SPOILER TALK: Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny

[Jay 33,655]

With the film premiering at Cannes today, spoilers will likely be all over the internet.

 

This is a space for those who want to discuss spoilers can do so freely.  Feel free to share spoiler-free Cannes reactions in the existing thread.

[Brónach 1,189]

I think the part with the giant boulder again was a bit much

[Alex 2,694]

This review contains some potential spoilers so I’m going to post it here

 

 https://www.gamesradar.com/indiana-jones-and-the-dial-of-destiny-review/

[toothless 959]

Just read two spoiler free review by French outlets. For now it’s only praise! 

[Tom 3,987]

I read some reviews and thought they were pretty heavy on the spoilers, with time-travel (fissures) and such, but here I am in the spoilers thread.  I really hope we get an ancient-sounding Archimedes theme or at least motif.  

[Nick1Ø66 3,856]

 

Quote

 

Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny, Cannes 2023, review: A shabby counterfeit of priceless treasure

 

It ultimately feels like a counterfeit of priceless treasure: the shape and the gleam of it might be superficially convincing for a bit, but the shabbier craftsmanship gets all the more glaring the longer you look

 

...the action is generic and clunkily staged – for all the local detail in every individual shot of the heavily advertised tuk-tuk chase, it might as well be taking place on an endless conveyor belt. As for the comedy – well, Waller-Bridge has clearly been given the instruction to “just do Fleabag” but she’s operating without Fleabag-level material here, and her frequent attempts to juice up the clumsy gags with her trademark winking delivery tend to fall flat

 

 

 

 

Quote

 

‘Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny’ Review: Time Is of the Essence in a Sequel That Gets Old Fast

 

Not only is “Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny” an almost complete waste of time, it’s also a belabored reminder that some relics are better left where and when they belong. If only any previous entries in this series had taken great pains to point that out. 

 

 

Quote

Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny review — even Fleabag can’t rescue him this time

 

The good news is that it’s not as poor as Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. The bad news is that it’s not much better.

 

A meandering, frequently enervating yawn, this fifth and most expensive Indy outing yet (about $300 million) is a curious demonstration of how a Hollywood studio can fire nearly a third of a billion bucks at late 20th century nostalgia and get it so wrong.

 

[BrotherSound 2,077]

3 hours ago, Alex said:

This review contains some potential spoilers so I’m going to post it here

 

 https://www.gamesradar.com/indiana-jones-and-the-dial-of-destiny-review/

 

Quote

thankfully, we do get to see an on-screen map charting the characters’ movements.

Map cue confirmed?

[Tom 3,987]

34 minutes ago, Nick1Ø66 said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yikes, though, quite frankly, these are the kind of reviews I expect from a film festival (just like the over the top positive reviews of the Fabelmans).  It tells me this movie will be solid and fun, though not earth-shattering.  

[TolkienSS 340]

If mainstream outlets like MSN are salty about this film, there may be hope after all.

[pete 793]

I like that they incorporated Operation Paperclip into film, the recruiting of Nazi/German rocket scientists as the war was ending and afterwards. I recently read both a non-fiction book, American Moonshot by Douglas Brinkley, and an SF book, A History of What Comes Next, that explored/touched on that program. I had no idea A History of What Comes Next focused partly on that operation when I started reading, so it came as a nice surprise soon after reading American Moonshot, which was admittedly a pretty dry read. It explored the development of rockets and then the Space Race and Kennedy's political career with an emphasis on him gearing up to reach the moon.

[Tom 3,987]

Evidently, Indy is searching for the lance of Longinus in the prologue--maybe that will give us one last Williams's Indy-religious theme.

[Holko 8,608]

5 hours ago, Nick1Ø66 said:

Quote

it’s also a belabored reminder that some relics are better left where and when they belong. If only any previous entries in this series had taken great pains to point that out. 

 

The people who fuck with the Ark get their faces melted or blown off. In ToD Indy's all about fortune and glory but by the end he leaves the Sankara Stone with the locals. When the Grail is attempted to be taken away, the temple collapses itself, killing Elsa and almost Indy until he can decide to let go.

[Garrett 136]

15 hours ago, Tom said:

Evidently, Indy is searching for the lance of Longinus in the prologue--maybe that will give us one last Williams's Indy-religious theme.

I hope you’re right; that would be really cool.

 

However, if Williams is lazy, he might just recycle the Holy Grail theme from Last Crusade. This would be the “Rise of Skywalker” approach.

 

JW reused old themes way too often in the last two Star Wars films, but hopefully he course corrects with Dial of Destiny.

[Brónach 1,189]

4 hours ago, Garrett said:

However, it Williams is lazy, he might just recycle the Holy Grail theme from Last Crusade. This would be the “Rise of Skywalker” approach.

 

mmmmh an inversion of the grail theme or in reverse i hear

 

also, help, this movie is exactly about what i thought it would be about, this is hilarious to me

[Nick1Ø66 3,856]

 

 

[Edmilson 5,644]

I trusted Mangold would deliver something truly great. 

 

Can't believe the last great Indy movie was released in 1989.

[Chen G. 3,327]

So its now:

 

43% "rotten" and 5.6/10 for all reviews (14).

33% "rotten" and 5.3 for "top critics" reviews (12)

51 on Metacritic, mostly (10 out 14 reviews) mixed.

 

Better, but not good at all!

[pete 793]

Anyone know if there’s actual time travel in it?

[Tom 3,987]

from the reviews, it looks like there is.  Time-fissures, as they call it. 

[Bespin 7,559]

3 minutes ago, Tom said:

from the reviews, it looks like there is.  Time-fissures, as they call it. 

 

They surely hurt less than an... anyway!

[pete 793]

I read the time-fissure reference, just I'm not sure if that means Indy goes through it on a little trip - chance for Williams to pull out his Time Tunnel theme!, or if it's just something Indy is trying to stop the Nazis from opening. There were the pics from the set that looked Ancient Romeish, but that could be shown over someone talking about the relic's history - if those pics did show Ancent Romeish stuff. 

[greenturnedblue 303]

Indy must go back in time to stop the Nazis from using their new super weapon, a sports almanac, and changing the course of the war

[mstrox 6,051]

I suspect that, in true Indy fashion, the Nazis will use the dial and fall prey to their own desires, and Indy and Helena will be faced with their own earnest desires to change or visit the past, and a choice of whether to do it (which they won’t take, can’t play god etc etc).  In the meantime, through whatever fissures the audience sees, there will probably be flashes of times past.

[Nick1Ø66 3,856]

4 hours ago, Chen G. said:

So its now:

 

43% "rotten" and 5.6/10 for all reviews (14).

33% "rotten" and 5.3 for "top critics" reviews (12)

51 on Metacritic, mostly (10 out 14 reviews) mixed.

 

Better, but not good at all!

 

Like I said a few weeks ago, I just don't think it's possible to make a satisfying Indiana Jones movie today. No matter how talented the director or screenwriter is, or how good a performance Harrison Ford may bring. The Indy movies are about a young, charming, vital, globe-trotting archaeologist in the 1930's. Not a washed up, alcoholic pensioner living in a grubby NYC apartment in the 1960's.  It's just a totally different thing, and expecting it to be any more than a cheap copy was expecting too much. It was expecting too much in 2008, and certainly in 2023. And it's not only a different time in the films, it's a different time for film...they just don't make movies like that anymore. You just can't capture that again. That Indiana Jones is gone and isn't coming back.

 

Some of the reviews mention that he's estranged from Marion.  Mutt (to be fair, thankfully) is nowhere to be seen. Which means that Indiana Jones has officially joined Han Solo in the failed marriage/dead beat dad club, and Luke Skywalker in the washed up loser club. Just how we all want to think Indy ended up.  So well done Disney, well done. 

 

Why Disney wants to do this to their most iconic heroes is beyond me, and why anyone wants to see Indy like this is beyond me.  As far as I'm concerned, Indy rode off into the sunset at the end of Last Crusade/the end.

 

 

 

[TolkienSS 340]

Audience scores are way more important than critics' review scores. 

Film critics review in their own bubbles. The audience just reacts to whether they liked it or not, and is therefore a way better way to gauge.

Unless you watch the film for something specific they don't give you.

[Chen G. 3,327]

19 minutes ago, Nick1Ø66 said:

The Indy movies are about a young, vital, globe-trotting archaeologist in the 1930's. Not a pensioner in the 1960's. [...] Indiana Jones has officially joined Han Solo in the failed marriage/dead beat dad club, and Luke Skywalker in the washed up club.  Why Disney want to do this to their most iconic heroes is beyond me, and anyone wants to see Indy like this is beyond me. As far as I'm concerned, Indy rode off into the sunset at the end of Last Crusade/the end.

 

Basically.

 

Also, its now 44%/5.7 "rotten" from 18 reviews and 29%/5.2 from 14 "top critics." Yeesh!

[Nick1Ø66 3,856]

Why I can't figure out is, WTF was Disney thinking putting this up at Cannes, and with no review embargo?  Now instead of six weeks of eager anticipation, they're going have six weeks of horrible reviews just sitting out there. Seems like a huge self-own and a major marketing f*ck up.

 

I mean, they were probably trying to recreate what Maverick pulled off at Cannes, and build up some hype. But in this case it seems to have backfired in a big way. The film will certainly still make a lot of money no matter what, but...damn. This could not have been what they were anticipating or hoping for.

[Chen G. 3,327]

It does seem like a huge misfire as of yet. Hate to be in the filmmakers' shoes!

 

Also, when the film does come out, its reception could no longer be exclupated by means of "review bombing" given what's come out of Cannes!

 

Brutal.

[Edmilson 5,644]

1 hour ago, Nick1Ø66 said:

 

Like I said a few weeks ago, I just don't think it's possible to make a satisfying Indiana Jones today. No matter how talented the director or screenwriter is, or how good a performance Harrison Ford may bring. The Indy movies are about a young, vital, globe-trotting archaeologist in the 1930's. Not a pensioner in the 1960's.  It's just a totally different thing, and expecting it to be any more than a cheap copy was expecting too much. It was expecting too much in 2008, and certainly in 2023. And it's not only a different time in the films, it's a different time for film...they just don't make movies like that anymore. You just can't capture that again. That Indiana Jones is gone and isn't coming back.

 

At least one review mentions that he's estranged from Marion and Mutt isn't mentioned. Which means that Indiana Jones has officially joined Han Solo in the failed marriage/dead beat dad club, and Luke Skywalker in the washed up club. So well done Disney, well done. 

 

Why Disney wants to do this to their most iconic heroes is beyond me, and why anyone wants to see Indy like this is beyond me*.  As far as I'm concerned, Indy rode off into the sunset at the end of Last Crusade/the end.

 

 

 

After reading your post, I was wondering why, after the hugely controversial reception of the Star Wars Sequels, Disney/Lucasfilm still insists in this trope of presenting beloved heroes of the past as lonely, broken and sad men, who need a plucky young female to get them back in action.

 

Sure, if they have to bring legacy characters back, they need to be less youthful (no one wants to watch a digitally de-aged Harrison Ford for 2 and a half hours). But why make their lives miserable and unfulfilling? That was controversially received with the Sequels and now it's happening again with Indy.

 

Sure, Indy's old age will probably be played more for laughs than the depressing way they portrayed Luke (and I like TLJ).

 

Still, the only explanation I can think is that Lucasfilm doesn't want to show weakness in the face of what is, in their view, trolls. They don't want to be perceived as weak when facing major criticism from segments of fans. So they'll keep doing it again and again, and the bad blood between Disney and fans will continue.

[mstrox 6,051]

I think the issue is they’re trying to tell character stories about 700 million year old fellas and there are only so many ways you can go.

[Tom 3,987]

I think it comes down to a lack of imagination of the writer.  It is easy to redeem a broken character; it is harder to take a well-integrated person and still tell a compelling story.  Its possible and many, many older films do it, but with Disney, this is what we get.

 

I also think there is a bit of hubris with the writers.  They want to be the ones who give the character the definitive redemption arc, even if they have to first artificially drag the character down to make it even possible.  

[Nick1Ø66 3,856]

56 minutes ago, Edmilson said:

Sure, Indy's old age will probably be played more for laughs than the depressing way they portrayed Luke (and I like TLJ).

 

Quote

Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny review: 'Gloomy and depressing' final act

 

I'm not sure how many fans want to see Indiana Jones as a broken, helpless old man who cowers in the corner while his patronising goddaughter takes the lead, but that's what we're given, and it's as bleak as it sounds.

[Brónach 1,189]

2 hours ago, Nick1Ø66 said:

Some of the reviews mention that he's estranged from Marion.  Mutt (to be fair, thankfully) is nowhere to be seen. Which means that Indiana Jones has officially joined Han Solo in the failed marriage/dead beat dad club, and Luke Skywalker in the washed up loser club. Just how we all want to think Indy ended up.  So well done Disney, well done.

 

it sounds to me like Mutt died

[Chen G. 3,327]

1 hour ago, Edmilson said:

Sure, Indy's old age will probably be played more for laughs than the depressing way they portrayed Luke (and I like TLJ).

 

 

Just because its played for laughs doesn't mean its not miserable.

[Nick1Ø66 3,856]

10 minutes ago, Brónach said:

 

it sounds to me like Mutt died

 

I'm guessing Vietnam?

[Bilbo 3,707]

19 minutes ago, Brónach said:

 

it sounds to me like Mutt died

Could he be away in Vietnam? 

[Brónach 1,189]

i'm guessing i would have loved the nineties version of this movie, but also hat "sad old Indy" fits more with Raiders than the sequels, which become an inconvenience.

 

19 minutes ago, Nick1Ø66 said:

 

I'm guessing Vietnam?

 

17 minutes ago, Bilbo said:

Could he be away in Vietnam? 

 

it's a bit... dark.

 

and then this would get played as a pulp comedy? as the character motivation? it's kind of fucked up. i'd imagine it to be tonally a mess.

 

i think i'll skip this one to be honest. i can write my own Antikythera fanfiction that's fucked up.

[SilverTrumpet 610]

All I want to know is if that big rumor about Helena redoing all of Indy's adventures is true or not.

[Garrett 136]

55 minutes ago, Brónach said:

 

it sounds to me like Mutt died

Slow, somber rendition of Adventures of Mutt confirmed?

[MrJosh 783]

huh, well I'm disappointed they're doing the 'broken lonely old man' thing. I didn't like that Han and Leia were estranged in TFA, and why undo the happy ending of KotCS with this?

 

I don't mind Indy having a goddaughter idea, but it would have been weirdly refreshing for a movie about Indiana Jones to be mostly about Indiana Jones.

[Chen G. 3,327]

7 minutes ago, MrJosh said:

t would have been weirdly refreshing for a movie about Indiana Jones to be mostly about Indiana Jones.

 

You can't do that when Jones is 80, or 60 for that matter.

 

Already in Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, it was clear the action setpieces were written around Ford's age, handing-over the more, erm, acrobatic stuff to Mutt. Star Wars made it work because Han's involvement in action sequences is mostly about shooting his gun. Indy's scruffier and its yet another reason why an elderly Indy is a flawed concept.

[Brónach 1,189]

2 hours ago, Edmilson said:

After reading your post, I was wondering why, after the hugely controversial reception of the Star Wars Sequels, Disney/Lucasfilm still insists in this trope of presenting beloved heroes of the past as lonely, broken and sad men, who need a plucky young female to get them back in action.

 

In Rey's defense, she's the main fucking character, or she should be. It makes sense in Star Wars.

[Bilbo 3,707]

32 minutes ago, SilverTrumpet said:

All I want to know is if that big rumor about Helena redoing all of Indy's adventures is true or not.

I believe that was always nonsense

[Romão 2,236]

The Indiana Jones trilogy did not have the slightest concern for continuity, and it was all the better for it. You had a small reference to the Ark of the Convenant in TLC and a nod to the sword trick in TOD. You can watch them in any order, no previous knowledge of any of the films is required.

 

Now, of course, the opening sequence of Raiders and the last scene of TLC work really well as opening and closing chapters for the character, but doesn't mean the movies have to even be seen in that order.

 

Characters and love interests come and go without any need to explain what happened in the meantime. That would only drag the movies down.

 

Now, this obviously only really works with an ageless hero. Indy seems to be roughly the same age in all three movies.

 

When you've let so many years pass between movies and Indy is obviously much older, the hero is no longer ageless. The order of the movies ceases to be insignificant. And adding to that, when you introduce marriages and sons into the mix, you can no longer ignore continuity. You can no longer make characters come and go without explanation.

 

You've shot yourself in the foot, basically. These movies can no longer be what they were conceived as. It becomes impossible to make an Indiana Jones movie in the same spirit. It is folly

[mstrox 6,051]

Obviously I haven’t seen the movie yet, but the idea of Indy having regrets would play right into the theme of a McGuffin that can change the past…

[Nick1Ø66 3,856]

16 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

You can't do that when Jones is 80, or 60 for that matter.

 

Well you can, but you'd need to make another kind of movie entirely. Which goes back to my earlier point, I think it's impossible to make an authentic "Indiana Jones" movie today, in the way we think of Indiana Jones.

[Brónach 1,189]

Just now, mstrox said:

Obviously I haven’t seen the movie yet, but the idea of Indy having regrets would play right into the theme of a McGuffin that can change the past…

 

it's great for an epilogue movie made in the nineties, where maybe he's in his forties and disappears in mysterious circumstances never to be seen again. but we don't have that.

[Chen G. 3,327]

12 minutes ago, Romão said:

when you introduce marriages and sons into the mix, you can no longer ignore continuity. You can no longer make characters come and go without explanation.

 

Its one of the elements I most hated about Kingdom of the Crystal Skull: turning it all into a soap-opera a-la latter-day Star Wars. "Why, Mutt couldn't by any chance be...INDY'S SON!?!"

[Nick1Ø66 3,856]

So would they really end Indy & Marion's iconic relationship with a divorce? I can't believe even Disney would do something like that. I'd guess they get back together. Any chance she shows up at the end, as he's walking out of his classroom for the last time, and says "Let me buy you a drink...you know, a drink" and they walk off into the sunset?

[Brónach 1,189]

i never wanted her in the fourth one tbh