Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny (30th June 2023)

1126127129131132135

Comments

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 12,159
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    I’m glad to see that all Indy movies are at least respected on this thread. They all have their ups and downs. Accept for Raiders, arguably. There are no real problems with that movie.

    I think it excels in every department. If I had to find fault... Indy going out with child Marion is a weird choice; and his knowing not to look at the Ark at the end really needed to be set up earlier in the movie. I don't really understand how that got left out to be honest.
    The thing people say about him not affecting the outcome is nonsense: he blows up the plane and steals the truck, thus stopping the Ark from reaching Berlin, end of.
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    Crystal Skull has a decent villain in Cate Blanchett. Hopefully the next cast can be great as well.

    Yeah I think she works really well in it, it was a good choice.
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 3,784
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    Short Round is how you do child sidekicks right.
    Yeah, I liked Short Round...he was annoying, but he was meant to be annoying. I just (within the last two weeks) watched The Goonies for the first time, and the actor was just as annoying, but once again he was supposed to.

    Let's also accept that whatever one expects from Spielberg movies, this is the only IJ film with a child sidekick.

    Why would the Indiana Jones we get to know in Raiders be hanging around with an annoying child....? 🤔
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited December 2022 Posts: 12,159
    Why not? It works in the movie.

    In terms of sidekicks, I saw that one of the books has Indy team up with a dog. Seems a bit of an 80s buddy movie cliche I guess, but I could actually have seen that working in a film! :)
  • Posts: 5,869
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    Short Round is how you do child sidekicks right.
    Yeah, I liked Short Round...he was annoying, but he was meant to be annoying. I just (within the last two weeks) watched The Goonies for the first time, and the actor was just as annoying, but once again he was supposed to.

    He still has that same annoying voice! I was amazed with Ke Huy Quan in Everything Everywhere All at Once, as he sounds exactly the same and looks very young for a 51 year old.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 3,901
    As another Harrison Ford character would mutter..."I have a bad feeling about this." or did only other characters say it.

    I am underwhelmed with the trailer and the title of the film. I was hoping to see something different and got a jumbled mess of a trailer. What is Indy after? Don't know, though one assumes it's the dial of destiny. (ugh that is not a good title)

    Who will Indy encounter? Nazis, he will teach again, he will ride a horse into the subway, he has a god child??? In our brief glimpse we get her shouting at Indy that they are mildly related. WTF????

    We see a de-aged Indy and we see tons of CGI and not all of it is good. I feel that we will see Indy go the way of so many characters, he will not get a send off and instead this will set up Waller Bridge as the new heroine of the next film or TV series.

    I hope that I am wrong. I love Indy and his movies. I can recall seeing all of them as a teen in the 80's. I loved all the original trilogy films, wasn't so enthused with KOTCS. Less enthused about this one. He had his ride off into the sunset with Last Crusade.
  • Posts: 1,486
    thedove wrote: »
    As another Harrison Ford character would mutter..."I have a bad feeling about this." or did only other characters say it.

    I am underwhelmed with the trailer and the title of the film. I was hoping to see something different and got a jumbled mess of a trailer. What is Indy after? Don't know, though one assumes it's the dial of destiny. (ugh that is not a good title)

    Who will Indy encounter? Nazis, he will teach again, he will ride a horse into the subway, he has a god child??? In our brief glimpse we get her shouting at Indy that they are mildly related. WTF????

    We see a de-aged Indy and we see tons of CGI and not all of it is good. I feel that we will see Indy go the way of so many characters, he will not get a send off and instead this will set up Waller Bridge as the new heroine of the next film or TV series.

    I hope that I am wrong. I love Indy and his movies. I can recall seeing all of them as a teen in the 80's. I loved all the original trilogy films, wasn't so enthused with KOTCS. Less enthused about this one. He had his ride off into the sunset with Last Crusade.

    With regard to that ride into the sunset: LITERALLY
  • Posts: 5,504
    Denbigh wrote: »
    To be honest I think each of the first three Indiana Jones are perfect.

    I'm not a huge fan of the sequels. I don't even own them on any medium.

    Temple Of Doom is childish even with all the heart removing stuff. And I can't abide child sidekicks.

    Last Crusade is a little better, but just a rehash of Raiders. Connery is great, but turning Marcus into a buffoon was unforgivable.

    Crystal Skull had it's moments, but it was mostly jaw droppingly bad.

    Pretty much agree with you there mate. I enjoyed Temple of Doom in the cinema ( such a build up to it!!) And i only own it and Raiders on Bluray. But it's mostly Raiders i watch. Fantastic entertainment every time!
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited December 2022 Posts: 12,159
    thedove wrote: »

    Who will Indy encounter? Nazis, he will teach again, he will ride a horse into the subway, he has a god child??? In our brief glimpse we get her shouting at Indy that they are mildly related. WTF????

    You say that as if there's a self-evident problem..?

    Bear in mind it's only a teaser, it's not going to tell you the plot.


    Incidentally on a different subject, the YouTube channel which started all the lies about 'Indy being replaced' etc. posted a video the other day about how the deletion of Indy had supposedly started because the Old Indy segments had been deleted out of Young Indiana Jones, and this was a sign of Disney erasing our childhoods and replacing it with wimmin and black people etc.
    This was a lie too far and the account had to delete the video when everyone pointed out that it was in fact George Lucas who had decided to remove the Old Indy sequences over a decade ago back when he still owned Lucasfilm. Don't believe this person's lies, he's just trying to make money out of telling fantasies, nothing more.
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 3,784
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    To be honest I think each of the first three Indiana Jones are perfect.

    I'm not a huge fan of the sequels. I don't even own them on any medium.

    Temple Of Doom is childish even with all the heart removing stuff. And I can't abide child sidekicks.

    Last Crusade is a little better, but just a rehash of Raiders. Connery is great, but turning Marcus into a buffoon was unforgivable.

    Crystal Skull had it's moments, but it was mostly jaw droppingly bad.

    Pretty much agree with you there mate. I enjoyed Temple of Doom in the cinema ( such a build up to it!!) And i only own it and Raiders on Bluray. But it's mostly Raiders i watch. Fantastic entertainment every time!

    Temple of Doom certainly was a fantastic cinema experience. A real audience pleaser at the time.

    Raiders kick-started my love of cinema when I first saw it over 40 years ago!
  • HildebrandRarityHildebrandRarity Centre international d'assistance aux personnes déplacées, Paris, France
    Posts: 418
    The YouTuber is a fraud who happens to say things in a very assured manner, putting a few things that have a kernel of truth, and mixing them with elements that appeal to the worst fears of his target audience. He has no more inside information than a psychic has the ability to talk with ghosts. Like Bradley Cooper's (or Tyrone Power's) character in Nightmare Alley, he just did a little research like browsing the documentation that exists (including the leaked version from the trailer shown in July) and browsed popular fan theories on the web, and managed to put together some substandard theory about the plot. Honestly, some people had done a better job on No Time to Die here, and didn't feel the need to insert some incel theories blaming Barbara Broccoli for everything wrong every other sentence of the description.

    Then, the fact that his little hoax about the previews got traction and was ultimately the sole source for dozens of pieces published on the web by the press (not just anti-woke blogs) mostly tells volumes about how these loudmouth frauds are the scourge of the Internet.
  • Posts: 1,486
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    To be honest I think each of the first three Indiana Jones are perfect.

    I'm not a huge fan of the sequels. I don't even own them on any medium.

    Temple Of Doom is childish even with all the heart removing stuff. And I can't abide child sidekicks.

    Last Crusade is a little better, but just a rehash of Raiders. Connery is great, but turning Marcus into a buffoon was unforgivable.

    Crystal Skull had it's moments, but it was mostly jaw droppingly bad.

    Pretty much agree with you there mate. I enjoyed Temple of Doom in the cinema ( such a build up to it!!) And i only own it and Raiders on Bluray. But it's mostly Raiders i watch. Fantastic entertainment every time!

    A few comments:
    While IJATTOD has some parts which might appeal to kids, there's plenty of adult entertainment in it. Please recall, after all, that the IJ films were conceived to come on like a 1940s serial - in which case it would have even less adult content. I remember well the line - and motion - "I'm right here !" That's kiddie content only if you're a baby intent on nursing.

    Marcus into a buffoon in IJATLC ? Marcus was not an Indy ! He was an academic person who was not an adventurer like Indy.

    As for IJATKOTCS - indeed. Great bits, but ultimately such a letdown...and a massive shame, not only for producing such dreck after such a long wait for another Indy, but, in doing so, wasting the return of Marion, the idea of Indy having a child, Cate Blanchett and her cheekbones. Unlike many folks, I like the killer ants. I suffered red ants countless times as a child, and recall fondly the Charlton Heston film wherein he battled the red ants in South America - The Naked Jungle (1954). Was the CGI a letdown ? Not so much that it ruined the ants for me.
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 3,784
    Since62 wrote: »
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    To be honest I think each of the first three Indiana Jones are perfect.

    I'm not a huge fan of the sequels. I don't even own them on any medium.

    Temple Of Doom is childish even with all the heart removing stuff. And I can't abide child sidekicks.

    Last Crusade is a little better, but just a rehash of Raiders. Connery is great, but turning Marcus into a buffoon was unforgivable.

    Crystal Skull had it's moments, but it was mostly jaw droppingly bad.

    Pretty much agree with you there mate. I enjoyed Temple of Doom in the cinema ( such a build up to it!!) And i only own it and Raiders on Bluray. But it's mostly Raiders i watch. Fantastic entertainment every time!

    A few comments:
    While IJATTOD has some parts which might appeal to kids, there's plenty of adult entertainment in it. Please recall, after all, that the IJ films were conceived to come on like a 1940s serial - in which case it would have even less adult content. I remember well the line - and motion - "I'm right here !" That's kiddie content only if you're a baby intent on nursing.

    Marcus into a buffoon in IJATLC ? Marcus was not an Indy ! He was an academic person who was not an adventurer like Indy.

    As for IJATKOTCS - indeed. Great bits, but ultimately such a letdown...and a massive shame, not only for producing such dreck after such a long wait for another Indy, but, in doing so, wasting the return of Marion, the idea of Indy having a child, Cate Blanchett and her cheekbones. Unlike many folks, I like the killer ants. I suffered red ants countless times as a child, and recall fondly the Charlton Heston film wherein he battled the red ants in South America - The Naked Jungle (1954). Was the CGI a letdown ? Not so much that it ruined the ants for me.

    The Marcus line regarding the Ark in Raiders discounts that he was just an academic. "I'm really quite envious. A few years ago i would have gone after it myself..."
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper By the powers *in*vested in me by this parish, I hereby do commandeer this message board
    edited December 2022 Posts: 7,226
    Why would the Indiana Jones we get to know in Raiders be hanging around with an
    annoying child....? 🤔
    Maybe because the second movie played a few years earlier than the first, IIRC? Correct me if I'm wrong.,





  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 12,159
    Since62 wrote: »
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    To be honest I think each of the first three Indiana Jones are perfect.

    I'm not a huge fan of the sequels. I don't even own them on any medium.

    Temple Of Doom is childish even with all the heart removing stuff. And I can't abide child sidekicks.

    Last Crusade is a little better, but just a rehash of Raiders. Connery is great, but turning Marcus into a buffoon was unforgivable.

    Crystal Skull had it's moments, but it was mostly jaw droppingly bad.

    Pretty much agree with you there mate. I enjoyed Temple of Doom in the cinema ( such a build up to it!!) And i only own it and Raiders on Bluray. But it's mostly Raiders i watch. Fantastic entertainment every time!

    A few comments:
    While IJATTOD has some parts which might appeal to kids, there's plenty of adult entertainment in it. Please recall, after all, that the IJ films were conceived to come on like a 1940s serial - in which case it would have even less adult content. I remember well the line - and motion - "I'm right here !" That's kiddie content only if you're a baby intent on nursing.

    Marcus into a buffoon in IJATLC ? Marcus was not an Indy ! He was an academic person who was not an adventurer like Indy.

    As for IJATKOTCS - indeed. Great bits, but ultimately such a letdown...and a massive shame, not only for producing such dreck after such a long wait for another Indy, but, in doing so, wasting the return of Marion, the idea of Indy having a child, Cate Blanchett and her cheekbones. Unlike many folks, I like the killer ants. I suffered red ants countless times as a child, and recall fondly the Charlton Heston film wherein he battled the red ants in South America - The Naked Jungle (1954). Was the CGI a letdown ? Not so much that it ruined the ants for me.

    The Marcus line regarding the Ark in Raiders discounts that he was just an academic. "I'm really quite envious. A few years ago i would have gone after it myself..."

    And he goes in Crusade too. I just can't get upset about it; I think he's funny in Crusade.
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 3,784
    mtm wrote: »
    Since62 wrote: »
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    To be honest I think each of the first three Indiana Jones are perfect.

    I'm not a huge fan of the sequels. I don't even own them on any medium.

    Temple Of Doom is childish even with all the heart removing stuff. And I can't abide child sidekicks.

    Last Crusade is a little better, but just a rehash of Raiders. Connery is great, but turning Marcus into a buffoon was unforgivable.

    Crystal Skull had it's moments, but it was mostly jaw droppingly bad.

    Pretty much agree with you there mate. I enjoyed Temple of Doom in the cinema ( such a build up to it!!) And i only own it and Raiders on Bluray. But it's mostly Raiders i watch. Fantastic entertainment every time!

    A few comments:
    While IJATTOD has some parts which might appeal to kids, there's plenty of adult entertainment in it. Please recall, after all, that the IJ films were conceived to come on like a 1940s serial - in which case it would have even less adult content. I remember well the line - and motion - "I'm right here !" That's kiddie content only if you're a baby intent on nursing.

    Marcus into a buffoon in IJATLC ? Marcus was not an Indy ! He was an academic person who was not an adventurer like Indy.

    As for IJATKOTCS - indeed. Great bits, but ultimately such a letdown...and a massive shame, not only for producing such dreck after such a long wait for another Indy, but, in doing so, wasting the return of Marion, the idea of Indy having a child, Cate Blanchett and her cheekbones. Unlike many folks, I like the killer ants. I suffered red ants countless times as a child, and recall fondly the Charlton Heston film wherein he battled the red ants in South America - The Naked Jungle (1954). Was the CGI a letdown ? Not so much that it ruined the ants for me.

    The Marcus line regarding the Ark in Raiders discounts that he was just an academic. "I'm really quite envious. A few years ago i would have gone after it myself..."

    And he goes in Crusade too. I just can't get upset about it; I think he's funny in Crusade.

    Nah. A character ruined just for cheap laughs.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited December 2022 Posts: 12,159
    There wasn't really a character there; he only had a couple of scenes, and just used in exposition. His position of father figure had been filled so he moved to another.
    There's nothing wrong with laughs either; I want proper big silly laughs from an Indy film.

    People treat films so seriously and get offended by gags, I never get it. Have fun with it, it's not real.
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 3,784
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    Why would the Indiana Jones we get to know in Raiders be hanging around with an
    annoying child....? 🤔
    Maybe because the second movie played a few years earlier than the fist, IIRC? Correct me if I'm wrong.,





    A no nonsense archaeologist adventurer hanging around with a clumsy kid...? Yeah, OK...
  • BennyBenny Classified Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 13,161
    Shorty is a great sidekick in TOD.
    Whilst TOD is my third rated Indy film, behind ROTLA and TLC, the film and the characters continue the action adventure set up in the original. If you can believe stereotypical Nazi villains and melting faces, then surely a child sidekick should be easy to accept.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 22,020
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    Why would the Indiana Jones we get to know in Raiders be hanging around with an
    annoying child....? 🤔
    Maybe because the second movie played a few years earlier than the fist, IIRC? Correct me if I'm wrong.,





    A no nonsense archaeologist adventurer hanging around with a clumsy kid...? Yeah, OK...

    Yes, TOD takes place before Raiders.

    Is Shorty annoying, though? He's just a very excited kid, that's for sure. But I guess Indy has a heart, and offering a street kid the chance to learn and be with a father figure, is part of his good nature.

    Lucas had turned Han Solo 'soft' in ROTJ; perhaps he wanted to give Indy the same 'rascal with the heart of gold' treatment. ;-)

    Also, this was every Spielberg directed/produced film at the time. Always a kid, always the crucial element to bring in the families-- in TOD's case, no doubt to compensate for the film's darker tone.
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 3,784
    Benny wrote: »
    Shorty is a great sidekick in TOD.
    Whilst TOD is my third rated Indy film, behind ROTLA and TLC, the film and the characters continue the action adventure set up in the original. If you can believe stereotypical Nazi villains and melting faces, then surely a child sidekick should be easy to accept.

    Well they are fantasy films, so I can accept the Ark 'melting faces'

    Child sidekicks not so much...
  • Posts: 5,869
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    Also, this was every Spielberg directed/produced film at the time. Always a kid, always the crucial element to bring in the families-- in TOD's case, no doubt to compensate for the film's darker tone.

    That's very true. I would just add that even today Spielberg has that chip on his foot. Even if there's no actual kid, there's always a reference to a disfuncional family or a divorce, or abandonment. He should have made "The Fabelmans" back in the day and be self therapeutical about it. Although, we wouldn't have those true gems like Empire of the Sun, which is a perfect film in every way.
  • Short Round is a great character. Adds to TODs charm
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 22,020
    Univex wrote: »
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    Also, this was every Spielberg directed/produced film at the time. Always a kid, always the crucial element to bring in the families-- in TOD's case, no doubt to compensate for the film's darker tone.

    That's very true. I would just add that even today Spielberg has that chip on his foot. Even if there's no actual kid, there's always a reference to a disfuncional family or a divorce, or abandonment. He should have made "The Fabelmans" back in the day and be self therapeutical about it. Although, we wouldn't have those true gems like Empire of the Sun, which is a perfect film in every way.

    Correct, @Univex!

    Spielberg put a lot of his own emotions into his films, but the splendid outcome shaped my youth. I wouldn't have wanted it any other way.

    Glad to see someone else like EOTS. That makes... two of us? ;-)
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 38,288
    Can I also say that I love Kate Capshaw in TTOD as well? She really stood out to me this last viewing and I loved her character; not usually a fan of the damsel in distress/love interest that offers little more than complaining and screaming but it somehow really works here and I enjoyed her throughout.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 22,020
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Can I also say that I love Kate Capshaw in TTOD as well? She really stood out to me this last viewing and I loved her character; not usually a fan of the damsel in distress/love interest that offers little more than complaining and screaming but it somehow really works here and I enjoyed her throughout.

    This. People say she's terrible. I say she's very good considering the material she was given.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited December 2022 Posts: 12,159
    Yeah it annoys me a bit when people say she's terrible because she screams- that's literally the joke. The bit where they're in the camp and Indy says "The problem with her is the noise" - her picking up the bat like it's a bit of washing on the line and screaming in its face - that tickles me every time. She's a funny character and she's played well.

    The worst bit about her is probably her conspicuously 80s blow-dried bouffant when they're playing the waiting game in their rooms :D
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 38,288
    mtm wrote: »
    Yeah it annoys me a bit when people say she's terrible because she screams- that's literally the joke. The bit where they're in the camp and Indy says "The problem with her is the noise" - her picking up the bat like it's a bit of washing on the line and screaming in its face - that tickles me every time. She's a funny character and she's played well.

    The worst bit about her is probably her conspicuously 80s blow-dried bouffant when they're playing the waiting game in their rooms :D

    I was rolling with laughter during that whole sequence, the way she's losing her mind with all the exotic animals and they sort of tune her out. Like you say, a funny character that's played very well.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited December 2022 Posts: 12,159
    The pacing on that scene is so tight; the laughs are coming at just the right time. I guess that's a bit of a triumph of editing as well as direction.
    And then wonderfully it ends with the joke being on Indy because he becomes the one who's scared. That's just beautiful, deft stuff not to make him the victor of the scene.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 7,595
    I think she's a crap character but that's not on Capshaw. And I do like the scene where her and Indy are seeing who'll go to whose room first. We don't really get those kind of humorous romantic moments as much anymore.
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    edited December 2022 Posts: 3,784
    The best thing about Temple of Doom (IMO) are the bookends so to speak. The opening sequence in the nightclub (Ford dressed like Connery from Goldfinger is a nice touch) is great fun and the climax with the rope bridge is tense and exciting (albeit with some dodgy special effects)

    Talking of rumours not being true, back in 1984 before the film's release, there were rumours that Temple of Doom was going to feature Dinosaurs...😄
Sign In or Register to comment.