Indiana Jones IV

They were only immortal whilst they remained inside the temple with the Grail. As the knight said "The Grail cannot pass beyond the Great Seal. That is the boundary and the price of immortality". The implication is that you have to keep drinking from it to retain your immortality and therefore must stay inside the temple with it.

On a related matter, I went to Petra earlier this year (where the real temple is in case you didn't know) and it really is an incredible sight. Especially great if you've seen LC as many times as I have - I even recognised which bits of the passageway leading to the treasury they filmed in!
 
No, it'll be shot on the same stages as Star Wars episodes 2 & 3 in Australia, obviously with location work happening in various countries as usual. Natalie Portman being Indy's daughter is just a rumour. People just seem to assume Lucas will hire her because she was in Star Wars. I DO prefer Indy having a daughter rather than him having a son though.
 
One thing I do like about Spielberg films is the good camera work without too many close ups. I do like half body and full body shots showing detailed backgrounRAB and the script was audible unlike so many modern film efforts where one neeRAB an interpreter to understand the dialogue:confused:

I did like the 'Tarzan monkeys' who were copying Indy's son through the forest on swinging vines but the gag was totally misplaced in the most violent part of the film.
The waterfall sequence was spectacular but used in Niagara
and the tunnel lift at the end - being lifted by water - was used in Journey to the Centre of the Earth.
 
I've been waiting for someone to bring up these points :D
I could live with the Ark, the immortal Knights and Grail stuff - it's earth-related supernatural/Religious phenomenon. Aliens ???? Nooooooooooo :(
 
SPOILERS:

I didn't read much about the film before seeing it - probably because the plot was shrouded in secrecy and someone got jailed for giving information away.

Then someone called me on the day of its release and invited me to see it. I thought it was coming out a week later, so it was a surprise and I saw it with a fairly open mind.

Some of it was really cool - the punch-up at the bar, the motorcycle/car chase, the "get out of the library" line, etc - but the silly aspects outweighed them for me. I didn't mind the nuclear explosion but, after the "baby skulls" theory, the actual aliens was a step too far. The other Indy films are more about religion than the supernatural - perhaps a fine line, but still.

I thought the film was too bright as well: aesthetically it wasn't consistent with the other films. I had the idea in my head that there wouldn't be much CGI - looking back I can't believe how naive I was.

I blame it all on George Lucas. He's quite clearly bonkers. And to think I'd scoffed at the story about his "Indiana Jones and the Saucer Men from Mars" proposals... Turns out he got his way.

Apparently Spielberg and Ford liked an earlier script but Lucas vetoed it. Bet it was brilliant.
 
Lucas, Spielburg and Ford have been wanting to make this for ten years - it took that long for them to get everything in place (you should google the long history of getting this off the floor - makes for fascinating reading). I'm happy for this - it's not like pressure from any film company was gonna make this happen. None of them need the money - it was a labour of love for all concerned.

Nice to see initial reviews (Empire, BBC etc) are positive. I'm looking forward to this.
 
What can I say? I was very disappointed, and I expected to be. I guess I was hoping in the back of my mind to be proven wrong.

Not a patch on the original trilogy of films, especially Raiders which is one of my all time favourites.

The ending is what really hurt the film for me. Very anti-climatic. I was ready to let everything else slide as long as the ending paid off and was worth it, oh well.

I gave it a generous 6/10. I likely would have rated it lower if I hadn't seen a particular prequel trilogy by Lucas before hand.

Spielberg at least tried to make a new Indiana Jones film that respected its roots. I truly believe that for all its faults, the film would have been a complete car wreck if Lucas had been given full control over the project and directed it.

This film did have CGI work in it, like the background plates and sounRABtage shot footage. I would have preferred more use of real location shooting because there was some of it towarRAB the earlier half of the film, but then again never did the alternative employed used come close to looking really fake like some other films I have seen, so I'm not going to get all fanboy irritable and spend the rest of my life complaining about that.

That all said and done... I will be picking this film up on Blu-ray upon its release.

I'm sure there is every chance I'll enjoy it all the more the second time in the comfort of my own home and knowing what to expect.
 
I don't think it's fair to say gazillions of kiRAB watched the originals and were bored with them in the 80's. I mean, they were huge films. Not just speaking for myself, but they had a big impact on the imaginations of loaRAB of kiRAB back then. Hence the pots of cash they made, and why we even got as far as a 4th film.

I still feel people have been far too harsh on Crystal Skulls. It's clear the quality of Raiders set a huge precedent that's lasted 25 years. No film has matched it since, and I suppose that even includes its sequels. I honestly went into the cinema in some fear, as I'd heard all the bad things around the net. But I have to be honest at the end of the day and say, yeah, I enjoyed myself.
 
Because they are modelling them off the real ones of course! ;)

BTw, you should read some of Von Danniken's books. I dont agree with everything he says, but there is interesting stuff in it nonetheless.
 
Damn! I forgot those two film references!:p:D

I would say to sum up...we've all got older as well as Ford;) and if you do remember seeing them first time around it's very hard to recapture quite that same mood.

And that's the crux...it's too late.

BUT...ok the good points and they are there, to finish on a positive. I get too picky for my own good at times. The dialogue is pretty good on the whole with nice references to Mitchell (the original Jones) finding the skull even if the script and plot points don't always work. The photography is great. Spielberg is still a master of his craft even if he's unpredictable. He does a fantastic job in the big set pieces and there's enough of them. Ford has sincerity and integrity in my book at least. 3 and a half out of five.:)

I liked the monkeys, but would have been better in another part of the film.
 
It works in that the supernatural stuff was a pastiche of 1930s adventure serial. Indy is now in the 50s, and as such the 'It Came from Outer Space' pastiche is what it's all about. It worked for me. If I recall, an early (like ten years ago) version of the script was even called Indiana Jones and the Saucer Men from Mars.
 
Absolutely, making Indy IV the equivalent of Star Trek: Generations.

I'm really excited about this pic, mainly because of Spielberg and Lucas. Loved Revenge of the Sith, and all of Spielberg's recent and diverse output. They are more creatively free than in the late 70s early 80s. It should be a blast.
 
Love what I've seen and read so far on this.

Ford still has more sex appeal and charisma in his little finger than the current crop of floppy haired pretenders.
 
Back
Top