I saw it tonight, and, you know what? As much as I was afraid of an Episode I-style raping of my childhood, I was impressed with what I saw.

Okay, the alien thing was hokey (interdimensional beings, sorry), but all the dungeon crawling was PURE Indy. And the uncertainty about trusting Mack--straight out of the first couple movies, when you can never be sure who's a friend. This was a brilliant addition to the series, that was VERY respectful of those of us who grew up with the franchise. Much as I loathe Shia, he did well, and he's not going to fill Indy's shoes any time soon.

I was impressed. I thought it was well done. I didn't want to make a pilgrimage to Skywalker Ranch to punch George in the nose, the way I was expecting to.

George Lucas wants him to be Indiana Jones v2.0. My only hope is that Spielberg can keep him from brining his madness to fruition.

Other than that, I agree with Rat.

I read somewhere that Lucas wants Indiana Jones to be kind of like James Bond, which is one of the dumbest things that I have ever read. Mr. Lucas should get going to that old age home already and just stop associating himself with movies.

I think it was a decent movie. The CGI did almost ruin it for me, and left me with a cringe on my face almost the entire time, but good old Harrison Ford sure pulled through. That guy is amazing.

That was abundantly clear from the end of the movie, and too horrifying to imagine. Shia doesn't bother me as much as he apparently bothers some other people, but I'd really hate for them to try to stretch the series with a "new" Indy. I share your hope, will. Guess we'll have to see. Hopefully they can find some better story inspiration if they do make another.

I certainly will note, though, that this was MUCH better than the Star Wars prequels, so at least it's got that going for it. Overall, though, Lucas just hasn't been able to cut it. He loves his CG far too much and his ability to write a story has spun off in a strange and horrible direction.

Shia, in my opinion, plays a Power Ranger role. By that I mean: for some reason a teenager is part of the main characters, does a lot of action, and we know damn well that a teenager has no right being in the main view of a movie. Think Transformers. Could have been a perfectly good movie without the teenage angst, yet the film makers wanted something to attract a larger teenage crowd and throw in lines and scenes that would otherwise not work with a complete grown up cast.

I of course do not mean this in Shia's role in Constantine, where he dies. However, Spoiler: I found it perfectly acceptable in the alternate ending of the movie that Shia came back as a half-breed angel.


//JFK accent// All in favor of- ah- banning discussion of this here movie: say "Aye!"

For all those complaining about the CGI: Did you not see the claymation effects in the first 3 movies? The CGI in this was a welcome relief from that nonesense, and as I said in my other post, i think they dumbed down the CGI a bit just to stay in the same style as the previous effects.

Whoa, whoa. Actually the character of Indiana Jones was created by George Lucas. Lucas and Speilberg were on vacation somewhere, and Speilberg mentioned that he still really wanted to make a James Bond movie, but Cubby Broccoli wouldn't let him. George Lucas said he had a better character: Indiana Smith (it was later changed to Jones). So actually it was Speilberg who wanted to make a James Bond movie (and I still think they should let him try, especially since the series restarted), and George Lucas created the Indiana Jones character.

I just saw it & thought it was a fun little movie, better than Temple of Doom but not up to the 1st & 3rd. There are some real corn ball parts, that's true...but it was action packed - the motprcyle chase is exciting and (if you just relax and want to) believe it's a fun Saturday afternoon action flick, & better than shopping at the Mall - then you'll enjoy it, too. It did have a few scenes that were so absurd that they were funny/though not meant to/
Cate Blanchet makes a good "badie" ...but they didn't develop her charactewr enough & this movie needed some skin somewhere in it!

Definitely geared for a ride to be created in Disney World or some other place like it. You could see that from every angle.

And BTW Mutt (Shia) was okay IMHO.

I loved it. Yeah, there were about 10 minutes I could have done without, and will steadfastly pretend never happened that way, and I'm okay with self-delusion. But dammit, it was FUN! The motorcycle ride through the library, the little tribute to Marcus Brody, the fun and totally ridiculous CGI effects of magnetized gunpowder flying through the air (which, at that strength, the damn thing should have dragged the jeep through the air too).
And Harrison Ford. Oh, yum. I don't care how old he gets. Want.

eta: And hunnychile, you're dead on about the ride. I thought the same thing.

Did I mention, nom Harrison Ford nom nom?

I barely recall any sort of claymation effects in the first 3 movies (besides face melt), but the CGI most of us are talking about is not replacing special effects - we're talking about replacing entire sets with a computer generating background. I'm not sure if the masses just don't have a trained eye for it or what, but most of the action scenes were just digital/fake looking.

I don't mind CGI to replace claymation or puppets, as long as it's done correctly - but I do mind replacing entire sets/backgrounds/environments/movies with computer effects. Nearly the entire jungle scene was shot on green screen - mean the jungle was fake, it didn't exist, it was built using a computer, and it looked it. It took away from the gritty, adventurous feel of the first 3 films and made it seem artificial.

I liked it, it was a good romp, much like the other indy movies. Ants = Ow.

However, swinging through jungle, like fuck! Overall the jungle scenes sucked. I think most major film companies and special effects houses should go have a chat with Weta workshop and learn a trick or two off them.

Yep! And he named the character after... wait for it... his dog.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082971/trivia

This movie was very uneven for me. To me it seemed like it alternated between suck and great.

Spoiler: The opening scene outside the warehouse was pure suck. Bad Dialog with poor delivery and Cate Blanchette's accent fading in and out. Even the gunpowder scene was laughable.

But then I thought the chase scene was great and pure Indy

Then we move on to the "surviving a nuclear blast in a fridge" scene. Totally unnecessary and idiotic.

The "You're Fired!" scene was ok for me (although I imagine IRL he would have been fired looong before this since it seems he can never complete a semester ;) )

Then we move to the dialog in the malt shop. The editing in this scene bugged the crap out of me. It was like jump cut/jump cut/jumpcut. Just do a wide shot and let them talk. Geeez!.

I liked the "causing a fight to get away", and the motorcycle scene was great.

At this point I'm "okay" with everything that happens up to the Jungle Chase scene. I thought the first part of the scene was great and right in line with the classic vehicle chases in the other films, until.......The Waterfall Scene.

To me this scene was just a wretched re-do of a Scene from Temple Of Doom that was a contributer to it's suck factor. Of course the scene I refer to is the "survive a plane crash in a life raft" scene.

Now I really had no problem with the ending. Mainly because the "ancient astronaut" theories have been around since the early 20th century (if not earlier), and have been theorized about many ancient sites like Easter Island, Stonehenge, and both Myan and Egyptian pyramids. So it seems totally feasible that if "supernatural archaeological shenanigans" were afoot that Indy would be involved.

One thing I do find funny is that many of the people that are completely dumping on this movie for crap plot/acting, CG abuse, and bad ending, are that same people that lauded Die Hard 4, which IMO had all of those things in spades, and was a far worse movie than Indy 4.

Oh, and I thought Shia was going to be the dealbreakerfor me. But it turns out he was actually a pretty good sidekick, and waaay less annoying than Macboy from Die Hard 4.

I thought it was...okay. The fridge thing was a little ridiculous... but the whole Spoiler: swinging through the jungle on vines then catching up and kicking Cate Blanchett off the Jeep... Come on, now. That was about the time it "jumped the shark" for me. Plus the whole river scene...yeesh.

A not-so-great Indy movie is still better than most of the stuff out right now, though.

Saw it. Liked it for the most part. Will probably buy it when it comes out on DVD primarily because I have the first three.

(I still like the first three better.)

The end of this movie, when the thing does the thing, still gives me goosebumps. John Williams did it again.

I am not sure which came first: my head ache or my dislike of this movie.

I don't know I thought #2 was pretty bad.

I thought overall this wasn't that bad, not great, but watchable.