Indiana Jone 5 confirmed (Please not another)

[toys2cool]

the first 3 were the best of course,sure part 4 wasn't as good but still entertaining until the last 20 minutes

That being said TOD was my fave cause I watched it so much as a kid,but the Last Crusade has the best storyline to me,just because I love everything about the holy grail and the Knights Templar

[domino]

Well, I enjoyed Raiders of the Lost Ark. I hated Temple of Doom, Didn't care for Last Crusade and refused to watch Crystal Skull. Now a 5th one?? No thank you.

[thunderbolt]

I watched Crystal Skull twice and don't remember one damn bit of it. The first three still hold up as well as when I first saw them, unlike the original 3 SW films. They are just as corny and poorly written as the prequels.

[Hector]

Strangely enough, I never cared for Indiana Jones in the first place.

To me, they're all boring ... even the action parts ... hard to explain.

I'll explain it for ya...you are Mike...

Come on, repeat after me...Mike...Mike...Mike...

[Hector]

that's the Mike we all know and love.

Beat me to it, lol...

[Hector]

I love all the Indie flicks except the last one.

The nuclear blast saved by the fridge scene, the aliens, an annoying Shia LaBeouf...were all major negatives for me.

[Mego Milk]

A W E S OM E !!!!!!!!
Can't Wait!
keep em coming!

[60'schild]

It could be worse. Shia LaBeouf could be replaced by Keanu Reeves!

[Megospidey]

I tend to go to movies to be entertained and not to be overly critical...especially science fiction and action/adventure.

I thought all 4 were a rousing good time. 2 hours of forget-your-worries-and-your-troubles-and-get-lost-in-an-action-movie fun.

[huedell]

The thing I did not like MOST about KOTCS is that the "pieces"
leading up to the final assembly of the ship---the multiple skulls
---putting them back and taking them with you and all that went with it
was so dry and complex and basically no fun because of it.

The Staff Of Ra, the kidnapped hypnotized Indian villager kids,
the Thugee cult/Cali Ma, the inscription on the knights shield 2nd marker,
the 3 tests of faith...all that stuff from the first 3 movies was
easy to latch onto and digest.

I'm STILL baffled and bored by 4's details no matter how many times I
watch it---also, I hated the dumb as heck double agent/triple agent character right up until his vague death...how stupid was all that?

----other than that, I like Shia, I LOVE the refrigerator scene
---in fact, I think the movie's basically perfect up until the chase thru
the college campus.

There's some other great stuff along the way too...classic stuff, like the
quicksand scene and the red ants scene.

I tell ya, if therere's a 5th one...they better tighten up the story.

[huedell]

I tend to go to movies to be entertained and not to be overly critical...especially science fiction and action/adventure.

I thought all 4 were a rousing good time. 2 hours of forget-your-worries-and-your-troubles-and-get-lost-in-an-action-movie fun.

Too bad I couldn't "get lost in it"---I'm not "over-critical"--
I just couldn't follow it (or be MADE to follow it!---read my above post)

It's really to bad, because I was really ready to "lose myself" in the action movie I was watching.

----they coulda had a THOUSAND scenes like the fridge/vine swinging Shia/the
Alien ship and I wouldn't've minded one bit!

[ctc]

>The nuclear blast saved by the fridge scene,

That bothered a lot of folks, but I found it more humorous than irritating. Indy's always making impossible saves.... this was one more.

>the aliens,

THIS seems to be a major problem for most of the people I know who hated the film. I find this odd, 'cos:

-officially they're not aliens, they're extradimensional beings. (And we've seen those before in an Indy film.)
-In the other films we see a box full opf angels melt a platoon of Nazis, a dude pull the still beating heart out of another dude WITHOUT killing him, and a knight who's been keeping his watch for 500 years. Aliens seem like the LEAST impossible of the bunch....

>an annoying Shia LaBeouf...

Okay, ya got me there. I didn't find him annoying so much as bland. He was trying too hard to be an iconic 50's teen that he never really came across as his own person. Although, that's pretty accurate to all them 50's juvenile delinquent movies.

>It could be worse. Shia LaBeouf could be replaced by Keanu Reeves!

SSSHHHHHH!!!! They'll hear you!

>I tend to go to movies to be entertained and not to be overly critical

I think most people INTEND to; but it kinda happens subconsciously when folks get bored or frustrated. I've always wondered WHY they get bored and frustrated. Sometimes it seems like there's some sort of unconscious effect that happens 'cos the conscious explanations seem askew. Like this flick and the number of people who hated the aliens, but are okay with a box full of angels.

I really do believe that for a lot of us older fans the problem is internal, but we tend to see it as external. It's not that the movies/comics/tv shows/toys/whatever are neccessarily worse, but since we've partaken so much they don't have the novelty they did on the first go. But we don't realize that WE'VE changed, so we see it as "this movie sucks!"

For a lot of us, the next Indy film CAN'T be good, 'cos we're gonna be (unconsciously) looking for the same kick we got from the first time we saw whichever one we saw first; and that can't happen since the character, settings, themes and presentation AREN'T new to us. Unless it keyes up precisely with the idea we carry around in our head for the character, whcih is unlikely (but possible) since that image was formed from standards and circumstances 20+ years old.

Don C.

[spiderrogue]

i like them all and it would be ok if they made another...dont know about the mutt character..but Ford is getting a bit old....

[Megospidey]

I read your post, and I hear what you are saying bro...

I just think that as adults, we go into these movies and don't enjoy the "wonder" of the movie experience like we did as kids.

If Star Wars were released during the Summer of 2009 for the first time, I have to wonder how it would have been accepted on this board

When I go to a movie, I pay my $10 to enjoy myself...not become a critic. But that's just me. The movie has to be god-awful bad for me to say anything negative about it. If it's even hafl-way decent, I let myself enjoy the fun that's there.

Too bad I couldn't "get lost in it"---I'm not "over-critical"--
I just couldn't follow it (or be MADE to follow it!---read my above post)

It's really to bad, because I was really ready to "lose myself" in the action movie I was watching.

----they coulda had a THOUSAND scenes like the fridge/vine swinging Shia/the
Alien ship and I wouldn't've minded one bit!

[ctc]

>we go into these movies and don't enjoy the "wonder" of the movie experience like we did as kids.

I don't think it's really POSSIBLE for us to. Not with the same old same old. We'd need something really different, and for the most part we don't seek out the really different. And we need to be open to things that are really different, but most of us aren't. So we spend our time looking at the same old same old lamenting that it isn't as good as the stuff WE grew up on when in actuality it's all pretty much the same.

"But no, it's ALL different. WE didn't have lame-o toilet humour, and the sexualization! It's SHAMEFUL! And the marketing gimmicks! I wish they'd just tell a damned story without selling me things!" No, we had all that; but it was a different form. We were okay with our juvenalia 'cos we were climatized to it. The window dressing changes, but the core is the same.

I dunno. I think all the sequels and remakes ADD to the problem because they don't bring anything new. They don't even HINT at anything new. They run screaming from the CONCEPT of "new." So folks get even more climatized to the same old. We want the kick we got from the first Indy film, but don't realize we CAN'T get it from a NEW Indy film. We CAN be entertained, but it'll be in a different way.

Don C.