alien plotline. That's lame. Indie isn't about futuristic sci-fi, he's old school. His finds have mystic power, just because they're mystical! Not because they're alien artifacts. Boo.

END SPOILER

I'm psyched for this...

However, this is cold war Indy. This is Indy 20 years later in a world where the Nazis have lost. A world where science is taking a leap forward, and in the USA--it's the era of Roswell, area 51 and UFOs. The alien connection actually DOES make sense in 1957.

Elegant, understated, refined...beautiful...I shot my wad. 4 stars.

SHIA: Nobody says 'dorkwad' anymore. If you really want to shine someone on, you say 'Hasta la vista, baby.' Or you can mix it up a little...

INDY: Hasta la vista, dickhead.

SHIA: You got it!

Still can't get excited for this though.

1) Temple of Doom and Last Crusade never came close to being proper sequels to Raiders. How could this?

2) Title is among my top 5 worst movie titles of all time.

3) Ok, who'm I fooling, I'm pumped and there opening night.

Disclaimer: Yes, I know it was Ricardo's real chest.

I give this another 100 posts before it goes to hell. I see the signs already. Yes, I am talking to you BSB, and Pound Sand...and Osmosis Jones (if you aren't the same person).

Unless that's HIS skull up there on the forehead of the big skull.

I see the odd looking skull in this poster and I know all the rumors about how aliens "may" be involved in the various plots which may have converged into the final script, but I just can't see aliens being a "god-like" presence in the Indyverse.

That said, this film IS courtesy of the guys who brought us ET, Close Encounters, and those little Star Wars films, so.....

Raiders of the Lost Ark- Egyptian/Hebrew

Last Crusade- Middle East/Christian

Kingdom of the Crystal Skull- Central America/Mayan

What I'm trying to say is that it fits with the rest of the series. Indy and Co are going to an entirely different locale and dealing with an entirely new religion/culture.

And also, being a fan of Mesoamerican mythology, this could be quite fun.

And for the record, I think I was the first to point out the face on the bridge of the skull nose. But NO ONE believed me (sniff, sob)! Probably cuz every time a new poster is shown here, people cry wolf and say they can see Venom and shit.

And since I'm posting yet again, how'z about Indiana Jones and the Quest for Bifocals, a Crossword Puzzle, and a glass of ice-cold Vernors.

(Sorry...I couldn't resist.)

Oh, and the poster looks frakkin' great. IMHO, Struzan's work seems to shine best with this series.

I hope this film is good.

I love that it's after Iron Man, but before TDK. I want Indy to be number 1, but that's probably how the films will end up, IMO.

1. Dark Knight

2. Indy IV

3. Iron Man/Prince Caspian (not sure which yet, but one will be 3 and the other will be 4.

5. Incredible Hulk. (can't wait to start seeing some stuff on that.)

http://tinyurl.com/3yb67h

My guess:

Narnia - $300 millions. Easily.

Indy IV - $250-300 millions

The Dark Knight - $200-250 millions

Iron Man - $150-200 millions if Paramount is damn lucky.

Speed Racer - $ame as Iron Man.

Yeah, then I'll see it at midnight again.

And leobloom, I'm not saying Narnia will swat it like a fly, I see them both around the $300 millions mark (which the first Narnia almost crossed domestically if memory serves) BUT considering that Indy is a 20 years old franchise, and the kids will most likely flock into Narnia theaters, it is more likely to cross the line than Indy IMO. I'm no Media By Numbers analyst, but it's more logical that way. I mean, Superman Returns crossed the $200 millions mark by ONE ticket. Mine. And I'm not proud of it.

Oh, and nice poster.

Speaking of hatesuck, aren't Memories-of-Murder and NoDiggity overdue for some of their usual lame Indy bitching in this TB?

So that's, like, how good it is.

You know what would freak me out? Those fuckin' rabid monkeys, a whole team of them gnashing and gnawing their teeth, screeching and clawing, those little bastards seem viscious. That's just me though.

Whatever they do, I really hope they don't do one of those 30 clips that has a ton of talking, and then like 5 images flashed across the screen at lightning pace. The movie is coming out in May, December is perfectly acceptable to start showing a decent length trailer. I realize that Spielberg has been filming this thing at a lightning pace already, but let's go here!

Secondly, just like you said with the crocs, can you imagine a bunch of them teeming together? Don't know how that would work on film.

Third, and this is just a nitpick, the scares with the other critters was that they were the type of things that grouped up together, got all over you, and just made your skin crawl. Sharks are f'ing scary, but I don't know about skin crawling.

However, I could see them putting a shark in, and having Williams throw in a little Jaws nod, which admittedly sounds cheesey, but done right could be funny. Remember the little nod to Raiders in Last Crusade, it was all of 5 seconds, and Williams perfectly underscored it with a little hit from the Raiders subtle theme.

not sure if it was already reported here, but the prince caspian trailer is up.

and kind of a sweet, too.

1/ hate the goddamn movie, too expensive and hyped to be honest and

2/ Buy the tie-in video game/ happy meal/ bedsheets.

Then the movie opens. First time of my life I attend the first showing of a movie. It was great, but every time I catch an Indy flick on TV I can't help but think "I would've killed to discover THIS at eleven, without the marketing bullshit, the internet, and the cynical, suspicious adults spoiling my fun". Lucky you.

I also love to see practical stuff, and I don't understand why they use the CGI to embiggen the same old stunts, while Asian filmmakers just got them right with ten times less money. This arms race is just stupid and counter-productive. Stunts nowadays are REALLY innovative when they take advantage of the framing and the topography (some factors the old school films like Indy or 80's Bond weren't really exploring, focusing on rhythm) and the Parkour guys really hit the nail with that. Too bad they're pigeonholed by the industry as lame baddies as in Die Hard 4. For shame...

please dont believe I'm some fool or that those are my politics.

It was just supposed to be really funny and preposterous.

Seriously, though, I am interested to see how this Crystal Skull thing pans out. I don't think that they can pull off making it good in the way the first three were good (everybody involved, including the audience, is radically different than it was twenty years ago), but if it was good in a new way, and yet still linked with the old, that would really be something. Something absent from the SW prequels, I might add.

fucking TPM and AOTC *shakes fist angrily*

I hope in the name of satan's codpiece that this isn't a repeat of TPM.

Where the fuck is nodiggity to tell us that this isn't a true Indy film, because we don't get to see him do his packing?

*shakes fist angrily*

Or maybe less small fucking robots.

or maybe not.

Anyway, thanks for the info. I feel stupid and less ignorant at the same time.

Seriously, fuck Paramount and their HD-Payola. I'm gonna dig old NTSC VHS from Amazon.

I wouldn't get my panties in a bunch reading too much into this meaning "aliens" will seriously be the "mysterious power" behind this artifact.

This is pure speculation, but it could be in the movie the ancient Mayans attribute some kind of mysterious power to "being from another world", but with all the Indy movies so far, the "mysterious power" behind all the artifacts has been related to "gods". I say that in quotes because you could believe "god" made the ark or Shiva or Kali were the power behind the stones and Molaram's magic, but you could also believe it was just a name the cultures had put on the origins of the power behind those artifacts. These skulls will likely (hopefully) be treated the same way.

In principle, what's the problem? If you have something that works, why would you recreate the wheel? You can tell a unique story that still encompasses certain details.

I understand the concern that this new film "could" be alot like Raiders, but is that even really a bad thing? Hell, it sounds like a great thing considering the state of blockbuster movies these days. They're obviously not "remaking" Raiders, so making another Indy in its stead can hardly be a bad thing.

By my reckoning, Indy has so far encountered a total of one rival archaeologist in his cinematic adventures (two if you count Forrestal's mostly inert corpse, both of which are in the same movie). So, in other words, if he encounters one in this film, that makes it a recurring motif which appears in two out of four films, which isn't exactly overwhelming considering the value attached to most of the artifacts he pursues.

You sound like the idiots yelling about Rambo "just killing a bunch of brown people as usual", when the only non-white people he killed were about half of the body count in Rambo: First Blood Part II (the rest being lily-white Soviets).

If I were you, I'd go back to talking about your fear of Indy 4 being "too pulpy" or how "Newt is Jones" in the "remake" of Alien known as Aliens, because obviously math isn't one of your strengths.

Hey, we should have a contest where we can submit fan poster art, depicting Indy or concepts from the new movie--intermingled with geriatric hardware and senior grocery items. Indiana Jones and the Cinnamon-Sprinkled Applesauce...of Fuckin'DOOM!!

But I can conunter this easily by pointing out that, as a character in the film, the audience is never remotely supposed to think Toht was a "good guy" like Elsa in LC.

You prove nothing, NoDiggity.

I'll go a step further an point out more fundamental differences between them:

1) Indy and Elsa share a number of scenes dialoging with one another even before her "betrayal". Indy never speaks to Toht. He's one gun fight in the Nepal and they're all together in the canyon and when the Ark is opened, but they never directly interact, let alone dialogue.

2)Toht's role in advancing the story is completely different from Elsa's. As covert a Nazi agent, Toht pursues the clues to finding the Headpiece/Ravenwood for his Furher. I'd even argue that without the scalded image of the headpiece on his hand, he might not have ended up back in Egypt so quickly, if at all. The clues to the Ark was an assignment for him. Elsa on the other hand, was actively searching for the Grail. She used the Joneses to further her and her Furher's quest, but unlike Toht was actively seeking the Macguffin.

School's out, NoDiggity. Go sell your "crazy" somewhere else. We're all stocked up here (as usual on AICN).

Simply mind-boggling.

Still, you have a long way to go before you top "too pulpy" and your somewhat disturbing fedora-packing fetish.

I'm not saying you HAVE to reuse elements to make a good "sequel". Empire's a fine example of how you can come up with a great (superior in some ways) movie by not retaining similar plot pacing and character traits.

But I could counter that example with one from the same "universe" - the SW prequels. I would argue they tried reinventing the wheel and look what happened. Had they stuck closer to they way theu approached SW and Empire, things might have turned out differently.

I wouldn't write off Indy IV because of some percieved similarities to Raiders. I actually take some comfort knowing they are looking at the things that WORKED in Raiders while crafting Indy IV than trying to do something "they haven't done before" and wondering if it'll come out as "successfully" as the SW prequels.

I understand what you’re saying to a degree. We don’t need “Nazis” or another woman he has a love/hate relationship with, but I don’t think you can blame them for including these story points. We’ll see what Cate’s role is and what she adds to the film. In a perfect world they gave Marion a huge part and let Ms. Ravenwood be his romantic foil, but no….this is Hollywood. And a film series that was based in part on the James Bond character. There was going to be another female interest. The rival archeologist is a good thing. He’s always, at least in 2 of the 3 films (the most successful) been in a race to get his artifact. I would be upset if this wasn’t the case. If you take out the Russians….you’re really hinging a lot on Winestone’s character being a big enough villain to rival the tone of Raiders, which is what I think most of us want. Erasing the name Germans and throwing in the Russians is formulaic, but is A) a nice bookend to underline Indy’s aged and B) no big fucking deal. It’s Spielberg. He’ll make it work. You can’t recreate Raiders. The most, IMO, was perfect. I would prefer a little less comedy. I, as I’m sure a lot of us have, have thought about over time what a new Indy adventure would look like. How you could create a new movie that would be on par with Raiders. One, you don’t bring back Connery or Kate Capshaw. You bring back Marion and give her a solid role. Twenty years between them, picking the Marion/Indy story back up if done right will be priceless. Personally I would have loved to have seen Short Round come back…maybe in the Marcus Brody role. Indy’s boss, friend….maybe he’s been a con man as he grew up and conned his way into getting this job. But I’d want the tone of Raiders to be marched. Which means the artifact has to be badass. We have to feel like Indy could be beat to death, etc. You know, it was probably blind luck that the first one was as great as it was. It’d be a miracle if Kingdom even approached it, but I’ll give them credit for trying something new. This isn’t Indian Jones and Noah’s Arc. Or Indian Jones and the Garden of Eden. The alien bit could be inspired.

I understand what you’re saying to a degree. We don’t need “Nazis” or another woman he has a love/hate relationship with, but I don’t think you can blame them for including these story points. We’ll see what Cate’s role is and what she adds to the film. In a perfect world they gave Marion a huge part and let Ms. Ravenwood be his romantic foil, but no….this is Hollywood. And a film series that was based in part on the James Bond character. There was going to be another female interest.

The rival archeologist is a good thing. He’s always, at least in 2 of the 3 films (the most successful) been in a race to get his artifact. I would be upset if this wasn’t the case. If you take out the Russians….you’re really hinging a lot on Winestone’s character being a big enough villain to rival the tone of Raiders, which is what I think most of us want. Erasing the name Germans and throwing in the Russians is formulaic, but is A) a nice bookend to underline Indy’s aged and B) no big fucking deal.

It’s Spielberg. He’ll make it work.

You can’t recreate Raiders. The movie, IMO, was perfect. I would prefer a little less comedy. I, as I’m sure a lot of us have, have thought about over time what a new Indy adventure would look like. How you could create a new movie that would be on par with Raiders. One, you don’t bring back Connery or Kate Capshaw. You bring back Marion and give her a solid role. Twenty years between them, picking the Marion/Indy story back up if done right will be priceless. Personally I would have loved to have seen Short Round come back…maybe in the Marcus Brody role. Indy’s boss, friend….maybe he’s been a con man as he grew up and conned his way into getting this job.

But I’d want the tone of Raiders to be matched. Which means the artifact has to be badass. We have to feel like Indy could be beat to death, etc. You know, it was probably blind luck that the first one was as great as it was. It’d be a miracle if Kingdom even approached it, but I’ll give them credit for trying something new. This isn’t Indian Jones and Noah’s Arc. Or Indian Jones and the Garden of Eden. The alien bit could be inspired.

You've stated your fear of Indy 4 being "too pulpy" (Indiana fucking Jones!) and then display a complete lack of understanding of the genre being homaged when you complain of recurring themes in the films. You've also said outrageous things like the Soviets more or less not being evil enough to be villains and that having the Soviets as villains in this day and age smacks of Western saber-rattling in the face of Russia's resurgence.

How about alien mummies coming to homicidal life at the end when the skulls are disturbed? That should please both camps. Not that it will happen.

Just stop, NoDiggity, you're proving yourself less and less an Indyfan and more and more of an attention-whoring asspickle.

So, YES, the fact the opening scenes of Raiders took place in a South American jungle is a relatively "minor" detail in the Indyverse.

Perhaps SS and company looked back at that and wanted to return Indy to the jungles of South America in Indy IV. Big deal. There's ALOT of jungle (especially in the 50's) in South America so i don't think him being in one part of it in 1936 means Indy going back there is absurd. And I would presume to call it "uncreative" either because I haven't read the script to understand why the story goes back to the jungles. I assume it's something to do with the crystal skulls, which mean his being there is very much PLOT DRIVEN. This is a new Indy story, perhaps with some familiar elements, that brings Indy back to the jungle. All the Indy elements you've mentioned from previous films are things that worked and people liked about those films. Why would it be "bad" to use them again?

"I would NOT presume to call it 'uncreative'"

Fool.

see my earlier post.

And at the end of "Crystal Skull" the mother ship lands and SPOILER Richard Dreyfuss gets out, and he hasn't aged a bit since he got on the ship in 1977!! That would be AWESOME!!

What an asspickle ND is.

(nods to Doc P for the lingo)

Hey, wouldn't it be cool to see Indy get even with Lao Che in this movie, and maybe piss on the guy's face as he lay dying. Then Indy could zip up and say something like, "Thanks for the antidote, bitch. It let me live another 25 years so I could do that."

That said, it'd still be cool if Indy pissed on his bones and said "Nice try, Lao Che" one more time.

although that guy looks more like Frank Oz than Lao.

No more parachute (sic)!

Perversions of "Indiana Jones and the . . . "

Insert "ham" into as many movie quotes and titles as possible

I remember something about dinosaur porn from way, way back, too

Although it's not a record-breaker in terms of the number of posts, I think it's close for a hijacked TB NOT being spanked by the mods or having anyone banned.

But I guess that ain't saying much