Jump to content

Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny (James Mangold, June 30 2023)


Joe Brausam

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 6.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

8 minutes ago, KK said:

I don't think anyone really has a problem with the overall premise of the prequels. In fact, it was a promising one. Just execution was all wrong, so you end up with some ambitiously craptacular films.

 

Execution wasn't perfect (e.g. the love dialogue) but Lucas and the other filmmakers deserve way more respect for their creation than they are getting. 

 

You know, here's what I think might be the reason for the disconnect between my opinion and that of most others:

 

I am a huge Star Wars fan, and my favorite part about the saga (not counting the music) is the opportunity for analysis and thinking about the story. 

 

Many of you probably want to just watch a movie and have a fun time. (as I do with most films; SW is an exception)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

The official announcement for 5 earlier this year has me pumped. I just hope it turns out good. Disney will be handling it and if The Force Awakens is an indication then Indy is in pretty good hands. I loved TFA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On June 23, 2016 at 11:16 AM, Will said:

 

While I have only watched each SW OT and PT film once, at this time I actually prefer the prequels to the originals. The originals are more fun, but the prequels are more interesting and emotional, IMO. They tell a tragic, beautiful, and intriguing story. Some hate the prequels because of their political complexity, but that's what I love about them. And ROTS is the most emotional film of the original six, and my favorite. 

 

The key is to look at the prequels as part of a larger story as opposed to as individual films. That's what Lucas intended the Star Wars saga to be (at the time he was making the prequels) -- one story told in six episodes. 

 

By the way, it's hard to say whether it was actually Lucas's intent to make SW a ring composition, but the Ring Theory is certainly an immensely interesting read. I read all 8 pages of it, and I think others should too before they go prequel-bashing.

 

Because if this is what Lucas intended, then the prequels deserve to be placed at the pinnacle of filmmaking achievements:

 

http://www.starwarsringtheory.com/ring-composition-chiasmus-hidden-artistry-star-wars-prequels/

People don't hate the prequels because of their political complexity, they hate them because they're shit. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If he's ever short of cash, Lucas could always restart his career as a writer for Days of our Lives.

 

God help us if he has any story input or script approval for Indy V. His stubborn rejection of any idea that wasn't aliens for Indy IV is the reason that film took so long to happen. Spielberg clearly hated the idea and it shows in the final film.

 

With any luck Disney's story group are running the show this time around; they rectified basically every problem with the Star Wars prequels in TFA. Would've been nice to see Moffat, Wright & Cornish get the screenplay gig though; I have no faith in Koepp after KOTCS. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/22/2016 at 11:07 PM, Shatner's Rug said:

I hope the new one has aliens in it.

 

Yeah, and a grizzled old Indy saying "aliens...why'd it have to be aliens" before he pulls out his revolver and mows them down.  The alien princess says "but wait, we come in peace" to which Indy replies "and you'll be going back in pieces" as he hurls a live grenade to finish off the last of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People that don't like aliens in Indy, forget the Ark of the Covenant, the Sankara stones and the Holy Grail.

 

All my childhood is a lie!!! :sarcasm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

So I'm pretty sure Shia isn't coming back....

 

Quote

LaBeouf eventually followed Disney with a lucrative partnership with Steven Spielberg on several projects at DreamWorks–including “Disturbia,” “Transformers” and “Eagle Eye”–as well as Paramount’s “Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.” He thought it would be a dream come true, but he had a hard time. “I grew up with this idea, if you got to Spielberg, that’s where it is,” says LaBeouf, who originally wanted roles like Macaulay Culkin’s in the “Home Alone” movies. “I’m not talking about fame, and I’m not talking about money.”

He thought Spielberg would be his ticket to a big-screen legacy. “You get there, and you realize you’re not meeting the Spielberg you dream of,” LaBeouf says. “You’re meeting a different Spielberg, who is in a different stage in his career. He’s less a director than he is a f–king company.” (Spielberg declined to comment.)

LaBeouf felt like there was no room to grow as an actor, and that he was stuck. “Spielberg’s sets are very different,” he says. “Everything has been so meticulously planned. You got to get this line out in 37 seconds. You do that for five years, you start to feel like not knowing what you’re doing for a living.”

When LaBeouf completed the recent art project of re-watching his old films, he purposefully got up and left during the second “Transformers,” which was executive produced by Spielberg. “I don’t like the movies that I made with Spielberg,” he says. “The only movie that I liked that we made together was ‘Transformers’ one.”

LaBeouf says he felt the most disappointed by the reception for 2008’s “Crystal Skull.” He doesn’t consider the sequel a success, despite its worldwide gross of nearly $800 million. “I prepped for a year and a half,” LaBeouf says. “And then the movie comes out, and it’s your fault. That sh-t hurt bad.”

 

He kept seeing anonymous comments online from people complaining that between “Transformers,” “Wall Street 2,” and “Crystal Skull,” he had destroyed the ’80s. Whenever a fan asked him for a selfie, he’d replay those thoughts in his head. “I didn’t like going in public, because I had to face my failures constantly,” he says.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, crocodile said:

Maybe Michael Bay is simply a better person than Steven Spielberg?

 

Not sure where you got that from, he didn't say anything to assault Spielberg's character? He's talking about a creative process he found stifling, as opposed to Bay who he seems to think could be more easily liberated from what he's been doing and become something more interesting. I actually sort of buy that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

His observations are somewhat reflected in Spielberg's recent output. It's like a production line; he can't make films like he did in the 80s because there was so much adversity along the way. He'd never put himself in a situation like that these days; everything is intricately planned, budgeted and scheduled (probably also a reflection of modern studio filmmaking).

 

KOTCS was an almost perfect encapsulation of this. Soulless, cynical, risk-averse, production line stuff. No creativity to the photography after the first act, nothing organic with the dialogue (thanks to that mess of a script), nothing filmed outside the US, Ford phoning it in and Spielberg either too lazy or disinterested in yielding a stronger performance from him.

 

Dude's a grandpa now, he's probably not going to make films like he used to. I don't hold much hope for Indy 5 recapturing the lightning-in-a-bottle of the original trilogy, especially with you-know-who handling the script (which indicates to me that Spielberg has no intention of leaving his comfort zone).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spielberg has shown to be responsive to criticism from the fans in his older age. As much as he is a major brand and businessman film producer, he doesn't seem to be adverse to vocalising humility on occasion. Otherwise he'd never had admitted his misjudgement with regards to E.T.'s digital fiddling, even going as far as reversing them for the latest home release. 

 

Can you ever imagine Lucas doing that? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, from what I can gather, Spielberg's recent output has been well received anyway. Sure BFG has stumbled at the box office, but loads who have seen it have been happy with it. Shia does make some reasonable points, but he's just a jaded 30 year old. I was still a jumped up dick at that age as well. He'll cringe like fuck at himself when he's older. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.