Brace yourselves...

"Paging Nodiggity spillage of crazy in aisle 4"

And I could have had an Indy film every 3-5 years since the last one.

That, NoDiggity, is by far the most ludicrously far-fetched thing you have ever written, and that's saying a lot since you've posted some real whoppers in the past. This thing even beats the classic "Newt is Jones" post.

Furthermore, when did Zatipo ever "reach" for anything?

The only one who is "reaching longingly" here is you.

"I don't care, though. I'm on board. George Lucas and Spielberg can have my money."

Just keep an open mind NoDiggity, and just succumb to the new Indy, relax, and you'll enjoy it without having to worry about any of these 'similarities' that irk you.

I can hardly await for your review NoDiggity, when you take it screen shot for screen shot telling us where he was being Indy, where he wasn't. Should be a blast.

This exchange is reminiscent of our earlier exchange regarding Ash and Ripley in the med lab.

I mean how am I supposed to take "Indy = Newt" arguments seriously when you obviously don't respect the original Indy movie.

Secondly, that guy in the new trailer really doesn't look anything like Satipo. Can't you tell it's a "young" Abner Ravenwood reaching for something (likely related to a crystal skull?). He looks more like Alan Cumming from Circle of Friends than Satipo.

What, is Indy's expository speech to Eaton and Musgrove about the Ark and Staff of Rah too "boring" for you to lsten to? If all someone cares about is the chase and fight scenes, then you'll miss some good dialogue between Marion and Rene in the tent.

I'm just being defensive of one of my favorite movies ever, but seriously, what parts are "slow" to you that could be cut?

According to the recent EW interview, Lucas prodded Spielberg to shoot with digital cameras, but Spielberg has a love for editing on film, which I completely respect. I think as long as CGI is composited to film, there will always be some discrepancy to be nit-picked. Having said all that, I personally think Lucas and Spielberg tend to know what they're doing when it comes to making movies, and the look of this film will be no worse than anything we've seen in their previous work. I can't fucking wait!

(is it my imagination, or did Winstone's CGI Pants look better this time?)

Every single last one of them!!!!

"As much as he is a fan of Indy lore, Koepp says it’s essential to discard that point of view when tapping out further adventures. “You can’t write a fan script,” he insists. “You have to pretend that this movie exists without the other one.”

“The worst thing to do would be to have him make reference to things he said in the first movie, like to pun on lines of dialogue,” he argues. “That’s tempting, because you’ve seen the movie a hundred times and you know all the dialogue, but no human being remembers exactly what they said 25 years ago word for word, much less make reference to it. So you try to put aside the other movies and yet be in the spirit of them.”

So, if there are any blatant and annoying references to previous films in the movie, they are most likely not his fault.

I'm excited for Indy, too. And AGree that SS and GL have generally done well when it comes to visual effects (if that is what you meant). I just meant that while the prequels had good effects work, it wasn't enough to make the films any better. Hopefully, this won't be the case with Indy.

Indy IV may be terrible, who knows... But I feel that vibe, the one one you can feel from movies that got heart. A vibe I failed to notice in the whole 130 minutes of Iron Man.

http://tinyurl.com/4aja6v

In FLV flash format.

Re Sapito- You need to rewatch it diggers (just as you need to rewatch Alien and Aliens), you obviously haven't seen it in a long time- and you are miles off with this one. Remember how far off you were last time, this time you are even further away.

and a note of warning- everyone ignore BraneRobot, he is the latest incarnation of the oft-banned but never lamented monster AnimalStructure/ Thunderballs. Just don't read his posts

Please stop.

Thank you.

Yet I used it like 5 times yesterday. The REAL definition of a callback it when an actor literally gets "called back" after an audtion to read for a part again.

I am more than willing to replace "callback" in my vernacular with a less assinine word. But until someone comes up with a better term , what do we have? "In-joke reference to a scene from a previous film in the series" doesn't actually roll off the tongue too well...

Was that TMI?

That is a "callback". Diggity, what you refer to as a "callback" is simply a reference to a previous film. Make up a new work that makes sense if yo umust, but don't pervert the use of one that already exists for a different purpose.

These "callbacks" you cite are just references....and frankly, some of them aren't even that.

my whole point is that making up a new use for the word "callback" is unnecessary. It's a reference to something in an earlier film. If you want to call it a "callback", that's your business. I'm not tellign you to stop. I'm just telling you it's not necessary. I would, however, disagree with you on some of the thigns you see in this new Indy movie that you feel are specific "retreads" or "callbacks" to the the other Indy movies. Some are to be expected (for better or worse) because they already established a precedent for doing that as early as ToD ("no gun for the swordsman" bit.) But some of the ones you have mentioned I just don't see. Let's agree to disagree and leave it at that. I'm not even going to try and change opinions that you're certainly entitled to have.

But I changed my mind.

http://tinyurl.com/32dba9

http://tinyurl.com/4vhenn

Please don't thank me for something that wasn't expressed outright.

Nice Gaius is totally allowed to take back his "prop giving". It doesn't matter what he thought or when he thought it. He ultimatly decided that you deserved no props. So you get none.

Your logic is absurd. What are you in fourth grade? CONSIDERING something and DOING something are two ENTIRELY different things. Surely you can grasp this, no?

Here's an example for you: I am CONSIDERING killing my boss this afternoon. That doesn't mean I am going to DO it. And it certainly doesn't mean that I DID it. In fact, until I actually DO kill my boss, NOTHING has actually transpired. Because I didn't DO anything. I just THOUGHT about it. Class dismissed.

stop before you dig yourself deeper in.

Did you notice that line Indy said in the new IJATKOTCS trailer was a prevmovieref to Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom?

Why yes, I did notice that line Indy said in the new IJATKOTCS trailer was a prevmovieref to Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom.

Hmm, perhaps instead of saying Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, we should say, IJATTOD.

No, I don't like that idea too much. It's silly. It might be a handy abbreviation to use in an AICN talkback though.

What's AICN stand for?

I don't really know, but those prevmoiverefs in the new IJATKOTCS trailer just have me gooin' in my pants.

Oh, I wouldn't say they're that good.

END OF EXAMPLE OF USAGE OF TERM PREVMOVIEREF.

Holy shit, the things I do when I'm bored at work. Catch y'all later. About to go see early showing of Iron Man. Can't wait to see the new IJATKOTCS trailer! Haven't actually watched it yet. Discipline, gentlemen, is the key to happiness.

What a heroic display of mental masturbation!

You're still a fruitcake.

What a fucking asshat.

The correct term is surely "reference". As in KOTCS references ROLA by having Indy rescue his hat.

Why the fuck do people feel the need to make up new terms or misapply actual words (FOR THE RECORD ANYONE THAT USES "ACTION" AS A VERB SHALL HAVE THEIR GENITALS CUT OFF AND FED TO A GRABOID. SAME GOES FOR THE WORD "PROACTIVE")? reference will do fine.

Why don't you proactively showcase your analytical skills and action me a 300 word report vis a vis Newt=Jones?

Although, I struggle to think of my favourite bit, but the pigman fight has to be a contender.

Either that or when he tries to shag the guard disguised as the princess (worst transformation ever filmed). I still maintain that it is the fact that it is all so fucking po-faced that makes it magnificent.

Probably for a governmnet organisation like the DLV.

As for his female sidekick, that's none other than the late Lana Clarkson who that bastard Phil Spector shot in the face.

A million pencils of torment await his black heart in Hell.

Or the tattoo that keeps moving on the villain's head. And the fact that he keeps his all powerful magic amulet pinned to a wall. Or that Deathstalker has a sword that makes him invulnerable when he is holding it. So he keeps putting it down for no apparent reason.

There's a great drinking game to be constructed out of it.