Ain't It Cool News: The best in movie, TV, DVD, and comic book news.

Quint and THE KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL!

first by LarryTheCableGuy	May 18th, 2008 07:26:39 PM

Second by mrfan	May 18th, 2008 07:27:57 PM
Maybe
Call him Dr. Jones, Quint! by Stereotypical Evil Archer	May 18th, 2008 07:29:00 PM

I'll be there by Cpt. Arnoldo	May 18th, 2008 07:29:23 PM
at the midnight show. I work at the movie theatre til 12 anyway, so I might just stick around. Color me fucking excited, despite all the nasty comments Quint points out.
Also, count me in... by mrfan	May 18th, 2008 07:32:18 PM
as to still excited about seeing this. I just want a fun time at the movies. I think this is just one of the movies that will do that this summer.
i'll go see it, begrudingly by Magic Rat	May 18th, 2008 07:32:37 PM
I'm not expecting much. Harrison Ford look ancient in the trailers, plus, honestly, he's not that good of an actor anyway. What's the last good movie he was in?
Quint and the Positive Lukewarm Review by chrth	May 18th, 2008 07:33:45 PM
I can't wait to see where Mori falls on this film...
Shouldn't we all start bashing Jar Jar now? by Keeper Of Chimps	May 18th, 2008 07:33:49 PM
How's everyone's childhood doing?
Can't wait to see this, just can't wait!! by Ecthelion	May 18th, 2008 07:34:34 PM

The 3rd best sequel? by Bobo_Vision	May 18th, 2008 07:36:41 PM
There only were 3 sequels? Thats the same as saying its the worst of the four movies. I can understand how that isn't necessarily bad, since the first 3 are exceptional movies to live up to, but still. Its like telling a kid with four brothers that he's the fifth smartest son.
WOW by Lashlarue	May 18th, 2008 07:37:04 PM
An honest review.
Temple of Doom gets better with each viewing. by Stereotypical Evil Archer	May 18th, 2008 07:37:16 PM
I used to think of it as a throwaway, but it really shows the extremes that Indy must go through and learn from before he's mature enough to deal with the Ark, or the Grail...or Mayan Skulls.
Actually Skull is the 2nd sequel, Doom was a prequel. by Stereotypical Evil Archer	May 18th, 2008 07:38:58 PM

Temple of Doom Blew cause he never really did any archeology stu by Jugdish	May 18th, 2008 07:40:05 PM
Think about it- Temple has zero archeology scenes in it- you Bozo's like it cause we were all around the same age as Short ROund when it came out
I am excited about this film again! by AshesOfDonnie	May 18th, 2008 07:41:23 PM
Basing it on the previews, the film looked bland, but both Harry and Quint's reviews have given me hope. yeah, we all know its not gonna surpass the originals but I'm content that it will be another good chapter to the adventures. Long Live Dr. Jones!
TOD is still the best Indiana Jones movie by Magic Rat	May 18th, 2008 07:41:44 PM
non-stop action pretty much all the way through. Raiders has good scenes at the beginning and end, but lags in the middle. Last Crusade was a comedy.
If it's closest to Last Crusade in spirit... by epitone	May 18th, 2008 07:42:47 PM
...then that puts a big smile on my face because I freaking love that movie more than life itself. I can admit that Raiders may be a better movie, but I've watched Crusade a million more times because it's so much fun.
thinking about it by Magic Rat	May 18th, 2008 07:43:14 PM
if you spliced all three films you'd get one really awesome one. Take the beginning of Raiders, the middle of Temple of Doom and the end of Last Crusade and you'd have one awesome Indiana Jones movie.
Moriarty and the Last Skull Raider of Doom by Stereotypical Evil Archer	May 18th, 2008 07:43:41 PM

I agree: ToD does get better... by PirateEmery	May 18th, 2008 07:44:30 PM
I just rewatched it last night and I actually enjoyed it a lot.
as a kid, i always hated that dionner scene from Temple of Doom by AshesOfDonnie	May 18th, 2008 07:44:41 PM
and the Thugee cult, shit creeped me out when you are 4/5 years old. but even as a kid I hated Kate Capshaw's character.
Where's Moriarty's review! by Stereotypical Evil Archer	May 18th, 2008 07:44:57 PM
Hopefully he doesn't drone on about the script and writes about the movie!
What's this about.... by Herb West	May 18th, 2008 07:45:15 PM
CGI monkeys and Suburb Shia swinging with them?
You're right, Jugdish by Bobo_Vision	May 18th, 2008 07:45:30 PM
Temple of doom needed more archeology. Indy should have done some carbon dating, dusted off some fossils, some digging, trips to the museum - that sort of thing. You're so on point.
Darabont's script by TheXeno	May 18th, 2008 07:46:49 PM
I really wonder what Darabont's Indy would have been compared what they ran with here.
Yeah it will proballly be like Rocky,Rambo and Die Hard. by Redfive!	May 18th, 2008 07:47:43 PM
A Good movie and fun to see the character do his thing,but nothing original...and probally didnt need to be made either.
John Williams is god. by Silverglade	May 18th, 2008 07:48:44 PM

Thanks Quint by I Own You	May 18th, 2008 07:49:22 PM
I think one thing a reader of this site needs to understand is that Harry has a child-like wonder over most properties he sees. It's not a fault, it's his sandbox after all. I like the site for reviews from you and Drew, you both balance it out. You allow us to do a rotten tomatoes or meta critic in our heads as we get your impressions. SO thank you for the honest review. I'll keep it in mind as I plan to watch the film.
This seems like a reasonable review by YackBacker	May 18th, 2008 07:50:17 PM
It acknowledges the flaws but recognizes that it is an adventure movie in the same vein as the previous films (mostly with LAST CRUSADE, according to Quint, which I was expecting). If I get another LAST CRUSADE type film, I'm gonna be fucking happy as all heck. Thanks, Quint, this was some strong work on your part.
Hey TheXeno, in Darabont's version Indy shoots Mutt at the end by YackBacker	May 18th, 2008 07:51:17 PM
Because the Ruskies are taking over and there's no hope at all, man!
Reviews on RT by JackinNYC	May 18th, 2008 07:53:34 PM
Are pretty positive so far. So I guess that is encouraging. I would have seen it anyway. No matter what.
Watching TLC right now. by QuiGonnJin&Tonic	May 18th, 2008 07:53:55 PM
How anyone can knock that movie is beyond me.
Archaeology in TOD by chrth	May 18th, 2008 07:56:41 PM
I think the point was there's a lack of scholarly problem-solving like there was in Raiders and TLC. That was actually the best part of TLC, the following of the clues. Raiders was good too, especially with the staff and the map room. TOD didn't really have much of that nature.
Allison Doody = Hot by QuiGonnJin&Tonic	May 18th, 2008 07:56:49 PM
Even if she was a Nazi bitch.
Ebert liked it. by jimmay	May 18th, 2008 07:56:52 PM
That counts for something.
QuiGonnJin&Tonic by Herb West	May 18th, 2008 07:57:09 PM
Yeah, it did have it's moments. Even the haters have to admit that Connery was spot on perfect. I totally bought that he was "the professor that the students hoped they didn't get."
Yeah, I'm officially excited now. Phew. by YackBacker	May 18th, 2008 07:58:44 PM
I was an original naysayer to this project back when it was announced. We don't need to go through another abortion of a beloved movie franchise, I said. Lucas is not to be trusted. Spielberg doesn't make legit actioners anymore. Ford sucks balls! But then today happened. The reviews came in and its beginning to look a lot like movie christmas. I hope this is the real deal.
Thanks Bobo- you get what I am saying- IF TOD was great then y by Jugdish	May 18th, 2008 07:59:41 PM
They never brought Willy back or Short Round for the crusade or for this new one- its as if it never existed..Its cause the film really had no Archeology stuff and it really doesn't fit with the other 2....Makes me wonder what I would have thought of Return of theJedi if I saw that as a man in my late 20's instead of having seen it as a little 8 year old kid and loving it- if I were in my late 20's and saw TOD after loving Raiders- I'd be pissd
Quint, don't feel bad by aversiontherapy2	May 18th, 2008 08:00:05 PM
Harry has a history of histrionic reviews, none of us trust them, we read yours and Moriarty's for the facts.
It's not that the Last Crusade is a bad film by chrth	May 18th, 2008 08:01:31 PM
It just seems like some of the characters are sacrificed for the sake of a joke, especially Brody. If Raiders had never happened, Last Crusade would be a great film. But based on what was established in Raiders, it's just a very good one.
Why archeology didn't matter in TOD... by YackBacker	May 18th, 2008 08:02:31 PM
Why? Because the Macguffin was truly unimportant. The Shankara stones were not the ultimate purpose of the movie. It was getting the stones back to the village along with THE CHILDREN. If anything, the kids were the real Macguffin. The scene where the tribe explains to Indy what happens perfectly illustrates this-- he's translating to Willie that the stone was stolen, that the crops dies, etc. and then he only starts to give a shit when he hears that the children were taken away. This is why TOD rocks-- Indy becomes a truly selfless hero. He's there to get those kids free. The whole "fortune and glory" phrase was tongue-in-cheek. TOD was legit.
Return of the Jedi is a fantastic film ... by chrth	May 18th, 2008 08:04:12 PM
if you ignore the parts involving Han Solo and focus on Luke. Unfortunately, there are a lot more Han Solo fans than Luke fans in the world, so Empire (which is a weak film with a lot of quotable lines) is considered better than Jedi, simply because bounty hunters are cooler than Ewoks.
TOD = a very special episode of Macguyver by Jugdish	May 18th, 2008 08:04:53 PM
you know the 2 hour variety type
Thanks Herb by QuiGonnJin&Tonic	May 18th, 2008 08:05:32 PM
Yes it is not ROTA but damn if it isn't a great film. That's my opinion at least. With all the crap produced today I will take Last Crusade over most films.
Thanks Quint by ScottinDC	May 18th, 2008 08:07:26 PM
Thank you for a more rounded and insightful review than the one Harry squeezed out.
I loved TOD and LC... by kolchak	May 18th, 2008 08:08:00 PM
because they're all chapters in the adventure. Why are we all expecting Raiders?
Loved Temple and Crusade. by mrfan	May 18th, 2008 08:12:17 PM
Of course nothing can top Raiders. Still, I think they are both wonderful additions to the world of Indiana Jones.
Exactly, now when is Indy going to hit Bluray? by QuiGonnJin&Tonic	May 18th, 2008 08:13:25 PM

Quint, I'm puzzled by Shaner Jedi	May 18th, 2008 08:14:03 PM
by this criticism: "I think a lot of the trouble with KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL is that the MacGuffin forces Indy to be almost a complete observer for the last act of the movie. In fact, almost everybody involved in the climax does little besides stand around looking at things happening." Do you remember the climax of Raiders? Hell, they didn't even WATCH it happen.
Giddy as a school boy! by Keeper Of Chimps	May 18th, 2008 08:14:22 PM
I wasn't excited at all about this until now.
Spielberg the less goofy by Thunderbolt Ross	May 18th, 2008 08:16:59 PM
Sure, sure, he never does anything goofy ...
kolchak, mrfan by Herb West	May 18th, 2008 08:18:30 PM
Yes, they are all classic movies in their own way and it is one of those rare franchises in that all 3 chapters can be watched in any order and still appreciated. Honestly, if KOTCS is as good as Crusade, I'll be happy.
"the MacGuffin forces Indy to be almost a complete observer for by Junior Frenger	May 18th, 2008 08:18:46 PM
"...In fact, almost everybody involved in the climax does little besides stand around looking at things happening." Uhhh... yeah. Quint kind of like the ending to Raiders where Indy and marion were tied to a pole while the nzai's STOOD AROUND and were melted.
Shaner by Quint	May 18th, 2008 08:20:07 PM
I understand your point and even talked about that exact thing with friends after the movie. It's so much that he's an observer for the finale, but the entire third act. That's like if Indy just watched the trucks take the ark to the boat and then watched them unload it and do the ritual. I think you'll understand my point a bit better when you see the film. I don't want to say much more about it so I don't spoil anything, but it's a little more than Indy being tied up for the climax like in Raiders.
should read: by Quint	May 18th, 2008 08:21:07 PM
"It's not so much"
True Quint by Shaner Jedi	May 18th, 2008 08:23:57 PM
you did say the third act even in your critique. I can't wait to see it. BTW, who said this film was as good as Raiders? Harry loved it but didn't say that.
The only thing I'm afraid of now.... by Herb West	May 18th, 2008 08:25:55 PM
is "watching Lucas and Spielberg fight back and forth." I think we all expected it, but I have a feeling that Quint was being really generous and polite about it.
But is Indy recruited for the Avengers project by chrth	May 18th, 2008 08:27:03 PM
after the credits?
In short, by Buck_Turgidson	May 18th, 2008 08:27:24 PM
It didn't rape your childhood, but it may have engaged in some inappropriate touching.
Quint by Herb West	May 18th, 2008 08:27:51 PM
Can you tell us any more about the CGI monkeys? Is it really as bad as it sounds?
great review by kungfuhustler84	May 18th, 2008 08:28:44 PM
focused, and detailed. Harry's review was ridiculously lacking in any real useful information at all. Just a pointless love fest from somebody who already adored the movie months before seeing it. Harry actually made me not want to see it but this review has me excited for another Indy movie, flaws and all.
Herb West by Shaner Jedi	May 18th, 2008 08:29:53 PM
The only thing I'm afraid of now is "watching Lucas and Spielberg fight back and forth." I think that depends.
herb by Quint	May 18th, 2008 08:30:50 PM
It's... damn silly, but at that point in the movie I kind of dug it. The moment really is bug-fuck ridiculous, but it's a fun one nonetheless.
Wait a second Quint by Shaner Jedi	May 18th, 2008 08:31:56 PM
are we talking Jumanji-monkey silly or not that bad?
no by Quint	May 18th, 2008 08:33:23 PM
not that bad... but very, very, very silly
Oh, Ebert. You slay me! by kolchak	May 18th, 2008 08:33:28 PM
"Not many of the audience members will be as logical as I am, and wonder who went to the trouble of building parallell roads in a rain forest."
Quint hated it, so we will love it by Razorback	May 18th, 2008 08:34:20 PM
Thanks for the Lucas-raped-my-childhood review.
BRING BACK SHORT ROUND!!! by Kal Reeve	May 18th, 2008 08:36:22 PM
Him and Indy were a dynamite team and possessed a powerful father/son bond. I want to see an older Short Round on a great adventure with Indy.
I bet if Dr. Jones made a metal suit and.... by Mr. Profit	May 18th, 2008 08:38:16 PM
Ripped off the end of Robocop 2 the way Iron Man did, every review would be sucking its dick the was they inexplicably did Iron Man. Iron man was just OK yet this site OD'ed with praise. Why the double standard? I hate how people feel like Speilberg and Lucas owe them something. Its just a movie. If its good its good. No one expects to go into a film and have their life change unless they are fucking crazy.
Goofy by Fineus Fog	May 18th, 2008 08:39:04 PM
I watched Last Crusade again on the weekend and fuck me if it wasnt completely goofy - but thats what I love about these films and the best news is that the ultra cheesy punching sounds are back in - rather than the gay rape grunting of The Bourne Series. Roll on Thursday night (when I will be seeing it)
Razorback by Shaner Jedi	May 18th, 2008 08:39:22 PM
does every person need to absolutely love a film in order not to hate it? I really enjoy Temple of Doom because it's so different from Raiders. I don't love it, but that's not hate. Some films are just thrilling and fun.
Crusade not In same league ... by Dr. Temple Of Doom	May 18th, 2008 08:40:52 PM
Using Raiders as the standard, Crusade just doesn't hold up well to me as an Indiana Jones Film. There is too much comedy, not enough mounting obstacles and derring do.The action sequences are soft and pale in comparison. I hope the reviewers tell us where they think Crystal Skull ranks.( no pun intended) The tank chase is a good try but falls short when compared to the scene it mimics (Raiders "yet unsurpassed" truck chase.)
Here's the key to this movie . . . by lavaboat	May 18th, 2008 08:43:59 PM
You can't approach a movie like this as a self-conscious experience. If you do then the gears of scrutiny will already be in full swing before the curtain parts. Try to forget that you are about a watch something that has been "made". Try to forget that you're supposed to have an opinion about this. In other words, leave "yourself" at the door. Let the film wash over you. Give it a chance to be magical. You'll thank me later.
Quint you are a bigger better person for this review by IndustryKiller!	May 18th, 2008 08:45:47 PM
and I would personally like to say THANK YOU. You might not want to hear it from me, but given everything going on with this film right now it took balls writing this, an even handed account. I love how they are already saying you "hated" the film, I swear some of the people on this site are incapable of hearing anything that doesn't jibe with what they want. Don't worry about it, as always, time will quell the hyperbole and everyone will come around.
So what exactly did they do to Brody? by bah	May 18th, 2008 08:46:04 PM
Seriously, I've heard this a lot, but I just rewatched Raiders, and I don't know where the hard-ons for Brody come from. He's got about five lines, none of them critical except to fill in Indy's background. I know, there's the line about how 5 (or is it 15) years ago, he'd have done it himself, and people took that to mean he used to be much like Indy. But this time, I took that line as BS, completely in character with the Brody of Crusade, the one who's bragging about his riding ability as he's sideways on his horse. Crusade fleshed out Brody, but it didn't destroy anything that had been given previously.
How silly really??? by blazeoflglory	May 18th, 2008 08:47:26 PM
Is it any more goofier than the feast in Temple of Doom or the monkey in Raiders giving the nazi sulute? It would be useful for comparison sakes becuase the other movies have some silly moments (that we love). I just hope it doesn't look silly CGI-wise. That is all I really care about.
Quint hates Lucas and so he hates Indy 4 by Razorback	May 18th, 2008 08:49:34 PM
I am just creating these hyperbolic titles to demonstrate how people react to blurbs over the whole of the message.
Temple of Doom was goofy... by Mr. Profit	May 18th, 2008 08:49:53 PM
And Kate Capshaw screamed the whole way through. But for a film made for 28 million the action is top notch. I enjoyed it as a kid, and I still laugh at it now. As far as the series goes Raiders is 1 and Doom is my 2nd fave. I didn't really care for part 3. Everyone loves it but to me it was one of those see it once, appreciate it, but rarely watch again type deals. People are just hating part 4 because they feel like they have to hate Lucas for "raping" them with those mediocre star wars prequels.
bah by Herb West	May 18th, 2008 08:53:25 PM
Yeah, and as someone pointed out in another talkback, Crusade Brody was meant to show that there is no other archaeologist on earth like Indy.
Quint hates Harry by Razorback	May 18th, 2008 08:56:16 PM
And he poops green.
Temple of Doom march theme is one of my favorites by xannibal	May 18th, 2008 08:56:31 PM
Sometimes I watch the end credits just to hear it.
Raiders by Shaner Jedi	May 18th, 2008 08:56:32 PM
is such a great film because it can harken back to those films before without having the wink-wink and flat-out steals from those movies. Plus, it is tonally consistent throughout. The perfect popcorn movie.
Hey xannibal, buy this CD by YackBacker	May 18th, 2008 09:02:49 PM
The Spielberg/Williams Collaboration CD from Sony Music. http://tinyurl.com/3qglnf It has "The Parade of the Slave Children" on it in its full glory. And some other great Indy music mixed in too. It is a must-have CD (and you can't get the original soundtrack for TOD without paying stupid $$-- it's an import).
Here's the thing for me by xannibal	May 18th, 2008 09:03:50 PM
It's like "Can Speilberg reteam with Lucas and make an action move in the CGI era?" If the answer is "no", then it's a major disappointment for me. Please don't tell me that Speilberg/Lucas don't have access to the best writers available - is the answer then that THEY made the wrong choice? (We already know Lucas can't recreate the original Star Wars magic) I don't want to hear that either, because face it haters - you WANT this movie to rock - bitch as much as you want, but you really do. If it doesn't, have the Michael Bays/Stephen Sommers of the world won because our childhood idol film-makers can no longer knock it.
Shaner Jedi by Herb West	May 18th, 2008 09:03:51 PM
You're right, and those were the great days that when you saw someone sliding under a speeding truck, you knew it was a real mother fucker doing it. Those are things that we will never see again.
Where the heck is Mori? Making another baby???? by YackBacker	May 18th, 2008 09:07:24 PM
Dude, we NEED to hear ya chime in!
These 20 to 30 year old fat-ass geeks who live in their parent's by expert_40	May 18th, 2008 09:13:00 PM
... because he's living the life they've wanted since they were kids. Duh! It's plain jealousy and easy psychology, really. All of these lame talkbackers wanted to meet Steven Speilburg and George Lucas. They all wanted to be in a Transformers movie and be in an Indiana Jones movie with Harrison Ford. The fact that Shia gets to do it and their lazy, WOW-playing fat-ass's don't, well, it drives them into fits of petty jealousy. Seriously, Shia is funny and talented. He carried the Transformer's flick and gave it heart. He made Disturbia more than the latest crappy teen horror movie. He's got that affable everyman quality like a young Richard Dreyfus or Tom Hanks. So of course all of these fat-asses who work at Hollywood Video for $6.00 / hr are going to hate him. He's living the life they want!
Temple of Doom by loogenhausen	May 18th, 2008 09:13:04 PM
Best Indy movie IMHO. The suspension bridge scene is the single best set piece in the entire trilogy.
Great review by Darth Thoth	May 18th, 2008 09:15:29 PM
I feel you Quint. I can't wait to see this flick and see how your sentiments match up to my thoughts on the film. Peace.
Mutt Williams = The New Jar Jar by That 70s Venom	May 18th, 2008 09:22:18 PM
Hahahahahaha... I'm totally kidding. All you Shia-haters... I don't understand you people at all. Shia is a good actor. So shut the fuck up please. You're just jealous that he is in all these cool movies and you're not.
assuaged? emboldened? by batzilla	May 18th, 2008 09:22:20 PM
Thats what I always ask myself. Oh brother.
Saw it this morning in Philadelphia by slone13	May 18th, 2008 09:27:19 PM
And I can't wait to see it again on Thursday. It was so much fun to have Indy back in action that I think I was willing to let some of the issues that Quint mentions slide. I think Quint's being a little overly dramatic in regards to how Marion's character is treated. (It's so great to see her again, I just wish she'd shown up sooner.) He's right about Winstone though, his character is ultimately pretty useless. If you have a problem with some of the crazier "over-the-top" Indy scenes (the raft/parachute or the mine cart track jump kind of thing) there's a few scenes in Crystal Skull that might bother you, but I love that stuff. SPOILER ALERT: When Indy flies about a half a mile in a refrigerator after a nuclear blast, it's priceless. The final scene is really fun. And for one split second it looked like Lucas and Spielberg were going to go and do the one thing I didn't want to see, some sort of passing of the baton from Indy to Mutt. And it nearly happens. They want you to think that's what you're about to witness, but then they turn it around instead. As if to mock the idea that such a scenario could have ever even been considered. And I think it only confirms that Lucas was totally taking the piss when he was talking about Mutt being the lead in any potential Indy 5. Quint's also right about how it feels like an Indy movie. Ford's having a great time with Jones again and it shows. It was a great time.
Temple Of Doom FUCKING OWNS YOUR SOUL by That 70s Venom	May 18th, 2008 09:28:39 PM
ToD is a great fucking film. And yes I totally agree with loogenhausen... the bridge scene is one of my favorite film scenes of all time. Perfectly executed in every way. Although... Mola Ram did kinda die like a fuckin punk, lol. He should've gone down in a hardcore fashion. I think Samuel L. Jackson saw that scene and then he looked at George Lucas and said "Yo, homie, I do NOT wanna die like that punk in Revenge of the Sith." lol... seriously... his death should've been more dramatic, but that is like the only flaw in that whole movie, if you can even call it a flaw at all. The stone flies into the air and he tries to catch it with one hand and Indy catches it instead and then... for some retarded as fuck reason... Mola Ram reaches out with his other hand (the one he is using to hold onto the rope with) and he basically commits suicide like a little bitch, while Indy has a stone in one hand and he is holding on to the rope with the other. They could've at least had Mola Ram punch Indy a few more times and then have Indy shove the flaming Shankara stone into Mola Ram's chest, right into his heart (metaphorically it would be cool since Mola Ram is down with ripping mother fuckers' hearts out). That would've been perfect. Seriously guys pop your Temple of Doom DVDs in and watch the scene again where Mola Ram dies... he goes out like a complete bitch... a death totally unfitting for the greatest Indiana Jones villain in the whole trilogy.
Waiting for the two fat kids by Dragulf	May 18th, 2008 09:30:09 PM
chest bumping!
Devin Faraci must be the most miserable man alive... by JackIsLost	May 18th, 2008 09:30:11 PM
Seriously, read his review on CHUD. He's just such a negative, nasty pudge of excrement. Even though Harry and the gang may be sort of full of shit sometimes, at least I actually believe they give these things a fair shake. Was there any doubt that CHUD scumbag would hate this? And it's like that for everything. He doesn't need to see THE DARK KNIGHT to write his review b/c he's already decided he hates it. I almost pity that poor loser...
Cate Blanchett by Series7	May 18th, 2008 09:31:36 PM
God I think she is terrible. Personally I enjoy Shia on screen more then her, he is a much better looking female then she is. Shit I just realized that I have to watch all three episodes this week. Meh maybe I'll just do like Rambo and watch the first one right before I see the new one. Fucking work, I need to get paid to sit around and watch movies. Everyone at work thinks I am crazy for watching a movie a day.
That 70s Venom, I agree... by jarjarsjockstrap	May 18th, 2008 09:38:55 PM
They've been playing the hell out of the original trilogy the past couple weekends (USA, SCIFI), and I'll be damned if TOD doesn't totally rock. "Mola Ram! Prepare to meet Kali ... in HELL!" Is one of the single-greatest moments in Indy history, period. Short Round kicking Mola Ram's goons in the cajones -- priceless. The alligators eating robs, sans bodies -- genius. Man, Indy rocks.
"Hang on lady, we going for a ride..." by loogenhausen	May 18th, 2008 09:39:46 PM
He no nuts...he's crazy!
a script doesn't matter to Lucas by guerillakarma	May 18th, 2008 09:40:44 PM
all about the visual effects and money.
JackIsLost... by TroutMaskReplicant	May 18th, 2008 09:42:12 PM
Pfft. You do know that the only reason people read CHUD is for the amusing misanthropy and the cynical views on the movie business? You only read that CHUD review because you knew you'd hate it. Talk about double standards...
I think Quint meant to say... by slicer	May 18th, 2008 09:45:15 PM
the third best film. Not the third best sequel. So, it would be ROTLA, TOD, KOTCS then TLC.
Actually Devins review is easily the most concise so far by IndustryKiller!	May 18th, 2008 09:45:26 PM
It hits every point, makes clear concise arguments, addresses specific moments from the film as well as questions of tone and atmosphere. If you like Harry's review and dislike Gavins then its only because it's what you wanted to hear. I dare you to show me a better written review.
slicer by Quint	May 18th, 2008 09:47:03 PM
nope, at least not after my first viewing. I'd put it after LC right now. That might change after repeated viewings, but I did mean third best sequel.
Quint shows why this generation has no heart. by LordEnigma	May 18th, 2008 09:49:41 PM
Harry took it to you, boy. Get a heart.
I am so glad that George Lucas... by Keeper Of Chimps	May 18th, 2008 09:52:14 PM
doesn't write to please you whiney fuckers. How long before you all auto-erotic asphyxiate yourselves?
Yeah, CHUD sucks... by acorvey25	May 18th, 2008 09:54:18 PM
Devin's "take" on the film was laughable.
Lot of miserable bastards in TBs here too... by JackIsLost	May 18th, 2008 09:56:06 PM
No surprise. Actually, Ebert's review, in terms of pure writing quality, is by far the best so far. The point he makes about comparing which pound of sausage tastes the best...priceless.
so Shia plays the son of Remo? by Reprobus	May 18th, 2008 09:56:42 PM
I don't get all the Shia hate either. My only problem with him is that he seems a little generic, bringing the same thing to every movie so far. Hopefully that changes once he outgrows the roles he's been getting a bit. As it is, you coulda told me the kid in Forbidden Kingdom was Shia and I wouldn't have doubted it at all, at least until he pulled out the kung-fu. Anyways, I loved the tonal changes of ToD. Even at ten years old I was jazzed to hear it had a darker story. And what really freaked me out was that the evil priest guy totally reminded me of my dad. The only sour part of ToD for me was being a prequel. Whenever I hear Indy say, in Raiders, "i don't believe in that hocus-pocus mumbo-jumbo", it doesn't add up with the glowing rocks, fingers-to-the-heart stuff that he's "already" witnessed. But...minor stuff! can't wait for the 22nd.
Explain Acorvey by IndustryKiller!	May 18th, 2008 10:04:17 PM
Seriously, explain how Devins review is laughable. It's inarguably the most in depth review so far.
Actually Faraci's review is only slightly more negative than Qui by TroutMaskReplicant	May 18th, 2008 10:04:19 PM
But he seems to be more unpopular than George Lucas...
Than Qui? Quint Obviously... by TroutMaskReplicant	May 18th, 2008 10:05:51 PM
At least I spelled Faraci right...
Devin's review... by acorvey25	May 18th, 2008 10:07:36 PM
I just hate when critics like Devin say a film is "deeply flawed" but fail to offer up any concrete reasons why. His whole review is just a bunch of vague criticisms written with a slight air of scum-bag superiority (yes, I stole that line from "The Departed.") How the fuck does he know Spielberg was "bored" and only "mildly engaged" while directing the film? Bullshit...
Honestly, KOTCS was my 2nd favorite. by Novaman5000	May 18th, 2008 10:08:45 PM
I happened to like last crusade the best, then crystal skull, then ark, then temple (and i liked temple, i just liked it least out of the 4). People might think im crazy for putting crusade above ark, but it just felt bigger, more epic, and had a far more satisfying conclusion than the original film. There were alot of great moments in skull. This one was not as campy as temple, which was nice. Great set pieces- I thought the jungle chase was really fantastic. Most importantly, it FELT like an indy movie. This movie is going to make an outrageous amount of money this weekend and I think, for the most part, it deserves it. As for music, there are definitely some new cues that were reminiscent of Last Crusade, which was great.
weekend almost over and still no rip thread for elder by bacci40	May 18th, 2008 10:08:47 PM
ya...cuz we gotta get in all the reviews for indy...even though it is a critic proof movie and will make a gazillion dollars...will elder will come back and haunt you all
Faraci doesn't like movies by messi	May 18th, 2008 10:09:57 PM
well maybe he just like movies with humans and human emotions, which is lame. i rather see fun.
Nice Review by Bearded Clam	May 18th, 2008 10:10:26 PM
I never post, but i particularly thought this was a good review. I mean i get it, its an okay movie, take it for what it is and have a good time, but maybe its not what it could have been, however its going to be fun. i think sometime we don't give these guy credit for being being pretty good at what they do. nice review, i will be seeing this.
They should have used a different object. by greenstyle92	May 18th, 2008 10:12:05 PM
The Crystal Skulls are very obviously faked. At least the Ark and holy grail may have been real, (slim chances, but still.) and the stones are sort of an exaggeration of a real thing...
Also... by acorvey25	May 18th, 2008 10:13:49 PM
Devin rambles on and on about the action being "flat" which proves beyond a reasonable doubt that he has no idea what he's talking about. Spielberg's action directing has never been "flat." Even in a mediocre film like "War of the Worlds" the action was exhilarating.
The REAL problem with Temple of Doom... by JackIsLost	May 18th, 2008 10:14:05 PM
is Kate Capshaw. She is so annoying and really makes you want Karen Allen back. Other than that, it's a pretty good movie but Kate has so much screentime, that it takes the air out of the movie.
Actually, I'd bet the goofy parts are Spielberg's by drompter	May 18th, 2008 10:16:45 PM
Lucas is darker than people give him credit for, and Spielberg is goofier than people is willing to admit.
And Spielberg knew it! by greenstyle92	May 18th, 2008 10:21:39 PM
Story goes that Spielberg and Ford did not want to use the crystal skulls, but Lucas had a hard on for them and kept forcing them down their throats. Finally Spielberg and Ford relented.
Actually all the crystal skulls are fake by IndustryKiller!	May 18th, 2008 10:25:07 PM
Or at least so says those nutty scientists and their FACTS. But nice try geniuses. Not that their existence has any bearing on the film.
Lucas was going thru his divorce by Shaner Jedi	May 18th, 2008 10:29:24 PM
when they were developing TOD so that might be why it's so dark and the damsel is so annoying. It probably came from his heart.
I know the crystal skulls exist. by greenstyle92	May 18th, 2008 10:37:03 PM
Duh. But they were all made in the late 19th/early 20th century and there was a lot of lying/scamming. They're not meso-american. There's no legend about re-uniting them. They're bullshit. the earlier, smaller ones were beads that go carved, the later ones were carved with jeweler's tools. Some chick said her dad found one in an ancient temple, turns out he bought it at sotherby's. Seriously, google "Crystal Skull Fraud." Oops, but I may have accidentally misworded my original post to make it appear I didn't think they existed, so I will never have talkback credibility again.
Shaner Jedi, don't forget that hearts were pulled from chests! by YackBacker	May 18th, 2008 10:37:39 PM
Lucas' literal take on Marcia doing the poolboy.
I'm just saying they are a particularly sucky object. by greenstyle92	May 18th, 2008 10:39:15 PM
But hell, so were the Shankara stones, which the Skulls sort of remind me of. So the movie itself could still be good.
I love me some Indiana Jones... by blackmantis	May 18th, 2008 10:40:58 PM
...Raiders is probably my favorite film of all time, but damnit if you couldn't watch TV this weekend without hearing that damn theme song every five seconds. I'm starting to hate it, and I loved that theme song!
Spielberg's goofiest contribution: Kate Capshaw by YackBacker	May 18th, 2008 10:42:17 PM
God, talk about fucking the help. He gave that shreiking wretch free reign on that set. Now, if Lucas was directing, he would have made her wear a gold bikini and talk in an odd, inconsistent quasi-British accent. I would have gone with Lucas on that one point.
Hearts were pulled from chests in Iron Man too. by greenstyle92	May 18th, 2008 10:43:05 PM
I don't get it: In one scene, Tony Stark wants to change Stark Industries from Weapons manufacture to building Arc Generators and Obidiah thinks that's stupid. Later, Obidiah is desperate for cash and he wants to study Tony's little arc generator to start movie the company in that direction. And tony says, "Nope! This stays with me!" The hell? the only other Arc is 30 years old! they need to look at the new model to see where to go next. So Tony suddenly doesn't care about Arc generators, or his company, or helping people with alternative energy any more? Why the change?
Hmm, talk back's getting slow. by greenstyle92	May 18th, 2008 10:45:49 PM
For a second I thought Moriarty's review finally went live. No, just Sunday night slump. And Harry's is still active...
Bullshit, Quint by Atticus Finch	May 18th, 2008 10:46:42 PM
If you didn't notice any new music cues from KotCS, you must have had cum in your ears. I've listened to the soundtrack twice now, and "Call of the Crystal" and "The Adventures of Mutt", and "Irina's Theme" are welcome masterpieces to the Williams legacy, and those are just off the top of my head. Your hate for Lucas only allows you to begrudgingly say KotCS is pretty good, whcih must mean it is actually great. Its funny how you say you don't want to nitpick the film, then go on to do exactly that. You are so transparent it isn't funny. Go read Harry's review and be schooled on what it is like to go to the movies to lose yourself in fun and adventure for two hours instead of carrying around some half-baked "hatred" for Lucas that probably stems more from your own self-loathing than for anything Lucas ever did.
ughhh so this is a negative review because he... by BMacSmith	May 18th, 2008 10:49:56 PM
didnt suck its knob like Harry did? i thought it was pretty positive, but evenhanded. good job
greenstyle92 by YackBacker	May 18th, 2008 10:51:18 PM
Stark wasn't sharing the arc tech with Stane or anyone because as he told Pepper "You're the only one I can trust." He was going through what was likely PTSD following the 3 months he was a prisoner. And he knows that Stane would exploit it for the wrong purposes (maybe not to the extent that Stane really would have at that point in the film, but nonetheless, Stane is a greedy SOB, and that's never been a secret). So, it makes sense why Stark behaved the way he did. I mean he decided to build a protective suit of armor for crissake! That's a guy feeling very vulnerable, methinks.
temple was great for being so dark. fuck off. by BMacSmith	May 18th, 2008 10:51:25 PM

Fair enough, but... by greenstyle92	May 18th, 2008 10:54:50 PM
that still doesn't jive with his earlier stated goal of "looking back into Arc reactor technology." I still think the two scenes are incompatible because both Stark and Obidiah flipped positions. But hey, guess tony isn't thinking clearly and Obidiah changed his mind when he became desperate for cash...
atticus by Quint	May 18th, 2008 10:57:40 PM
If you actually read the review, instead of reading the parts you want to read in order to bolster your theory that I hate Lucas, you'll see that I mention that it didn't jump out to me and that upon a second viewing, when I'm not bombarded with everything at once, I might pick them out. I think you'd have to admit that listening to a soundtrack and hearing that score in a film are two completely different experiences. I asked five different people who were also at the screening and not one could remember any new music, let alone hum it. Of course there are new cues there, there have to be, but that's not how it came off to me. Every time I heard the score (and paid attention to it during the film) it was either the Raiders March or a cue from Last Crusade. I expect on the second viewing I'll pay closer attention to the score. And I don't need to get "schooled" by anybody. This is my opinion. I've seen the movie.
Indy a Commie? by MarkWhittington	May 18th, 2008 10:58:55 PM
I think that's a stretch, even in the bad old days of HUAC days (Tail Gunner Joe by the time of the movie was busily drinking himself to death, having self destructed during the Army Hearings.) One would have thought that accusations of grave robbing would have been more appropriate and provable.
greenstyle92, the scene is coming back to me by YackBacker	May 18th, 2008 11:00:52 PM
Actually, Stane is baiting Stark. If you recall, he says to Stark it's a failed technology, nobody could ever make it work practically. But he already knows that Stark has a mini arc in his fucking chest. He goes to Tony "Alright, show me" right there. He's pushing Tony's buttons. It's a subtle play by Stane.
the only reason capshaw was cast in doom was by bacci40	May 18th, 2008 11:04:13 PM
spielburg was bangin her...and no, doom sucked period...here is why..the point of raiders was to recapture the excitement of the old serials...it did that....temple lost that and replaced it with gross out scenes and children in peril...it just wasnt a fun movie...the fun returned in last crusade, basically because of connery...you could tell he was having a blast
Ebert by JackinNYC	May 18th, 2008 11:04:33 PM
said it best... "I can say that if you liked the other Indiana Jones movies, you will like this one, and that if you did not, there is no talking to you."
This movie is ABSOLUTELY perfect by Proman1984	May 18th, 2008 11:06:21 PM
Exactly what we wanted and much more than we deserved.
Glad to hear that, Proman1984... by acorvey25	May 18th, 2008 11:14:04 PM
My excitement for this film is beyond words.
Temple ROCKED, Last Crusade didn't by blue meanie	May 18th, 2008 11:15:04 PM
I'm just hoping that KFTCS isn't another Last Crusade, because I definitely thought that was the weakest of the bunch. I don't have any idea where all these haters of Temple are coming from. Temple of Doom ROCKED HARD; it was maliciously dark and evil, freaky scary (some parts are plain horrifying), great characters (Short Round is one hell of a sidekick) and Mola Ram is one of the great villians in moviedom. Yeah, Indy wasn't solely after "Fortune and Glory", but that's what made it great; he was more a humanist in trying to get the Sankara stone back to the village and free the enslaved children. Plus, it was a totally different environment and plot from Raiders. Last Crusade was simply an inferior rehash of Raiders, and aside from Sean Connery, I was bored, having "been there, done that already". I'm having a bit of trepidation in seeing KOFTCS, as the CG effects will never match the authenticity and danger of old school effects. I wished Lucas and Spielberg went back to old school ways and abandoned the CG. Nothing will ever compare to those "real" effects and stunts of the older movies...
Qunit...ya can't knock this third act... by rumple foreskin	May 18th, 2008 11:17:51 PM
ya can't knock the third act of KOTCS because indy is an 'observer.' lets remind ourselves of what the third act of "raiders..." was. It had Indy and Marion tied to a pole. they were again 'observers.' lets also take a look at another classic of the 'berg's "close encounters of the third kind." again, a classic third act wrapped in observaation. with such an inconsistent analysis on your part of the prior indy films and other classic berg films, your review is not sound and i take any negative you note with a total grain of salt.
Does Marion still drink? by I. Ratzkywatzky	May 18th, 2008 11:20:09 PM
RAIDERS was the greatest darkened theater experience of my childhood, and I always thought the element that was missing from the sequels was the hard-drinkin' Howard Hawksian heroine Marion Ravenwood. The main question on my mind since I heard of Marion's return in KOTCS has been "Does she still drink?" In RAIDERS we first see her in the iconic drinking contest and her final line (and the final line of the film) refers to getting a drink. I hope they haven't removed this element that was central to her character. By the way, in my review of RAIDERS on my BOOZE MOVIES Website, I said that Marion may be the perfect woman. If you want to check out that review, you can find it at http://boozemovies.blogspot.co m/2007/07/raiders-of-lost-ark- 1981.html
if any Indy was campy it was TLC by Prossor	May 18th, 2008 11:21:08 PM
they restorted to slapstick. brody/sallah became retards. TOD shoved its balls down your sockets.
Jugdish you ignorant slut by Prossor	May 18th, 2008 11:23:12 PM
who watches indiana jones for archeology? Are you a retarded fucking idiot?
Prossor, I call it the STAR TREK V effect by YackBacker	May 18th, 2008 11:23:57 PM
Bumping into bulkheads, finding out characters have long-lost family members, etc. The difference here is that Shatner is not hamming it up with a fedora and whip. Thank God for that...
Indiana Jones and the Waste of $5 for Parking by Kolchak2	May 18th, 2008 11:25:00 PM
I have to disagree with Quint and Harry--I just saw a screener and it is a major disappointment. (Very MINOR SPOILER ALERT) From the opening shot of a groundhog crawling from it's hole, you know that Speilberg and Lucas are going for camp. The "plot" was so full of holes, it was painful, and the villains were milktoast. I admit, it's still fun to watch Ford in a Fedora, so see it for that, but LOWER your expectations....and watch Raiders again to think of what could have been.
gotham_night by YackBacker	May 18th, 2008 11:26:03 PM
Sallah may not have been that big of a difference, but Brody became a flat-out retard in LC. In RAIDERS, he was an elegant man, with the hint of a shwashbuckler ("I wish I could join you"). LC's Brody... dumb. We're talking Jar-Jar stupid.
Jesus tap dancing Christ... by poeticwarriorII	May 18th, 2008 11:29:46 PM
A CGI monkey army that TheQueef Tarzan swings away from??? Oh for the love of God, this sounds like complete shit. Was this as stupid as it sounds or is there some kind of information that makes this not retarded?
INDIANA JONES AND THE MYSTERY OF KOLCHAK'S MILKTOAST by acorvey25	May 18th, 2008 11:36:06 PM
What the fuck does that even mean? Apparently we've resorted to making up new words for criticism.
gotham_night, thanks to TBS, I've watched it the other day by YackBacker	May 18th, 2008 11:39:09 PM
Brody is a museum guy who comes off a bit devlish. Look, you're right, Brody's characterization in RAIDERS is minimal, but it is distinct. And LC's Brody is a douchebag. I didn't catch that vibe in RAIDERS. In fact, RAIDERS really didn't waste much screentime on douchebags. Action, villains and mayhem.
Has Anyone Read The Chud Review On Rotten Tomatoes? by fassbinder79	May 18th, 2008 11:42:35 PM
That review makes me nervous. Either way I bought my advanced ticket today for an early morning thursday showing. As much as I love Raiders (it is one of the best adventure films ever made) and Crusade (lighter than Raiders and Doom but the character stuff is strong between Indy and his father) - Not a fan of Doom (loved it as a kid but it doesn't hold up and some of it is not only juvenile but pretty racist-despite the coolness of seeing Indy go bad) - I just can't believe from what I've seen (trailers) and read (even many of the positive reviews) that this is going to be good. I'm also getting more than a bit annoyed seeing every single negative comment or review about the film blaming Lucas for the film's flaws. Even the Chud review does this to my dismay. Lucas did not direct this movie. Spielberg did. If you're going to say something good about the film the praise can't only go to spielberg and the negatives then tossed on Lucas. And the bottom line is any Indy movie with too much CGI can't be all good. Swinging monkeys? Skulls being used to revive alien bodies? That doesn't fly even in the realm of Indy lore. I just can't see this film working. It bums me out. I really miss the way I felt seeing films as kid in the 80's. The last two films that made me feel like that in recent memory were Nolan's BB, The Prestige and The Incredibles. I hope this will be good. But Spielberg has been really letting me down. And Kaminski should not have been DP on this.
For all the reviews go here by Megamonki	May 18th, 2008 11:43:10 PM
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt03 67882/board/flat/106432963
Kaminski kind of bothers me too by YackBacker	May 18th, 2008 11:44:20 PM
Soft lighting and saturation. He made CATCH ME IF YOU CAN look sleepy. Fuck that.
not working by Megamonki	May 18th, 2008 11:44:38 PM
go to imdb and go to the boards their should be a thread about all the reviews(good and bad)
TLC was a little too silly. even Raiders was dark. by BMacSmith	May 18th, 2008 11:57:38 PM
it had people's face melting off! LC feels a little different than the other two.
JackISLost by Maui	May 19th, 2008 12:07:43 AM
Yes, 100% with you on that one. Kate Capshaw was a major negative in TOD. Elsa was the pits too in TLC. No one can touch Karen Black's portrayal of Marion. She is by far the best Indy female lead.
KAREN ALLEN by Maui	May 19th, 2008 12:09:13 AM
I meant...duhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!
Ivana Spankalot. by Fa Fa Fooey	May 19th, 2008 12:24:57 AM
I'm there.
Damn you, George Lucas! by Motoko Kusanagi	May 19th, 2008 12:28:38 AM
Damn you to hell!
I was being sarcastic... by Bobo_Vision	May 19th, 2008 12:28:46 AM
...about the lack of archeology in Temple of Doom, sarcasm doesn't always read well. I love TOD. I can't really compare TOD with Raiders because its like apples and oranges to me. They're both great in different ways, but I've watched TOD about ten times more than Raiders, its one of my favourites. I don't really care about the lack of archeology in TOD, because archeology was never really a significant part of the trilogy, but just an excuse to chase the artifacts.
Quint, what about that damned refrigerator? by vich1	May 19th, 2008 12:30:36 AM
Stupidest scene ever.
ya.. so what was the movie about? by sleeptones	May 19th, 2008 12:57:10 AM
idiot?
Lucas's "CG Involvement"? by Termigoonie	May 19th, 2008 01:00:20 AM
Guess what? That wasn't George's hand behind the "Tarzan scene." That was all Mr. S. Sorry. Do a little research, and you'll find that it's the case. George Lucas made these charaters, he developed the basic (and basically very strong) story, and the flaws I chalk up to the choices made in the direction and the screenplay. There are flaws. Lord knows there are flaws. There were flaws in all of the movies, "Raiders" included (weak villain, iffy stuff on the boat [sorry, guys, but it really does drag the plot], poor characterizations from anyone outside the four or five leads ... and it's still a rockin' movie). This movie was bound to have flaws, and I think that's what your whipping boy Mr. Lucas was trying to say a few weeks back. It's a movie. And guess what? It's a pretty good one. Better than "Raiders"? Come on, you all know that would be impossible. Better than "Doom"? I don't think so, but that's just because "Doom" was so DIFFERENT. Better than "Crusade"? WAY better than "Crusade," in my book. TONS better. And it puts "National Treasure" and "The Mummy" to shame, rightfully so. It's got a whopper of a tale to tell, and it could have used a few more weeks' worth of time, of Spielberg and Kahn sitting back, letting it breathe, then going back to it to see what didn't work. If any film could benefit from a "Special Edition" years down the line, something tells me this is it. (I'd love to see a cut with almost everything intact except "Tarzan" and the scorpion, both of which I thought were weak moments for the movie and weak for Shia.) Personally, I loved that it took time to tell the story, to let the audience know what the stakes are. I love that there are a couple of scenes that hearken back to Indy explaining the Ark -- a scene that, today, would read as wildly boring and talky. I just wish the movie had taken a few MORE moments to breathe, actually -- for instance, to give us more bearings in the warehouse (and its location, perhaps); to slow down and take more time with the crawlies (for those who don't know what they are, I won't say); to give Marion and Indy just a few moments longer together; to flesh out Spalko's character a bit more and give her something really sinister instead of "look into its eyes"; to offer up Indy OR Mutt one of those "will she still be with him?" moments that make you know the stakes in THIS QUEST are important. (There are some nice reflective moments, though.) But the motorcycle/car chase is absolutely slam-bang terrific, the waterfall sequence superb, the interplay between Indy and Spalko appropriately loathful, the overall tone exactly right. It comes out not half-baked at all. Just a little underdone. And the disappointment is the same as an underdone meal by a master chef. You appreciate everything that's gone into it, you genuinely like it, and it's better than anything else you've had all year. But after all you heard, you wish he had just taken a tiny bit more care. As for that original comment, though, and the heading -- don't blame George this time. He's the restaurant owner, and he was wandering around the kitchen ... but he wasn't preparing the dish.
...and the Temple of Rap by RTDInternational	May 19th, 2008 01:04:25 AM
Super goofy but kinda smart take on the new film. Indiana Jones and the Fortress of Rap. http://tinyurl.com/6fjykb
Bah's Point about Brody by WerePlatypus	May 19th, 2008 01:27:40 AM
I agree with his question. What exactly was wrong with Brody in Crusade? Considering that Brody has only has a few exposition scenes in Raiders, I don't get it. They made him a comic fish out of water, which is more than he was, and I thought it was funny as hell . . . My favorite bit of his was Indy's bluff about Brody's competence, followed by his wandering through a crowd asking "Does anyone here speak ancient Greek?" Comedy gold.
Quint hates Lucas and despises Spielberg and I have proof. by HEADGEEK	May 19th, 2008 01:38:05 AM
Quint hates Lucas and Spielberg for giving him his favorite movies. He's bitter about this because he hates movies and they made him feel like his hatred for film was questionable. I can prove this because Quint doesn't spend every spare moment searching and watching as many new films as possible. He actually also spends moments he can't spare watching films. That said... the mere fact that Quint prefers JAWS to RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK... well, its a disconnect between Quint and me. I love Jaws... but man... it's RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK for me. JAWS is a much more "real" film - but I prefer the fantasy of RAIDERS... the PULP of it all. And Lucas - he's an easy foil - but the fact is he may be a goofy daffy bastard sometimes... but he's that wacky uncle I've grown up loving - and now I feel he's eccentric and all the more lovable for that.
Spielberg works best without big budget by Prossor	May 19th, 2008 01:43:52 AM
like in Duel and Jaws. He was razor sharp with those, no sappyness whatsoever. Even Raiders had his goofy shit kicking in for the wide-eyed children.
still though... by Prossor	May 19th, 2008 01:45:48 AM
I would say Spielberg up to Close Encounters was raw and giving the finger to children audiences. Close Encoutners to Jurassic Park he was at his best with the wonder-spectacle, Shindler to now he's sappy/"serious" phase.
TEMPLE OF DOOM is my favorite out of the series by Mike_D	May 19th, 2008 01:55:23 AM
LAST CRUSADE was kinda boring. RAIDERS was a great intro to the universe, but was a little bored with it too.
Raiders ends with Indy doing nothing by David Cloverfield	May 19th, 2008 02:04:18 AM
He fails at stopping a bunch of nazis killing themselves - that's all he accomplishes. So being a bystander is not new for Indy.
Some people don´t want to like this movie by CuervoJones	May 19th, 2008 02:16:53 AM
Sick people.
Termigoonie's review by Dene	May 19th, 2008 02:17:03 AM
Thanks for that, a very reasonable review. I've a feeling I might have similar thoughts. Sounds like they pulled off what was, let's face it, a Herculean task. If it's far from perfect, well in this day and age what is in the movie world? Very little, esp. in the summer blockbuster field. 'Last Crusade' would have been ripped to shreds if the Internet had been around then. Too many silly jokes -- can you imagine the reaction the to librarian and his date stamper?!
Saw it...I agree with Quint by Jabroni	May 19th, 2008 02:34:21 AM
The things that are bad have nothing to do with the acting, it's the script and what is being asked of the action. With that said I waked away feeling I would not trash the movie entirely due to a few silly scenes. The ending blew goats for me, but I understood. Quint's mention of the monkey army was #1 bad for me, however there is a heck of a lot of stuff that's pure Indy and I loved it for that.
A good sign by CuervoJones	May 19th, 2008 03:03:26 AM
CHUD assholes don´t like the movie. That means the movie is good.
Well, Quint and Moriarty both seem to like the film.. by Gabba-UK	May 19th, 2008 03:32:03 AM
despite it flaws and frankly, as their the two best writers on AICN, that good enough for me!! Sold!!!
A CG monkey? by DiamondJoe	May 19th, 2008 04:00:43 AM
Ah, the poisonous hand of Lucas. I've almost missed it.
The Iron Man praise by warsinthesun	May 19th, 2008 04:02:05 AM
There has never been such a mediocre wave of films in all of film history as there is now(1998-present). So of course movies that are good tend to look brilliant.
Damn You Michael Bay by MCMLXXVI	May 19th, 2008 04:12:49 AM
Damn You Michael Bay
The light behind Ford's eyes is CGI by random dude	May 19th, 2008 04:35:56 AM

How could it be on the same level as Raider!!!??? by FILMFUNK	May 19th, 2008 04:42:51 AM
I think you ask too much! As long as it's equally as good as the other sequels then What's the Problem? Frickin Hell If Fors Spielberg and the crew don't deliver EXACTLY what everyone want and STILL ''It Aint Raiders!'' I'm Glad it aint Raiders! I've seen that 3ooooooo times already, It's a perfect movie and I love Temple Of Doom and Last Cruisade but I want something different from this like aliens and ants and Ray Winston and the continuation of an older relationship b'tween Indy and Marion! and I FUCKIN CANNOT WAIT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!
Last Crusade was a reash of RAIDERS w/out Marion... by Mike_D	May 19th, 2008 05:19:03 AM
...and his dad being his "sidekick" in it. It had its moments, but TEMPLE OF DOOM was dark, comedic, and a throw-back to the great adventure serials.
Temple of Boredoom by Motoko Kusanagi	May 19th, 2008 05:40:21 AM
That says it all...
"It’s not perfect, but it ain’t bad either. " by Midnightxpress	May 19th, 2008 05:44:51 AM
...so it's just pointless then. Who needs an average Indy movie?
Headgeek by Knuckleduster	May 19th, 2008 05:49:19 AM
He won't be so lovable when he replaces Ford with Shia in the next Indy. Hey, maybe we can get rid of Sly and have his kid play the lead in the next Rocky movie.
TLC by henrydalton	May 19th, 2008 06:14:50 AM
Raiders may be the most important film, but Last Crusade is the most enjoyable. There, I said it.
Thanks for the review by happybunni	May 19th, 2008 06:20:32 AM
When I saw Harry say that he started crying and clapping his hands I knew his 'review' was a bit too involved. Thank you for an actual review.
Koepp's screenplay to Carlito's Way was excellent by Osmosis Jones	May 19th, 2008 09:42:51 AM

We...are going... by Osmosis Jones	May 19th, 2008 09:53:35 AM
...to DIE!!!
Stengah by CuervoJones	May 19th, 2008 10:23:18 AM
I did the same thing.
Goerge Lucas by WerePlatypus	May 19th, 2008 10:30:05 AM
wants Haunted Castles and a Mars Attack for chrissakes. Sure, they're pulpy stories, but not everything translates to a good movie. Mostly, these ideas are turds, and I have rows and rows of straight-to-video crap to prove it, from "10.5" to "Ice Spiders" to "Dyanamite Warrior". You have 100s of millions at your disposal to make a movie, so why on earth do you constantly try to legitimise crap that you loved as a kid? If he spent a little less time secluded at the ranch and a little more time with "the people," he might understand the question.
Let's Make by WerePlatypus	May 19th, 2008 10:34:50 AM
Indiana Jones and the Moon Warriors of Sector J. Indy can hijack a moon rocket and crash land, then fight off giant moon lizards with his whip. He didn't bother with a space suit, but as the moon has breathable oxygen, that won't matter. He gets kidnapped by a beautfiul tribe of moon women, who tell him of a resistance against the evil Karbah empire, consistin of floating blue heads. Indy whip them all, and discovers his own son, held prisoner at Moon Prison Alpha 3. They fight their way out, and discover an ancient temple built by giant space rats, which fortells of a savior in a fedora who will restore order to the peoples of the moon. . . . yeah, that's a winner.
Indy & 'Crystal Skull' > All Summer 2007 films! by ccchhhrrriiisssm	May 19th, 2008 10:40:03 AM
...and that is the honest truth!
Did you say CGI monkey army? by Abominable Snowcone	May 19th, 2008 11:00:12 AM
Please, no. Just no. Tell me it doesn't happen.
KOTCS rocks. by apolo_sputnik	May 19th, 2008 11:17:06 AM
If you didn't have a BLAST watching the new Indy, then there is something wrong with YOU and NOT with this movie.
Darabont Indy? by cloud_86	May 19th, 2008 11:44:53 AM
It was supposed to have been titled "Indiana Jones and the Sword of Arthur" hmm makes u wonder..
Stir of Echoes by Smoke Monster Loves Kate	May 19th, 2008 11:46:37 AM
whoa, he did that? i remember really liking that one.
"No ticket" by snapple_ladys_lazy_eye	May 19th, 2008 12:27:47 PM

Why Do People Act Like We Knew So Much About Brody? by BigTuna	May 19th, 2008 12:33:38 PM
How is his character crapped on exactly when he did very little in Raiders? He has much more to do in The Last Crusade, and hence you learn much more about him.
Quint, your Marion comment is ridiculous by slone13	May 19th, 2008 01:28:01 PM
I'm still confused as to your comment about how Marion's portrayed in the new film. What did Marion ever do that was really so amazing in Raiders? She would have died at the hands of Toht in her own bar if not for Indy. She got her ass kidnapped in Cairo. She couldn't escape from Belloq in the tent. She got herself thrown into the Well of Souls. And nearly taken by the Nazis on the submarine had it not been for Kantanga. So I ask again, what exactly did she do in Raiders that was so impressive?? At least in Crystal Skull she's driving the truck during one of the best action scenes ever filmed.
Slone13 by toadkillerdog	May 19th, 2008 02:08:45 PM
Not to speak for Quint in this matter, but what I think he is referring to is the fact that she never shrank from a situation that put her in danger, nor did she back down from Indy - or anyone else. Yes, she required rescuing, but she never complained that 'Oh, I broke a fingernail' like Willie, nor was she duplicitpus like whatshername in LC. Marion, love her or hate her, evoked Lois Lane from the the 1940's Fleicsher(sp?) cartoons.
toadkillerdog by slone13	May 19th, 2008 02:31:06 PM
Marion doesn't shrink from any situation in Crystal Skull or at any point back down from Indy, either. She's just as feisty as she was in Raiders. In fact, her first line of dialogue in the new movie is "Get you lousy hands off me..." a nice nod to her nearly identical line in her bar in Raiders. I love Marion, and still don't see what the hell Quint's talking about.
slone by Quint	May 19th, 2008 02:42:31 PM
Marion spends 80% of the movie fawning over Indy, like she was the president of his fan club. I love Indy's heartfelt line to her in the back of the truck, I really do... but after he says it she's just goofy. That's the problem I had with her in the movie. You point out all these scenes in Raiders... that are MARION centric scenes. Her trying to escape from Belloq's tent. Her standing up to the Nazis in her bar, despite her being alone. There are no scenes in this new movie where she has a moment to remind us of that character... except for a line they just pulled from Raiders. Nobody's saying it's not great to see Karen Allen back, but if you think the character in Crystal Skull is anything but a shadowed version of the one we know and love from Raiders, then we're just going to disagree on that.
So…CHUD stands for Critics Head Up Derrière? by JackinNYC	May 19th, 2008 03:02:13 PM
Based on what I read, it should. What a snide, pretentious, mean spirited review.
Guess we're gonna have to disagree, hoss by slone13	May 19th, 2008 03:04:07 PM
Doe eyes aside (and c'mon, she kind of IS the president of the Indy fan club), I just feel that Marion's rather crucial portion of the jungle chase amounted to more than she did in all her scenes from Raiders, where, while nothing like Willie Scott, she still ultimately served as nothing but the damsel in distress, albeit with an attitude.
Finally by Kurutteru Yatsu	May 19th, 2008 03:04:20 PM
Someone on AICN gets down to the business of reviewing the movie without half a page of wanking to wade through first. Thanks Quint. And acorvey25, I think kolchak was going for "milquetoast" (timid, meek, unassertive) but I think he may have been trying to describe them as bland or generic.
Dear Numbnuts Nerds by brobdingnag	May 19th, 2008 06:50:22 PM
ToD took place in 1935, carbon dating wasn't invented until 1949.
Good For You, Quint. by NoDiggity	May 19th, 2008 07:07:33 PM
Thanks for an honest and detailed review, reflecting the enjoyable and not-so-enjoyable parts. I'm sad that Marion was included just as a callback to Raiders.
Quint, best review on the site by quadrupletree	May 19th, 2008 08:55:24 PM
...as usual. Can't wait to see this on Friday and see if my reaction matches yours. Actually your reaction is better than my expectations so it will be an improvement.
JackinNYC: by Rev. Slappy	May 20th, 2008 03:03:15 AM
You expected something that wasn't a snide, pretentious, mean spirited review from CHUD? I can't really even read that site anymore, they are such unmitigated assholes. I hate movie sites where the writers seem to take no joy in the movie experience and just take a shit on the creative work of other people who are willing to take the risk or actually making something.
Can't wait to see it! by ricardomontalkhan	May 20th, 2008 07:27:57 AM
Great Review Quint! hey movie fans check out this new blog on blogspot. it's from a disgruntled tv producer. it's hilarious! it's called thebitterproducer
In Raiders..didn't he just sit and watch at the end as well? by knowthyself	May 20th, 2008 09:15:48 AM
Thats all he did. Watch them open the ark as God proceeded to kill them all.

Talkbacks

Quint and THE KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL!

User login

Quick Talkback

Talkbacks