I thought the last one was awful. How does this one compare?
Despite negative reviews from Youtube “critics”, it actually has decent reviews on IMDB, Rotten Tomatoes (I know it’s not that good BTW), and other online review sites. But I also heard that some people didn’t like how preachy it was, in their opinions of course.
1 Like
Headed towards epic bust status. Fans of this franchise don’t want a broken down, washed up shell of the character they loved. They would be better served recasting Indiana Jones and telling new stories set back in the 30’s and 40’s as opposed to this. You could get a lot of mileage out of the character and tell some fun stories that way.
2 Likes
I agree with what Effinsoldier says in general
I myself have no desire to go to see it due to that, I like Harrison Ford as an actor but I think he is a bit too old to be playing that character now
I dont understand why they didnt just have it about his son with Ford’s character being more of a support/advisor role
I would have more interest in going to see that, than this
1 Like
I’m not even going to go into how Kathleen Kennedy has treated great legacy characters. This was simply a stupid way to go. Indiana Jones could be like James Bond in that you find an actor, tell some fun stories, and then get someone else. I mean really, who wouldn’t enjoy seeing Indy running around doing cool stuff and sticking it to the third reich at every turn? What they have done here is really damaging to the brand.
2 Likes
They should have done like they did with #3. Have Harrison Ford play like Sean Connery did in that movie and have his son take over as the main focus of continuing on the franchise.
I have basically been boycotting any Disney movie with my wallet. I did not like how SW 7 went, so I never went to see 8, 9 or Solo at the movies because of her. This also holds true with all the other franchises that Disney has bought to try and capitalize on. I have since seen them but only once they were free to watch and so glad, I never paid to watch them this politically left/right agenda crap.
I go to movies to watch movies. Not view an agenda. A lot of the movies including She-Hulk TV-series, the female characters all seem to have mastered their powers better than the male characters who might have struggled to grow their abilities over several movies / shows. I blame this purely on the current generation and the older generation that want to appease them.
2 Likes
Shia Labeouf, the actor who played Mutt Williams, was fired by the director for being a difficult person to work with… which you can see why. So his character was said to be deployed to Vietnam during the war and died in combat.
They should have found an actor that looks a lot like him and did adventures in the 1910 to 1920s era when he was a very young man.
He was in his 40s when he did the first three so it would have been fine.
However, we all know they would have just ruined those movies too so I don’t think it makes a difference. Disney is going to keep ruining franchises until we stop giving them money.
2 Likes
I had to go look that up myself. As I didn’t think the Vietnam war really had lasted 20 years (1955-1975). I thought there was going to be a discrepancy in the timeline, but it seems he must have died in the war between 1955-1968 compared to when the movie was set (1969). The Korean war was from 1950-1953 which is why I was getting confused as I knew that war had happened as well but thought it was at a later date.
Its weird how people are blaming the producer when she worked on ALL the indiana jones movies to my memory.
Yeah Kathleen Kennedy has had her fingers in a ton of movies since the 80s.
So I’m not entirely convinced it was her screwing things up unless I’m proven wrong.
1 Like
Yeah you can tell folks were just “dat is woman! me go say it woman fault” with blaming her when they were stone cold quiet when they watched the other movies she worked on
The closer you use the fantastical into modern times the more it just becomes a super hero themed show. The whole Inidian Jones gimmick only really works in the early part of the 1900s.
Well it won’t flop as badly as the Flash did, so there is that I suppose.
I think the more humanistic, open ended or unusual movies of the 90s and 2020s and some in the 2010s (Star Wars prequels, I don’t know, Spencer) always fail the American public in terms of expectations because the popularity of pop cultural more monomyth or just less high minded movies of the 80s or 2000s (Judd Apatow movies etc, John Hughes movies, etc) are just what the people want.
I don’t know for sure but I think it’s sort of a class thing, Indiana Jones in the 80s was a pulpy red blooded upstart with something to prove, almost a hustler in Raiders. In the Dial of Destiny he’s dealing with mortality and loss and missed opportunities which I think was really cool and interesting, and heightened the cheesy drama and comedy and stuff. But yeah he’s a seasoned professor with tenure and his challenges aren’t like basic security and seeking the next big hit for his career but more fundamental issues like I was saying finding meaning and purpose and relevance.
I think the American public tends to like the kind of guy seeking his next big hit or rush of adrenaline, or high school kid that discovers time travel as a way to attract the girl he really likes, not an old guy meditating on issues and having to feel his way through things. If there’s an old guy teaching a younger guy something, it should be like Karate Kid a total know it all sensei that’s like perfection and all he delivers are pearls, it shouldn’t be that he has problems on top of other people having problems.
I mean he’s still a really well established scholar in Raiders who is sort of part of high society to a degree, but the theme of the movie is more to meet people with a relatable likable kinda everyman adventurer.
But I’m in the minority (I like the Star Wars prequels more than the original trilogy by a lot for example, I like historical epics from the 90s and 2000s or something more than ET and Back to the Future and the old stalwarts like that) so if you consider yourself more normal and with the majority on movies, you probably won’t like it as much as other Indiana Jones movies.
All that said, I really think the girl in it was hilarious and entertaining no matter what your basic stance, she comes out of movies from like the 40s and 50s and people don’t really object to those movies too much as more polarizing movies of recent times.
So that’s a long way of saying I think it’s good but this is why it isn’t making enough money.
1 Like
There’s been pushback lately.
Disney has been identified as one of those brands following Bud Lights trending downfall.
1 Like
eyeroll
Hard disagree but whatever
Aside from the obvious themes…Indie 5 is like watching Henry Cavills Superman live in a retirement home, struggling to fish his false teeth out of a glass of water.
Nobody wants to see their action heroes reduced to that state.
1 Like
Yea, just ignore all the WOKE morons who don’t even understand how absurd it is to complain about something they barely understand. And if they did really understand it they’d think twice about complaining about it.
Only thing WOKE should teach us is how powerful the media can be with getting whatever agenda it wants out there no matter how stupid or deceitful that agenda is.
I didn’t bother seeing this movie, the only movies went see in last 2 week are both MI 7 and Sound of Freedom. I might catch indy 5 on streaming.
1 Like