rough cut

Keeping in mind that some films include scenes across different time periods, and Temple Doom should be watched AFTER Raiders, I don't care WHAT the on-screen date says, this is how you'd do it:
 
1839 - Amistad
1865 - Lincoln
1918 - War Horse
1930s - The Color Purple
1936 - Raiders of the Lost Ark
1935 - Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom
1938 - Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade
1941 - 1941
1941 - Empire of the Sun
1943 - Amazing Stories: The Mission
1944 - Schindler's List
1944 - Saving Private Ryan
1940s/50s - Tintin
1957 - Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull
1957 - West Side Story
1960 - Bridge of Spies
1962 - The Fabelmans
1969 - Catch Me If You Can
1971 - Duel
1971 - The Post
1972 - Munich
1973 - The Sugarland Express
1975 - Jaws
1977 - Close Encounters
1981 - E.T.
1982 - Poltergeist (if you count it)
1982 - The BFG
1985 - Twilight Zone: The Movie (if you count it)
1985 - Amazing Stories: Ghost Train
1989 - Always
1991 - Hook
1993 - Jurassic Park
1997 - The Lost World
2004 - The Terminal
2005 - War of the Worlds
2045 - Ready Player One
2054 - Minority Report
2100s - A.I.

I think that you have put too much thought into my statement. I don’t sit with an excel sheet while watching movies. It’s a gut feeling.
 
But if my gut constantly tells me, “that’s unnatural - that’s illogical - that’s weird”, and then at the end my brain points out unresolved events abd starts going “but what happened to x - and what happened to y”, then It’s a bad movie.
 
There’s no calculus.
 
Of course, the “gut feeling” all depends on the movie. I can watch Sharknado and it’s obviously bad, but I don’t give Indiana Jones the same leeway.

I think that you have put too much thought into my statement. I don’t sit with an excel sheet while watching movies. It’s a gut feeling.
 
But if my gut constantly tells me, “that’s unnatural - that’s illogical - that’s weird”, and then at the end my brain points out unresolved events abd starts going “but what happened to x - and what happened to y”, then It’s a bad movie.
 
There’s no calculus.
 
Of course, the “gut feeling” all depends on the movie. I can watch Sharknado and it’s obviously bad, but I don’t give Indiana Jones the same leeway.

Whatever it is, make sure to drink it from a bathroom glass! 🤣🤣🤣

Whatever it is, they're drinking a lot more over on the appreciation thread. 

I think that you have put too much thought into my statement. I don’t sit with an excel sheet while watching movies. It’s a gut feeling.
 
But if my gut constantly tells me, “that’s unnatural - that’s illogical - that’s weird”, and then at the end my brain points out unresolved events abd starts going “but what happened to x - and what happened to y”, then It’s a bad movie.
 
There’s no calculus.
 
Of course, the “gut feeling” all depends on the movie. I can watch Sharknado and it’s obviously bad, but I don’t give Indiana Jones the same leeway.

They’re all bad.

I think the defenders of these movies give them a pass due to the franchise or brand they belong to. They have too much invested in them to accept any flaws. It becomes a self image problem (but of course that is the wrong conclusion). “If this thing that I grew up with, identify with, have formed my identity around, have publicly defended, spent time and money on - is suddenly bad, I refuse to accept this ‘new’ reality and will blindly defend it” - even though it’s painfully obvious for everybody around.
 
It’s the same reason (to some extent) that women in an abusive relationship don’t leave their men.
 

Like all “bad” movies they are bound to have have some redeeming features. The music. The set design. The props. A certain actor. A groundbreaking special effect. But one swallow does not a summer make.
 
I think it’s easy to look back at a bad movie and confuse one or more of these redeeming features with the movie actually being ok/good and think, “since it had X, it was not bad”. But this is a false logic. It’s self justification with a bias because we also want to like these movies.
 
But sure, we all have different definitions of good/bad, no one can deny that. And we can endlessly discuss the nuances of how bad it was by comparing a bad movie with other bad movies - which one was slightly worse or which one was slightly better - but it’s not enough that a movie is “relatively ok”. A movie is a sum of all its parts - and a bad movie with some redeeming features is still a bad movie.
 

Right! I’d forgotten about that. Such an unnecessarily cruel movie! And you’re absolutely right, the logic that the characters use around these events, so unnatural.
 
I think the reason I dislike this movie boils down to two things: most things happening in this movie feels either pointless or unnatural, and one can only suspend one’s disbelief for so many things.

Go slow. Peel at an angle. Don’t lift straight up. 

The sheet on mine was aligned crooked, so the decision was easy.  It’s cool to see the art design of the list of film titles rather than the sell sheet showing you what’s inside.  Which I will keep with it. 

They’re all bad.

I think the defenders of these movies give them a pass due to the franchise or brand they belong to. They have too much invested in them to accept any flaws. It becomes a self image problem (but of course that is the wrong conclusion). “If this thing that I grew up with, identify with, have formed my identity around, have publicly defended, spent time and money on - is suddenly bad, I refuse to accept this ‘new’ reality and will blindly defend it” - even though it’s painfully obvious for everybody around.
 
It’s the same reason (to some extent) that women in an abusive relationship don’t leave their men.
 

Like all “bad” movies they are bound to have have some redeeming features. The music. The set design. The props. A certain actor. A groundbreaking special effect. But one swallow does not a summer make.
 
I think it’s easy to look back at a bad movie and confuse one or more of these redeeming features with the movie actually being ok/good and think, “since it had X, it was not bad”. But this is a false logic. It’s self justification with a bias because we also want to like these movies.
 
But sure, we all have different definitions of good/bad, no one can deny that. And we can endlessly discuss the nuances of how bad it was by comparing a bad movie with other bad movies - which one was slightly worse or which one was slightly better - but it’s not enough that a movie is “relatively ok”. A movie is a sum of all its parts - and a bad movie with some redeeming features is still a bad movie.
 

Right! I’d forgotten about that. Such an unnecessarily cruel movie! And you’re absolutely right, the logic that the characters use around these events, so unnatural.
 
I think the reason I dislike this movie boils down to two things: most things happening in this movie feels either pointless or unnatural, and one can only suspend one’s disbelief for so many things.

My take is that the movie's faults are at a much more granular level.
 
I've only seen the movie the one time in the cinema (premiere showing, of course, I'm still a fan!), but what bugged me during the movie and coming out of the theatre was the follwing:
 
- Dr. Voller shouldn't have survived that hit to the head
- Running on top of the train was clearly CGI and it looked as if Indy was made out of rubber
- Sad Indy feeling out of touch with the times
- Helena Shaw leaving Indy to die during the encounter with the mob (great way to build sympathy for your new female character - NOT!)
- The whole CIA plot is pointless
- The CIA woman’s death seems unnecessary cruel and pointless 
- Helena Shaw's ex showing up is pointless
- Annoying dialouge from Helena Shaw's charater during Tuk Tuk race, "I am strong and independent" (show don't tell, remember?)
- Sallah showing up is pointless
- Antonio Banderas’ character dying seems unnecessary cruel and pointless 
- Archimedes doesn't do anything - pointless. Why even go to ancient Greece at all?
- Indy is gracelessly knocked out at the end
- The relationship problems with Marion is solved magically and feels unnatural.
- Repeat dialogue "where does it hurt" is annoying.
 
Edit: I didn’t mind the horse scene in particular. But I do remember thinking there was a rather odd cut when the horse jumped out of the train’s way. Something about the angle of the jump and the speed of the train made it seem unnatural.

Such a weird thing to put in the movie. He should have straight up died there.
 
Not only was DoD a bad Indy movie, it was also a bad movie. It is beyond me how that movie has an appreciation thread here on the forum. Denial much?
 
If this hadn’t been an Indiana Jones adventure, people would’ve hated this. Now it “kind of” gets a pass (but not really).
 
Even die hard Indy fans confess that it’s mediocre at best. And that’s ok. The movie is a product of many hands, countless meetings and business decisions, and the franchise is not an infallible man, but just that: a product made to be consumed and for whatever reason the creators messed up the recepie.
 
Also, a bad entry to the franchise doesn’t take away any of the magic from the previous films.
 
 

Well, to punch a hole in your theory, I didn't know who Phoebe Waller-Bridge was before this movie and have nothing personally against her, yet still somehow managed to dislike it.

It's a C and it has almost nothing to do with ol' Phoebs. In fact, I'd say most of the movie is pretty well cast. The plot just isn't very good. Thank God we at least got Johnny baby to score it!

My take is that the movie's faults are at a much more granular level.
 
I've only seen the movie the one time in the cinema (premiere showing, of course, I'm still a fan!), but what bugged me during the movie and coming out of the theatre was the follwing:
 
- Dr. Voller shouldn't have survived that hit to the head
- Running on top of the train was clearly CGI and it looked as if Indy was made out of rubber
- Sad Indy feeling out of touch with the times
- Helena Shaw leaving Indy to die during the encounter with the mob (great way to build sympathy for your new female character - NOT!)
- The whole CIA plot is pointless
- The CIA woman’s death seems unnecessary cruel and pointless 
- Helena Shaw's ex showing up is pointless
- Annoying dialouge from Helena Shaw's charater during Tuk Tuk race, "I am strong and independent" (show don't tell, remember?)
- Sallah showing up is pointless
- Antonio Banderas’ character dying seems unnecessary cruel and pointless 
- Archimedes doesn't do anything - pointless. Why even go to ancient Greece at all?
- Indy is gracelessly knocked out at the end
- The relationship problems with Marion is solved magically and feels unnatural.
- Repeat dialogue "where does it hurt" is annoying.
 
Edit: I didn’t mind the horse scene in particular. But I do remember thinking there was a rather odd cut when the horse jumped out of the train’s way. Something about the angle of the jump and the speed of the train made it seem unnatural.

Such a weird thing to put in the movie. He should have straight up died there.
 
Not only was DoD a bad Indy movie, it was also a bad movie. It is beyond me how that movie has an appreciation thread here on the forum. Denial much?
 
If this hadn’t been an Indiana Jones adventure, people would’ve hated this. Now it “kind of” gets a pass (but not really).
 
Even die hard Indy fans confess that it’s mediocre at best. And that’s ok. The movie is a product of many hands, countless meetings and business decisions, and the franchise is not an infallible man, but just that: a product made to be consumed and for whatever reason the creators messed up the recepie.
 
Also, a bad entry to the franchise doesn’t take away any of the magic from the previous films.
 
 

Such a weird thing to put in the movie. He should have straight up died there.
 
Not only was DoD a bad Indy movie, it was also a bad movie. It is beyond me how that movie has an appreciation thread here on the forum. Denial much?
 
If this hadn’t been an Indiana Jones adventure, people would’ve hated this. Now it “kind of” gets a pass (but not really).
 
Even die hard Indy fans confess that it’s mediocre at best. And that’s ok. The movie is a product of many hands, countless meetings and business decisions, and the franchise is not an infallible man, but just that: a product made to be consumed and for whatever reason the creators messed up the recepie.
 
Also, a bad entry to the franchise doesn’t take away any of the magic from the previous films.
 
 

Matching covers for Indiana Jones series, using Matt Ferguson artwork. Dial of Destiny has 'complete' variant for recent isolated score track

Too much money for me.
 
I’ll wait another 30 years for the expansion and then complain about the shipping cost and/or import tax.

Too much money for me.
 
I’ll wait another 30 years for the expansion and then complain about the shipping cost and/or import tax.

Too much money for me.
 
I’ll wait another 30 years for the expansion and then complain about the shipping cost and/or import tax.

Too much money for me.
 
I’ll wait another 30 years for the expansion and then complain about the shipping cost and/or import tax.

I’ve been an avid collector for 30 years, and still I “only” own 75 % of the content of this box. And I’d wager that’s a pretty decent percentage!
 
Still, lots of the stuff that is on here that I never got isn’t really “rare” - it’s just that I never pulled the trigger on the OSTs. I just figured I’d “get to it later”.
 
Thats about five discs worth of content that I don’t own.
 
This box is a great way to “catch up” on a lot of that music!