Search form

Indiana Jones and The Strangest Movie Ever

23 posts / 0 new
Last post
Indiana Jones and The Strangest Movie Ever

Is it just me... or did the new Indy movie have a serious "X-Files" vibe?

[FONT=Verdana]Without too many spoilers, I will say that there were some impressive effects in that movie, and I liked all the strong links to "Raiders". [/FONT]

cartoonchaos's picture
Follow @chaostoon on Twitter!

Follow @chaostoon on Twitter!

Potential Spoiler

Well....I never watched X-files but if you say so.
I loved this movie and I think I am in a minority but I took it as alot of 1950s themes, in reality and B-movies of the day; the "red" scare, cold war, extra-terrestrial aliens & UFOs with a 1970s Chariots Of The gods theory. It was looking back at those things that had us paranoid in the 50s with a certain rationality behind them.

Well....I never watched X-files but if you say so.

Well....I never lived in the 50's but if you say so. :D

Follow @chaostoon on Twitter!

To me, it was an entertaining action adventure movie but it wasn't Indiana Jones to me. I think they could've put Brendan Frasier in the role and it would have worked just as well. I also found it hard to believe that Indy was able to do all these physical actions. They keep mentioning how old he is now, Indy mid 50's Harrison 65, and yet he's getting into fist fights, crashing through glass windshields and the like.

Like I said, it was entertaining, but to me, it didn't feel in line with the Indiana Jones mythos.

Aloha,
the Ape

...we must all face a choice, between what is right... and what is easy."

Meh. It was okay - barely. It felt cobbled together, like Lucas/Spielberg/Ford were bored one Sunday afternoon and decided to slap something together. The story was weak, and Karen Allen's role was completely pointless. Some of the FX shots were cool, but it's getting to the point where all the CG animals/monsters/whatever are starting to blur together and become featureless, bland. Overall, like SW episodes 1-3, it doesn't hold a candle to the originals...

I agree with Rogert Ebert, it's a durn good adventure movie. Not my favourite Indy movie but not the worst, either. I usually put Last Crusade in third place but now it's gotta share that rank with the new one.

I love, love, love that in terms of cinematography it feels almost exactly like the old movies - cleverly planned action scenes, well staged, shot and cut with enough patience to make them readable while not taking away from the pace, and all in all it doesn't take itself too seriously, either. That's the way to do it in my book.
Considering that today's action movies are way too often about dislikable, run-off-the-mill rugged guys who pick up ugly weapons and mow down even uglier baddies in sequences overstuffed with frantic cuts and CG FX that could paralyze an epileptic, that one was a real joy to behold.

BUT! - they kinda lost me during the finale. Too many CG shots compared to the rest of the flick and they resolved the whole alien theme terribly unsubtle. Where was the mystery?
Still, it fits in with the old Indy movies WAY better than the new Star Wars trilogy fits in with the old.

I have to agree with what's been said here as well: pretty good movie, but didn't feel like an Indy movie to me. Indy himself seemed a little more smug and cocky and arrogant, making snooty remarks to others.

Plus the other movies do deal with unrealistic things happening in real life: ark of the covenant has supernatural powers, drinking from the fountain of youth and living forever, but the newest movie's mystery seems pretty unbelievable.

At least you can say, "yeah in the past the Jewish people carried around the actual ark of the covenant, and the film added the supernatural twist to it." Seems like the first 3 movies have some sort of believability wrapped up into the supernatural and mystical. But aliens? Alien life forms on earth have always been purely speculative at best, you can't base any of it on anything in real life and then add the supernatural twist. Plus mixing Indiana Jones with science fiction just doesn't mix well together, it's not a logical connection.

Flash Character Packs, Video Tutorials and more: www.CartoonSolutions.com

I didn't mind this older Indy. So he pulls off stunts no 65-year-old could. But hey, he's Indy. Twenty years ago he pulled off stunts no man in his forties could survive in real life. Besides, if we buy that 90-year-old kung fu masters in any given Eastern can cream students about seventy years younger than they are, action gramps Indy don't bother me at all.
As for his attitude, why not? So he's gotten older and a little crotchety. He had to take guff from all sorts of people all his life. Besides, I like it that way a lot better than them casting another guy or trying to make him younger than he is. Ford said he refused to dye his hair for the role because he wanted to show that, yes, Indy is older now, a little wiser and on top of things, and more cynical, too. Works for me.

You have to remember Indy and his father drank from the Grail, no wonder at sixty five he can do what he can do.

And the crystal skulls do have some archeological signifigance:

http://www.world-mysteries.com/sar_6_1.htm

But like the other Indy films the role of actual archeological items and their extraordinary elements is exaggerated.

But it was a fun Saturday matinee. For me I rank Temple of Doom and this one at the bottom of the heap.

Pat Hacker, Visit Scooter's World.

You have to remember Indy and his father drank from the Grail, no wonder at sixty five he can do what he can do.

Yeah, that's what I was wondering about because his father drank from it, too, yet he's dead in that movie. Still, the Young Indy Chronicles tell us that Indy lives at least well into his nineties.

Yeah, that's what I was wondering about because his father drank from it, too, yet he's dead in that movie.

Once they pass the great seal in the temple the power of the grail looses all effect. The knight tells Indy this right before he takes the water and grail to his father.

aloha,
the Ape

...we must all face a choice, between what is right... and what is easy."

Yes, possible. I always understood it that the grail doesn't grant eternal life if you drink from it once, but that you must do it repeatedly and that's what binds you to the grail temple. On that note, I also wonder whether the grail knight aged while guarding the grail or whether he was that old when he set up his quarters in the temple.

The way I always understood it from the movie was that it does grant you eternal life, but only if you stay with in the temple. Once you go outside the temple you start to age. So every time he left the temple to get water or food he would age. So if he was outside for a week, he would age a week. I'm not sure if you'd have to drink again once you came back to the temple or not.

The reason I don't think he was that old when they built the temple was that old guys usually weren't knights. Pluss they had to build that temple.

Thats how I understood it.

Aloha,
the Ape

...we must all face a choice, between what is right... and what is easy."

The way I always understood it from the movie was that it does grant you eternal life, but only if you stay with in the temple. Once you go outside the temple you start to age. So every time he left the temple to get water or food he would age. So if he was outside for a week, he would age a week. I'm not sure if you'd have to drink again once you came back to the temple or not.

*grins* OK, this is fanboy talk now but - why would you go outside the temple to get food and water (which should be hard to come by anyway, seeing as the temple is surrounded by desert) if the grail makes you immortal? I mean, technically you shouldn't be able to starve to death, right?
My guess is that the knight was that old when he arrived at the temple, considering he travelled from Europe to the Holy Land and fought in the crusades. Then again, he mentions to Indy that his strength has left him. Does that mean while he was keeping guard others came to challenge him for the post of guardian and he was able to defeat them, still being stronger?
All in all, I don't think he has any natural life left in him anyway. He's always shown in that unnatural blue light which makes him look like a well-preserved, walking corpse.

My guess is that the knight was that old when he arrived at the temple, considering he travelled from Europe to the Holy Land and fought in the crusades.

See, that's what I always thought.

Follow @chaostoon on Twitter!

i cant believe that M/s Lucas, Spielberg and Ford waited near 20 years to make a film as lame as this one?

wtf was that?

the weakest of plots, flimsiest of set pieces, it seems that the trio really took the whole B movie slant a little too close to heart.

i wonder which one is worse Temple of Doom or Crystal Skull.

Z
Z's picture

I know it's been a few weeks now since it's release, but I went to go see this since the theatre where Kung-Fu Panda was playing was too packed.

Really dumb movie. Sure Indiana Jones doesn't have to be believable, but some of the things that happened in this movie were just....dumb.

I would consider this to be worse than The Temple of Doom.

--Z

Funny how people always like the second or the third best and that people who prefer the third invariably think the second is worst. Me, I like Raiders best, followed by Temple. Crusade was just a little too dry for me in terms of scenarios. I also happen to think the fourth has most in common with the third.

"Crystal Skulls" was more than underwhelming... it was predictable, overwrought, very boring in places, and uninteresting. The "mystery" has become more or less a tired cliché and the "big ending" (i.e., the gruesome death of the bad guys), now a tradition in Indiana Jones movies, was confusing and awkward. Nonetheless, it was great seeing Indiana Jones again, and the nuclear test scene was amazing (though horribly unrealistic). I just hope Spielberg doesn't try to continue the series with Indiana Jones' "protegé." That would top the lame list.

"Skulls" was somewhat fun to watch once, but I can't imagine sitting through it again. I could sit through "Raiders" and "Last Crusade" over and over again. Not this one.

For a moment, I wondered why this thread was posted in the Animation section of the forum. Then I remembered the CGI prairie dogs at the beginning of the movie and the monkeys later on. Cute little extraneous-applications-of-CG-solely-for-the-sake-of-having-CG-in-a-movie-which-we-were-told-would-have-CG-only-where-absolutely-necessary, weren't they?

Add to that the villain being an exact copy of Natasha Badenov and that hiding in a fridge to protect yourself from a nuclear explosion could only work in a cartoon, and...

Yeah, I'll admit, I was wrong; the film being a crude caricature of everything the first film tried to be, it's definitely something of a cartoon, and so posting about it here is most appropriate.

For a moment, I wondered why this thread was posted in the Animation section of the forum.

Yeah, I'll admit, I was wrong; the film being a crude caricature of everything the first film tried to be, it's definitely something of a cartoon, and so posting about it here is most appropriate.

The Animation Cafe has chatted about topics other than animation before... granted, a lot of those threads were started by me, but there's more to animators (and life) than animation.

Most times when I start a thread, I'm really only looking for the opinions of trusted colleagues and friends on things -- doesn't have to be animation specifically.

Follow @chaostoon on Twitter!

Yeah the cafe is supposed to be somewhere to meet and smooze. But lately it seems more like some of the other sections which seem to have died from lack of participation.

Pat Hacker, Visit Scooter's World.

Well....I never lived in the 50's but if you say so. :D

Well.....neither did I live in the 50s. WHen I said "we" I meant North Americans during that era.
Just to be clear that I am not aged sooner than I should.:)
I still like this film but I realize by your X-files comment, Chaos, that I may like it more because I never watched anything that explored this premise so to me it was a newer idea...even if it isn't. If they come out with a DVD set of the 4 I'll be buying it.