense about Fantasy Football every Thursday evening at 6:08.
Kevin Grey
Global Moderator
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 13976


View Profile
« Reply #110 on: May 27, 2008, 07:19:03 PM »

Quote from: wonderpug on May 27, 2008, 07:13:42 PM

Quote from: Kevin Grey on May 27, 2008, 07:07:39 PM

Quote from: wonderpug on May 27, 2008, 07:04:31 PM

Indy 1: 1000+ year old religious folklore
Indy 2: 1000+ year old religious folklore
Indy 3: 1000+ year old religious folklore
Indy 4: several year old non-religious folklore

Huh? 
Spoiler for Hiden:
  I believe the movie says that the Crystal Skulls are several thousand years old and they are certainly religious folklore to the Incans. 

Right, but the idea of their Gods in the movie...
Spoiler for Hiden:
The various Area 51 alien conspiracy theories (aliens building the pyramids and all that) spawned in the early 50s, did they not?
  That's what I meant by several year old folklore: Indy 4 takes place in 1957.

Oh, gotcha.  That's a good question that I don't know the answer to. 
Logged
rickfc
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 5651


Why so serious?


View Profile
« Reply #111 on: May 27, 2008, 07:22:04 PM »

Quote from: wonderpug on May 27, 2008, 07:04:31 PM


Huh?  You said Temple of Doom had nothing to do with religion.  All I'm saying is that it did, just not Christianity.


See my revised post.

Quote from: wonderpug on May 27, 2008, 07:04:31 PM


And I don't think anyone had a problem with the Mayan mythology parts; they had a problem with 1950s conspiracy nut mythology.  Indiana Jones is an archaeologist, which makes ancient folklore a perfect match for his adventures.

Indy 1: 1000+ year old religious folklore
Indy 2: 1000+ year old religious folklore
Indy 3: 1000+ year old religious folklore
Indy 4: several year old non-religious folklore

I did enjoy the movie but only because I had been thoroughly warned about the content.  I would've voiced many a "WTF?!" if I had gone to a midnight showing as originally planned.

Just because some of the theories became prevalent in the mid-20th century, it does not mean they have not been around longer than that.  Also, many great discoveries have been made because scientists, archaeologists included, have bucked the trend and gone against the norm, whether it be a billion year old theory or one they come up with on the fly.
Logged
rickfc
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 5651


Why so serious?


View Profile
« Reply #112 on: May 27, 2008, 07:22:45 PM »

Quote from: msteelers on May 27, 2008, 07:15:36 PM


A bad Indiana Jones movie is still better than 90% of the other crap out there  icon_wink

Hey, something we agree on!  biggrin
Logged
YellowKing
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2994



View Profile
« Reply #113 on: May 27, 2008, 07:30:30 PM »

Quote
Technically Raiders was out on VHS in before ToD came out- IIRC that's where the first ToD teaser was.

We didn't get our first VCR until '87 or '88. I was deprived as a child.  icon_biggrin
Logged
wonderpug
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 11247


hmm...


View Profile
« Reply #114 on: May 27, 2008, 07:37:39 PM »

This thread would be so much easier if the whole thing was spoiler approved. frown

Quote from: rickfc on May 27, 2008, 07:22:04 PM

Just because some of the theories became prevalent in the mid-20th century, it does not mean they have not been around longer than that.  Also, many great discoveries have been made because scientists, archaeologists included, have bucked the trend and gone against the norm, whether it be a billion year old theory or one they come up with on the fly.

According to infallible Wikipedia the large object that is unearthed toward the end of the movie was thought up in the late 40s.

Spoiler for Hiden:
The "flying saucer" imagery came around in 1947 with Kenneth Arnold's descriptions of the UFOs he saw.

I can't find any Wikipedic confirmation of the rest, but I was under the impression that the other theories
Spoiler for Hiden:
of aliens building ancient pyramids and the like
came about in that same late 40s early 50s timeframe. 

I'm missing what you're trying to say about scientists bucking the trend.  Do you mean Indy bucking the trend and going against the norm?  In all four movies he's painted as skeptical until his eyes see things for themselves, and I thought that was consistent enough in this latest film.  My issue is just with the folklore Lucas and Friends decided to throw at Indy.  There's plenty of ancient Mayan and Incan folklore to go around without bringing ca.1950 folklore in as the main attraction.
Logged
YellowKing
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2994



View Profile
« Reply #115 on: May 27, 2008, 08:25:22 PM »

Spoiler for Hiden:
From Wikipedia: "Garrett P. Serviss' Edison's Conquest of Mars, published in 1898, is perhaps the first example of the ancient astronaut theory, predating Fort's book by over 20 years. In it, the narrator learns that the Martians from The War of the Worlds visited Earth around 7500 BC, enslaving the inhabitants of the Fertile Crescent and bringing them to Egypt to make monuments of their conquest, including the Giza pyramid complex and the Great Sphinx (which is actually the face of the leader of the Martian expedition). Afterwards, a plague caused them to leave, with the Martians taking a number of their human slaves to Mars to serve them there, until an expedition led by Thomas Edison freed their descendants in the early 20th century."

However, the 'ancient astronaut' theory only really took off in mainstream culture with Erich von Daniken's 1968 book "Chariots of the Gods." You'll see that book mentioned a lot if you watch any UFO docmentaries that deal with aliens in ancient times.

Logged
th'FOOL
Executive Producer and Editor-At-Large
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4999


Never whistle while you're pissing


View Profile WWW
« Reply #116 on: May 27, 2008, 08:26:29 PM »

So Lucas and Spielberg are supposed to ignore the fact that this movie takes place in the 50s?  I remember them saying that the original trilogy was meant to evoke the serials of the period they took place during (30s and 40s), while this one was meant to evoke the sci-fi of the 50s.  
Logged

Mike Dunn
Executive Producer & Managing Editor, GamingTrend
wonderpug
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 11247


hmm...


View Profile
« Reply #117 on: May 27, 2008, 08:31:57 PM »

Quote from: th'FOOL on May 27, 2008, 08:26:29 PM

So Lucas and Spielberg are supposed to ignore the fact that this movie takes place in the 50s?  I remember them saying that the original trilogy was meant to evoke the serials of the period they took place during (30s and 40s), while this one was meant to evoke the sci-fi of the 50s. 

You don't think there was anything else in the movie that evoked the 50s?
Logged
YellowKing
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2994



View Profile
« Reply #118 on: May 27, 2008, 08:38:41 PM »

Quote
So Lucas and Spielberg are supposed to ignore the fact that this movie takes place in the 50s?  I remember them saying that the original trilogy was meant to evoke the serials of the period they took place during (30s and 40s), while this one was meant to evoke the sci-fi of the 50s. 

Awesome! So in the next movie they can set it in the late '60s and have Indy fight the Vietcong, solve the Manson family murders, and hang out at Woodstock! Because that's pretty much how blatant an era cash-in this was.
Logged
kratz
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4197



View Profile
« Reply #119 on: May 27, 2008, 08:43:40 PM »

Quote from: rickfc on May 27, 2008, 07:22:45 PM

Quote from: msteelers on May 27, 2008, 07:15:36 PM


A bad Indiana Jones movie is still better than 90% of the other crap out there  icon_wink

Hey, something we agree on!  biggrin

I wish I could agree... and up until now I would've... I still like ToD even though it's not great... but this I just thought was a bad movie, and sadly just another silly greenscreened summer blockbuster.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 8   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.258 seconds with 105 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.078s, 2q)