Hurin Posted February 18, 2008 Share Posted February 18, 2008 Well I personally find the subject of alien-shaped skulls a fascinating subject because I've heard from friends aliens will be involved. So that's partly what made me come into the thread. I'm not trying to piss people off. Ok so the breaking of rules is bad for indy, but what if on its own merit the movie turns out good? Just not good for the indy franchise? Would you still watch it? If it would be "not good for the Indy franchise" (your words). . . shouldn't it therefore just be a non-Indy movie about crystal alien skulls? To which, of course, nobody here would have any objection. One more time. . . most here are sci-fi fans. Nobody here has a problem with aliens. . . or crystal skulls. Indeed, I think most even sorta think the "Stargate" idea (of past earth civilizations and religions being affected by alien visitors) is cool. The problem comes when you try to graft all of these things onto a vehicle (the Indy franchise) that seems completely inappropriate, counter-intuitive, and (possibly) downright destructive to the very core of the original movie(s). In the case of Raiders, *if* they directly (and retroactively) disavow the Ark's divine nature. . . you've horribly and irretrievably f'ed that movie up beyond all recognition. There's simply no saving it as anything I would personally find appealing. For me, half of what gives Raiders its mystique is the idea that the Old Testament God is being brought forward into the modern world. . . and he's slowly being "awakened" until finally. . . well, we all know what happens. The idea of it being an alien artifact is totally unappealing since that movie already meant something to me for the last twenty years. Now, if someone else wants to make a (non-Indy) movie about the Ark being an alien artifact, that's a different story. That might be a good movie! So, why wouldn't Lucas just make a "one-off" non-Indy movie about aliens and crystal skulls in ancient america? My first guess: Because then he wouldn't become even more rich off of it because it wouldn't have the "Indy" brand name (it wouldn't be a guaranteed blockbuster). . . and honestly, I really do think that he may confuses bizarre twists and sticking it to the fans as some perverse form of creativity. I think he gets a sense of satisfaction out of taking what people have believed/liked/experienced for twenty years and then arbitrarily saying "Hah! It now means something totally different! Bet you didn't see that coming did you? See, it doesn't mean at all what you think it meant! Surprise! Suckers!" Of course, what he often fails to acknowledge whenever these changes come about is that these are changes (and retroactive ones at that). We've only had these conceptions about his work (like the Ark of the Covenant being. . . well. . . the Ark of the Covenant. . . or the Force having nothing to do with microbes in the blood but instead being largely mystical or even quasi-eastern-religious) because it's 99.5% certain that these were his conceptions about his own work too before he decided (years or even decades later) to throw everyone a curve simply because he could. The problem is that when you do those types of things arbitrarily and capriciously, it's just pulling things out your ass rather than being creative. And it shows a tremendous lack of respect for both the audience and even his own creations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Z Posted February 18, 2008 Share Posted February 18, 2008 I hope someone often drops by conversations you're having about things that matter to you only to say: "it's just an x." For the life of me, I don't understand why people bother to drop by conversations that obviously matter to some merely to assert that it shouldn't matter to them. I don't know if it's about people wanting to feel "cool" or "above it all". . . but it sure is one of those quintessential internet behaviors: When you don't have anything to say, but you want to say something. . . just drop by a topic that doesn't interest you only to announce that it doesn't interest you. . . and then (either directly or indirectly) demean those to whom the topic matters. My opinion is just as valid as yours. You overthink and overanalyze a simple piece of entertainment; that's your thing. I don't and because of that, I can actually enjoy said piece of entertainment. Just like I can enjoy a toy for what it is and not for its degree of anime-accuracy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kanedaestes Posted February 18, 2008 Share Posted February 18, 2008 oooohhhh that's fightin words there. Anywho as i have scolled through most of this i am inclined to lean with hurin for the fact that it is a franchise with established rules. I am a film freak and love movies. Now i do understand that they are also entertaiment and can do what ever they like. But with that said you shouldn't go and mess with stuff in established community, with if the corleone family was related to scarface or something how upset would people be by that. As for the sheer entertainment side well i love all the indy movies and hope it stays true to that, but if it just another fluff piece i will just watch shoot em up or snakes on a plane. Entertainment pieces with out history that can be seen for what they are. And as for that toy comment. Sure it is a toy but some of us want it to be as close to the shows we watched as possible. Now i am not as harsh or as strict as some are about accuracy but it still matters to me how well something is faithfully adapted. Especially now that toy engineering has come so far. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hurin Posted February 18, 2008 Share Posted February 18, 2008 My opinion is just as valid as yours. You overthink and overanalyze a simple piece of entertainment; that's your thing. I don't and because of that, I can actually enjoy said piece of entertainment. Just like I can enjoy a toy for what it is and not for its degree of anime-accuracy. You're entitled to your opinion. I'm entitled to an opinion about your opinion. And it's my opinion that it's poor form to drop into a discussion only to denigrate the conversation and (by extension) those taking part in it. Indeed, one could even construe such drive-by "I'm too cool for this. You're all nerds!" posts as thread-crapping. So, good for you. You have an opinion. And you value being an undiscriminating and easily pleased consumer. That's wonderful. Now please let those who want to continue to discuss this do so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichterX Posted February 18, 2008 Share Posted February 18, 2008 good god. No one hates aliens. Look... simple: aliens = good Indiana Jones = good Indiana Jones + Aliens = BAD. Indiana Jones vs Boba Fett!!!! j/k... The premise of alien interference in Indiana Jones story is bad, it seems to come from all those theories that ancient civilizations were created by aliens... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eugimon Posted February 18, 2008 Share Posted February 18, 2008 My opinion is just as valid as yours. You overthink and overanalyze a simple piece of entertainment; that's your thing. I don't and because of that, I can actually enjoy said piece of entertainment. Just like I can enjoy a toy for what it is and not for its degree of anime-accuracy. Apparantly you don't think too much if you think simply discussing a major plot element is "overthinking" and "overanalyzing". So what would be an appropriate response, in your world, to a movie? "That was good." "That was ungood." "That was plus good." But hey, thanks for dropping in and for the lecture. We get it boss, you're hip and cool and everything is groovy for you... well, everything other than letting other people enjoy their hobbies in the way that best suits their tastes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Z Posted February 18, 2008 Share Posted February 18, 2008 (edited) "Indy's hat inner diameter appears to be 2mm too big. That's ruining the entire movie." "The 14th cameraman's last name starts with an F. That's ruining the entire movie." Basically, you think I'm calling you stupid for overthinking the whole thing and you seem to be calling me stupid for being easy to please. Who's going to win? Nobody. Who cares if Indy's dealing with aliens. I put aliens on the same level as mystical forces, God and all that crap. It's only a movie, no need to go crazy after little details. It's obvious that Indy's still going to be his Indy self and that's all that matters. If you want the 4th movie to be as formulaic as humanly possible, then I suggest to forget about that 4th movie and that you go watch the first 3 movies again. This way, you might avoid being surprised and disapointed? My 2 cents. EDIT : I can't believe we're arguing over a simple movie. Can't we just get along? Edited February 18, 2008 by Dr. Z Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelsain Posted February 18, 2008 Share Posted February 18, 2008 (edited) Is it just me, or does that warehouse look like the one where the Ark is housed? I have yet to see this Crystal skull picture floating around, but I did notice the crate marked Roswell, NM 1947. Maybe aliens will be involved. I hope not, but if they do it well, I'll accept it (as I believe in the existence of aliens more than gods). However, it could be that this alien thing is a red herring - perhaps it is a supernatural phenomenon (which would be in-canon), but not extra-terrestrial. I guess we'll just see... Edited February 18, 2008 by Kelsain Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eugimon Posted February 18, 2008 Share Posted February 18, 2008 "Indy's hat inner diameter appears to be 2mm too big. That's ruining the entire movie." "The 14th cameraman's last name starts with an F. That's ruining the entire movie." Basically, you think I'm calling you stupid for overthinking the whole thing and you seem to be calling me stupid for being easy to please. Who's going to win? Nobody. Who cares if Indy's dealing with aliens. I put aliens on the same level as mystical forces, God and all that crap. It's only a movie, no need to go crazy after little details. It's obvious that Indy's still going to be his Indy self and that's all that matters. If you want the 4th movie to be as formulaic as humanly possible, then I suggest to forget about that 4th movie and that you go watch the first 3 movies again. This way, you might avoid being surprised and disapointed? My 2 cents. EDIT : I can't believe we're arguing over a simple movie. Can't we just get along? and you would have a point if anybody here actually said any of those things. Nice. BTW, I love that you come in here, start lecturing and insulting people you don't agree with and then ask us to be nice to you. That's nice. And I noticed your post over in the cyclone thread, what's that? I thought you didn't have anything negative or critical to say about toys? It was meant to be small, just enjoy it for what it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eugimon Posted February 18, 2008 Share Posted February 18, 2008 Is it just me, or does that warehouse look like the one where the Ark is housed? I have yet to see this Crystal skull picture floating around, but I did notice the crate marked Roswell, NM 1947. Maybe aliens will be involved. I hope not, but if they do it well, I'll accept it (as I believe in the existence of aliens more than gods). However, it could be that this alien thing is a red herring - perhaps it is a supernatural phenomenon (which would be in-canon), but not extra-terrestrial. I guess we'll just see... yeah, I was thinking the same thing about that warehouse scene. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
misterryno Posted February 18, 2008 Share Posted February 18, 2008 I just went to see "Jumper" this weekend (IT'S BAD A$$ IMO) and I saw a preview for this new IJ movie. It looks alright. I hope it ranks somewhere close with the old ones that I love from when I was younger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Z Posted February 18, 2008 Share Posted February 18, 2008 and you would have a point if anybody here actually said any of those things. Nice. BTW, I love that you come in here, start lecturing and insulting people you don't agree with and then ask us to be nice to you. That's nice. And I noticed your post over in the cyclone thread, what's that? I thought you didn't have anything negative or critical to say about toys? It was meant to be small, just enjoy it for what it is. I'm sorry if you feel insulted, it's really not my intention. And I do enjoy the Cyclone, when did I say I didn't? I don't see "small" as negative. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eugimon Posted February 18, 2008 Share Posted February 18, 2008 I just went to see "Jumper" this weekend (IT'S BAD A$$ IMO) and I saw a preview for this new IJ movie. It looks alright. I hope it ranks somewhere close with the old ones that I love from when I was younger. yeah the teaser had some cool moments I thought.. it looks like it will be fun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1/1 LowViz Lurker Posted February 18, 2008 Share Posted February 18, 2008 (edited) perhaps it is a supernatural phenomenon (which would be in-canon), but not extra-terrestrial. I guess we'll just see... I'm thinking that a lot of rumours and spreading of images might even be part of the viral marketing to generate buzz. Put something controversial in there to get people worried, talking, discussing and then the hype builds up and by the time the movie is out you generate all these expectations of what's in the movie and it turns out to be different? It could be that the crystal skull that is shaped to look like an alien was a modern fake planted there as disinfo, so that there would be no chase to find the real one, and that way they could keep the real one with powers hidden from others. When I saw the AI movie, I had no idea that the robots at the end of that movie weren't aliens. I just assumed aliens are digging for humans because they made them look like aliens and you don't think of robots 'evolving' on first view. But it's that playing with our minds thing that I was mentioning. We may only be seeing a tiny portion of what is in the whole movie so maybe best to hold off judgment till its out. But having said that, some people do put magic, supernatural powers, gods, in the same basket with aliens. So to me personally it wouldn't be much a problem. (no I'm not saying I'm cooler than you, just that its "fiction" so it can go down that path, just as vampire hunter d can meld a bit of sci-fi with horror, or army of darkness can put supernatural monsters from ancient times against modern technology - ie time travel being mainly sci-fi thing) Many people still like to call the diseased people in resident evil "zombies" even though they aren't the same "magic zombie" you associate with supernatural horror movies. More like a "science experiment gone wrong" disaster movie. That doesn't stop people from enjoying the story just because they were led to believe at the beginning that there are zombies in a haunted house on first early impression. (where they don't know any better and can't know until they've gotten far into the mystery to see the truth) Edited February 18, 2008 by 1/1 LowViz Lurker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hurin Posted February 19, 2008 Share Posted February 19, 2008 "Indy's hat inner diameter appears to be 2mm too big. That's ruining the entire movie." "The 14th cameraman's last name starts with an F. That's ruining the entire movie." Basically, you think I'm calling you stupid for overthinking the whole thing and you seem to be calling me stupid for being easy to please. Who's going to win? Nobody. Who cares if Indy's dealing with aliens. I put aliens on the same level as mystical forces, God and all that crap. It's only a movie, no need to go crazy after little details. It's obvious that Indy's still going to be his Indy self and that's all that matters. If you want the 4th movie to be as formulaic as humanly possible, then I suggest to forget about that 4th movie and that you go watch the first 3 movies again. This way, you might avoid being surprised and disapointed? My 2 cents. EDIT : I can't believe we're arguing over a simple movie. Can't we just get along? We got it, you don't care. Noted. Logged. Recognized. Accepted. Acknowledged. Exactly how much more do you need to discuss how much you don't care about this? Why not just let those who do care continue to discuss what they find interesting? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Majestic Posted February 19, 2008 Share Posted February 19, 2008 Yeah I'm not getting much of a great vibe from this teaser trailer either. It looks too much like a "Mummy Returns" movie, which I suppose is expected since the Mummy series borrowed largely from the Indiana Jones films and style. Some of the effects seemed "off" in some way - like the transforming pyramid (Gerwalk mode too?), but I'm sure they'll be cleaned up by final release. "FANBOY" DISCLAIMER: Yes, I will be there on day one no matter what and I hope it's as awesome as the other films, if not better. Raiders is my #1 favorite film, after all. Hopefully Spielberg managed to defray some of Lucas' bad ideas/decisions/writing. Here's hoping for no "Your skin is soft, not like sand" Lucas dialogue moments in INDY4. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uminoken Posted February 19, 2008 Share Posted February 19, 2008 Not too prolong this anymore than it already has, but I for one would be greatly disapointed if they go the Stargate route with 'aliens are the true gods'. Athough 'Raiders' is cited as establishing God-as-diety, "Last Crusade' went leaps and bounds in its interpreation of the divine. The cup of Christ healing Dr. Jones (Sr.) leading to his 'illumination' about his belief in the divine suddenly an alien artifact? That is appalling and I for one will not spend a penny on it. Not even on the John-Williams-compsed-which-will-be-no-doubt-incredible-score. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EXO Posted April 13, 2008 Share Posted April 13, 2008 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr March Posted April 13, 2008 Share Posted April 13, 2008 Ka-ching! Ka-ching! Ka-ching! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hikuro Posted April 13, 2008 Share Posted April 13, 2008 can't really read it past Steve-O. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EXO Posted April 13, 2008 Share Posted April 13, 2008 can't really read it past Steve-O. you can magnify the whole thing! How many Spileberg movies do you recognize from that pic? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr March Posted April 14, 2008 Share Posted April 14, 2008 There's a few I can't get (hat, bear), but I recognize the following: Raiders of the Lost Ark, obviously Dinosaur = Jurassic Park Helmet = Saving Private Ryan Hook = Hook (*vomits*) ET = ET Shark Poster = Jaws Sailing Ship = Amistad Olympic Rings icon = Munich Gremlin = Gremlins (he was only ExProd) Far right poster = Schindler's List Plane = Always Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EXO Posted April 14, 2008 Share Posted April 14, 2008 teddy bear =A.I. mashed ptato sculpture = Close Encounter what's with the top hat??? ADD: nm... I just checked IMDB, he's making a Lincoln biographical film... that's about it I think Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smiley424 Posted April 29, 2008 Share Posted April 29, 2008 don't know if this was mentioned before but I just saw an ad for these in one of my comics 3 3/4" Indy Action Figures from Hasbro Looks like they're going to span all four movies and being as they're made by Hasbro should be on par with the GI Joe and Star Wars figures. Too small for my tastes, plus I'm afraid I'll start buying GI Joes and Star Wars figures if I start getting these. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vermillion21 Posted April 29, 2008 Share Posted April 29, 2008 Yep, these look pretty cool. I'll likely be getting at least ONE Indy figure, the one from Raiders looks pretty sweet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gerwalk25 Posted May 8, 2008 Share Posted May 8, 2008 (edited) I picked up Indy with the Fertility Idol today. It pretty much has the same joints like the current SW action figures (I wouldn't be surprised if it were the same designers ). I counted 20 points of articulation and looks really cool on my desk! He comes with two styles of whips (one he uses and the other made to be stored on a loop on his belt), a colt pistol with really bulky holster to keep it in, shoulder bag, molded leather jacket arms and the golden idol from Lost Ark. It's a great toy and ya'll shold pick it up. Edited May 9, 2008 by gerwalk25 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bsu legato Posted May 9, 2008 Share Posted May 9, 2008 a colt pistol It had better not be, or my childhood is offically rape-ed. Good sir, Indy is a Smith & Wesson man. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gerwalk25 Posted May 9, 2008 Share Posted May 9, 2008 It had better not be, or my childhood is offically rape-ed. Good sir, Indy is a Smith & Wesson man. Fixed! But he did use a Colt in Temple of Doom. http://www.indygear.com/gear/guns.shtml Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taksraven Posted May 9, 2008 Share Posted May 9, 2008 People have been begging for this movie for over a decade and I don't have the faintest idea why. Taksraven Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macross007 Posted May 10, 2008 Share Posted May 10, 2008 (edited) People have been begging for this movie for over a decade and I don't have the faintest idea why. Taksraven Because it's Indy and we all love him. (And the hat too. ) Edited May 10, 2008 by Macross007 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one_klump Posted May 11, 2008 Share Posted May 11, 2008 Love that pic from MAD, and the letter from Lucas to Spielburg was priceless. Not to mention the pic of Calista Flockheart, and the way they want to squeeze her into the movie lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vermillion21 Posted May 13, 2008 Share Posted May 13, 2008 I picked up Raiders Indy with the Fertility Idol today as well ... nice figure. Awesome detail, but not much articulation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hurin Posted May 17, 2008 Share Posted May 17, 2008 Spoiler - Hilight to read Well, sadly the hopes of seeing Abner Ravenwood were unfounded. Though we do get to see the big Ark weilding warehouse again (it's Area 51 just incase you were unsure), the Ark is not the main object that they are there for (they do show it ofcourse; ya gots ta). LeBeef is ofcourse Indy's son. And other than quick references to Indy's Dad and Marcus (both dead) there isn't much to link with the the old stuff. ***Light Spoilers through context below*** well, it doesn't sound quite yet like the Ark is retroactively made into an alien artifact as "collateral damage" of this new movie. Fingers crossed. Early reviews, however, are that it's exactly what you'd expect from Spielberg/Lucas. Camera mugging, pratfalls, infantile humor, etc. I love how Lucas is going around saying that the earlier movies weren't actually that good. I agree. . . except for Raiders. I'll wait for Netflix. As always, Just hoping they don't retroactively f--- Raiders in the butt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
transfan52 Posted May 17, 2008 Share Posted May 17, 2008 I just bought the trilogy DVD set of the Indiana jones series... My family is watching the temple of doom as I type this just now... Its a classic movie series, I have no doubt in my mind that IV will be better than that lame iron man movie, but not better than the dark knight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hurin Posted May 17, 2008 Share Posted May 17, 2008 I just bought the trilogy DVD set of the Indiana jones series... My family is watching the temple of doom as I type this just now... Its a classic movie series, I have no doubt in my mind that IV will be better than that lame iron man movie, but not better than the dark knight. If you're watching them sequentially, let us know if you notice any drastic difference in tone between Raiders and Last Crusade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.