Comments on: Dear George Lucas - quit destroying my childhood

By: Katie

Katie — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 03:44:22 +0000

Thanks for the info, is there an RSS Feed?

By: Bridgette Dotson

Bridgette Dotson — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 21:19:43 +0000

pcjm8cromlqnowow

By: David

David — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 20:26:04 +0000

Ty,

one quick thing. As far as I can tell, that whole Darabont offer never was “Fact.” it was rumor, from what i understand. If im wrong about that I apologize.

By: t clair

t clair — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 02:31:13 +0000

haha. wow. I really did sound upset. haha. I hate the movie, but yeah. Looks like I really took it too seriously.

I don’t think the alien plot line makes any sense in light of the spirit and nature of the other movies. I love science fiction, but not in an Indiana Jones movie. Raiders of the Lost Ark had to do with a religious artifact. Temple of Doom: religious artifact. Last Crusade: religious artifact. I am not suggesting that all of these movies need to follow that formula, but its the artifact in question that sets the tone for the film.

There are supernatural things in all of the movies. Really, Indiana Jones is a supernatural adventure series. Aliens are the stuff of science fiction. I think that is why it felt so out of place to me. One of the great things about Raiders of the Lost Ark and The Last Crusade is that they concern artifacts that exist. There are legends surrounding their origins that have to do with religion. In the movies, it is revealed that these objects really do have the power the religious traditions attributed to them.

I realize there really is the legend of El Dorado. I actually think there is even a legend of “Crystal Skulls” ( i think I saw something on the history channel about it). But I think this movie falls short in making the skulls actual alien skulls. There is nothing supernatural about an alien if aliens actually exist. They are just advanced people like me and you. It’s SCIENCE fiction, not supernatural fiction. I just think it feels out of place, and was a huge gamble they did NOT need to take. Frank Darabount hands them a script and they turn it down. (The guys wrote one of the best screenplays of all time, “The Shawshank Redemption”!) Then they remake Close Encounters of the Third Kind?

I just was very disapointed. There were a few minutes in there that made me very happy. I felt like Indy was back in the saddle. That, I suppose, was worth the eight bucks.

But then came the nightmares (literally). So maybe not.

By: David

David — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 19:46:22 +0000

Wow. Ty. Ease up.

The more i think about it, the more i like the “alien” plot line. It makes so much sense in light of the spirit and nature of the other films.

First twenty five minutes, garbage? how so?

By: T Clair

T Clair — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 04:35:23 +0000

i just noticed all these comments, and I have to chime in.

I literally had nightmares about this movie the night I saw it. It was honestly that bad.

Not only is it not an Indiana Jones movie, it’s not even a good movie.

If I wanted a crappy Indiana Jones knockoff, I would rent any of the Tomb Raider or Mummy movies.

Here were my feelings:

-first twenty five minutes: painful, painful garbage.
-middle hour and 15 min: Indy’s back! Just enjoy yourself Tyler! Have fun! w00t!
-Ending: Aliens. Need I say more?

I hate this movie. I am so passionate about it I actually get upset and can’t even carry on meaningful dialogue about it.

I am going to bed.

By: Nathan

Nathan — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 20:37:43 +0000

I’d agree with most of your main points in the article, Colin. For me, though, the biggest problem for me was what you said in the comments here about asking the audience to suspend disbelief just a bit too much. Stopping a mine cart with your feet? Crazy, but remotely believable. Almost any action sequence from this one? Just crazy.

The script just didn’t have the same tone to it that the old ones did. Too bad they couldn’t have gotten someone like, say, Frank Darabont to write it. Wait… I would have loved to have seen THAT movie.

By: Stuff and Things, June 7, 2008 « Iblogo Dei

Stuff and Things, June 7, 2008 « Iblogo Dei — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 16:46:30 +0000

[...] If you didn’t see it already, check out Colin’s review or the new Indiana Jones film over at the Hill. It sums up my thoughts precisely. It reminded me of [...]

By: David

David — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 20:38:47 +0000

John,
Again, I don’t think that Indy 4 wants to be taken seriously, or takes itself seriously at all. In fact, i think that, at least in part, it is a comic jab at the series. I think it intends very purposefully to be campy and ridiculous. What was meaningful about the RAIDERS was atypical adventure story line. It took the archetypes of the action film and altered them. The hero became a scholar with a fear of snakes and a note book of clues. Indy was no James Bond, he had fears. He didn’t drink martinis the same way. And it dealt with supernatural ideas and realms: The ark and the chalice, for example. And all the while it was entirely campy! He ran from a rolling giant stone ball, he held on while being dragged beneath a jeep. He had a fight next to a renegade airplane propellor. All very campy. What made Indiana Jones Trilogy the Indiana Jones trilogy was libraries and caves and the whip and supernatural occurrences. And those patented one liners. This movie’s failings seem to have been primarily in going slightly overboard with the CGI campiness. But I do believe that Speilberg and Co. were having a little fun with the movie and even making fun of the older ones - you see it in a way when Indy’s old friend’s (i wont give away which one) on-campus statue is crashed into by a car and the head falls off.

By: John

John — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 19:51:07 +0000

O and I did see snakes on a PLANE. I liked that. Think about the differences between that and Indie 4 and maybe you will understand what I’m saying better. As far as its general philosophy. Indie 4 wants you to take it seriously and yet has 500 unbelievable things in it, while SNAKES would never even kid itself about being taken seriously.