Well we're getting close enough along so it's time for a new thread...I sure hope these rumblings don't turn out to be true:

Variety blog...
http://weblogs.variety.com/thompsononho ... vance.html

"The advance buzz on Indy is getting damaging enough that Lucas and Spielberg may want to reconsider the current strategy of waiting until May 18 to show the film to everyone at once. That's a long way off."

Things to note:
-John Williams said the running time was around 140 minutes
-The film was been cut back to just over 2 hours with credits -- either that or John was simply erroneous

That Variety quip was from the following article over at CHUD:

"I was told a long time ago - when the movie was still filming - to not expect to see Crystal Skull until maybe a day or two before domestic release. According to some insiders, this policy was a smart one, as the movie may not have turned out to be what people in the industry call 'good.'"

http://chud.com/articles/articles/14385 ... Page1.html

And similar things over at this site too...

"I have yet to talk to anyone at Paramount who has seen the film, and don’t expect to, as security is quite tight on this one. But I have been told by a couple people to “keep expectations low”. Devin at CHUD has also heard the same kind of buzz from industry insiders. I too am hoping for the best. One thing is for sure, Indiana Jones is expected to make some serious cash at the box office."

http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/04/16/ind ... te-sequel/

Serious cash is a given. I just hope the film is better than the trailers seem to indicate...

I honestly won't be surprised if it's a letdown myself for any number of reasons.

I'm torn. I am trying to stay away from all the articles and such because I am really hoping this was worth the wait and all the script rejections by Lucas will pay off in the end. If the film is bad, I put the blame mostly on Lucas for more reasons than anyone would want to hear. I am a big fan of Spielberg and I want it to be good. I am also a big fan of Williams and want it to be good for that reason as well.

The one thing that bothers me about the film is the inclusion of a son. I don't care how old he is- I just don't like the idea. I am giving the film the benefit of the doubt no matter what the industry may be hyping or downplaying. Spielberg deserves that much.

If the film turns out as good as other ridiculously belated sequels like Terminator 3 or Live Free Or Die Hard, I'd be perfectly happy. Just the first new Williams score in 2 1/2 years is enough reason to anticipate this.

mkaroly wrote:I'm torn. I am trying to stay away from all the articles and such because I am really hoping this was worth the wait and all the script rejections by Lucas will pay off in the end. If the film is bad, I put the blame mostly on Lucas for more reasons than anyone would want to hear.

OK I know you hate the prequels and Lucas, but that's a little silly Michael. After you get past the premise stage the show is mostly all Spielberg's so if the film turns out to be a turkey (which it probably won't be, but I'm not expecting a classic either), I think there's plenty of blame to go around. I don't think Lucas would've gone to Koepp if he wasn't a friend of Spielberg's either, so that ties in as well.

Listen it probably feels like I'm lining up to hate this movie, and I'm not. But I am concerned. (Plus it's fun to vent).

My main HESITATION with the film basically reads like this:

1. THE LAST CRUSADE actually felt like the END. I question what the need for this sequel, so long after the fact, is outside of Harrison Ford's career basically being DOA at this point.

2. No Sallah, No Connery, but we have Shia LaBeouf, the hot young box-office lead, instead. Feels almost too "commercial" in that regard.

3. The "son" element feels like a gimmick. And yes the "Father" element sold THE LAST CRUSADE as well, but it kinda feels like they've spent years trying to figure out some fresh angle to mix in with the classic Indy formula (remember the talk of Costner as Indy's brother?).

4. David Koepp is writing the script. I have so little faith in him it nearly offsets the involvement of everyone else involved.

5. Janusz Kaminski. No matter what they've said about trying to emulate the use of Slocombe, the trailers seem to show off Kaminski's trademark use of blown-out light and lack of primary colors. I

6. The "fun, playful" Spielberg who turned out so many classics of escapist fare has not made a film like this -- well -- in a long time. Witness THE LOST WORLD and WAR OF THE WORLDS, which were also written by David Koepp.

7. The trailer is terrible.

So I think the movie has some questions it's going to have to own up to, just as it should, being a belated entry in a classic trilogy of films. People were harsh (sometimes unnecessarily so) on the Star Wars prequels and they will be here as well, given the level of expectations.

The main thing I keep wondering is why NOW. Nearly 20 years after the last film ended (which really felt like the finale to the series), they've gone ahead and made it. I just hope it's because they have something to say and it's not just because Ford's career is dying out, Spielberg would love to make a mega-hit again and Lucas, well, really has nothing else to do now that the prequels are over.

I just can't shake the fact that this should've been made 10-15 years ago when all the principals were still around and in their prime. Now we get Kaminski, David Koepp and Shia LaBeouf instead. As a FAN I'm having a hard time getting over that.

And also that THE LAST CRUSADE felt like the end, the finale, the literal ride-off into the sunset...if this movie is anything less than sensational people will be asking what the point of it was.

Just how I feel...now where's Williams' score??

Monterey Jack wrote:If the film turns out as good as other ridiculously belated sequels like Terminator 3 or Live Free Or Die Hard, I'd be perfectly happy. Just the first new Williams score in 2 1/2 years is enough reason to anticipate this.

I'd be happy with that too MJ. Agreed on that front.

True Andy- but from what I understand Lucas was the one who kept turning down scripts/story lines and this is the one he green-lighted. That's why I was concerned and why he'd be the first person I pointed the finger at. And yes, my bias is clearly that I don't repsect Lucas as a writer or a director, so that could have something to do with it. There would be plenty of blame to go around for sure if it sucked.
I may be wrong about that and if I am I won't have a problem saying I was wrong.

However- irregardless we get another Williams score which is a huge positive no matter what!

And yes, my bias is clearly that I don't repsect Lucas as a writer or a director, so that could have something to do with it.

He certainly has some deficiencies but I respect him for a lot of what he's accomplished in his career.

The original STAR WARS and AMERICAN GRAFFITI are, for me, two of the greatest films ever made. The prequels aren't classics but two of them were quite entertaining and at least far better than most of the "blockbusters" we've seen in the last 10 years, IMO. Other than that and THX-1138 he hasn't really directed much of anything, so his battering average as a director is actually pretty solid in my book...even if he's more technically oriented than a craftsman at working with actors (which he's never claimed to be anyway).

He's basically admitted that he's not the greatest writer (and clearly he isn't), but he's elevated visual effects wizardry and improved how we've watched movies at both the theater and at home through his support of THX sound systems and the like. I certainly respect him for that.

And I also respect him for making the SW prequels on his own terms. It's HIS series, they're his movies. He didn't whore them out and make 12 dozen of them the way a major studio would've. He didn't go back on his word and make several trilogies and produce them all right away. He waited, he made them himself, the way he wanted. It may not have been what you or I wanted to see, but he's entitled to do what he wants with his property and I respect him for that also. (And I don't mind his changes in the SW Special Editions either -- I just wish he had included the original versions the rest of us wanted to see).

It's all the fashion for internet groupies to piss on Lucas, I understand that, and it's a free country. But I think a lot of viewers have totally forgotten about his positive contributions to modern cinema, and many fans were not fair with the prequels and as time goes on, those viewers who had a hard time accepting anything not starring Mark Hamill and Harrison Ford may re-assess them in a more positive fashion.

No, they'll never have the freshness of the originals, one of them was a dud in my eyes, they're not nearly as "human" as their predecessors (lacking a Harrison Ford type), and some of the performances left much to be desired (Natalie Portman in particular)...but on their own terms they're actually a lot of fun. Even the original trilogy had its shortcomings (the tedious pace of Jedi, Carrie Fisher's performance, etc.) that some of these same "fanboys" seem to have totally forgotten about, or overlooked through the haze of nostalgia.

True Andy- but from what I understand Lucas was the one who kept turning down scripts/story lines and this is the one he green-lighted. That's why I was concerned and why he'd be the first person I pointed the finger at.

I'd point the finger at him too if the story turns out to be less than good. But this has always been a collaborative deal between the group, if the story is terrible Spielberg could've always tossed it down as well.

One of my main hang-ups with the movie is Koepp, and he's only onboard because of Spielberg. So it cuts both ways.

We do all agree on Williams though, no question

Monterey Jack wrote:If the film turns out as good as other ridiculously belated sequels like Terminator 3 or Live Free Or Die Hard, I'd be perfectly happy. Just the first new Williams score in 2 1/2 years is enough reason to anticipate this.

I agree 100 percent. This is about as realistically high as my expectations are for this film and score.

Anyone expecting an 80's return to glory on either film or the score is, of course, setting themselves up for needless disappointment.

Sadly, looks like the rumors about this being a major letdown are coming true

And after seeing the utter lack of response to the new trailer when I saw IRON MAN in front of a big audience, I had a sinking feeling my original doubts about this project were going to be reaffirmed.

God knows I don't always trust Harry Knowles' AICN reviews but this one sounds pretty legit...and extremely negative. Even Harry says things were apparently not kosher on the set, and with Lucas downplaying expectations, one can sense this one setting up to be a huge disappointment.

For those who don't want to read spoilers (and there are a lot of them) basically this writer notes the following:

-No sense of danger or suspense in any capacity
-lousy CGI out of line with the original films
-Shia LaBeouf is horrible
-terrible one-liners (you can see this from the trailer)
-phony backdrops and sets clash with "real" locations (again, obvious from seeing the ad)
-Ford looks tired

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/36667

Well with David Koepp writing this one, who's surprised?

AndyDursin wrote:Sadly, looks like the rumors about this being a major letdown are coming true

Again...is anyone really surprised by that? I'm not.

And after seeing the utter lack of response to the new trailer when I saw IRON MAN in front of a big audience, I had a sinking feeling my original doubts about this project were going to be reaffirmed.

Indeed.

Even the trailers they've been showing on regular TV have not lit a fire under me at all.

I think Iron Man will easily be the big event movie of the entire summer and Indy 4 won't touch it.

God knows I don't always trust Harry Knowles' AICN reviews but this one sounds pretty legit...and extremely negative. Even Harry says things were apparently not kosher on the set, and with Lucas downplaying expectations, one can sense this one setting up to be a huge disappointment.

That's beyond hideous, especially when I contrast that with the unbelievably fanboy gushing reviews he gave in the past to movies like Phantom Menace or Armageddon, as a frame of reference.

It really must be a heartbreaking train wreck if this is anything to go by.

For those who don't want to read spoilers (and there are a lot of them) basically this writer notes the following:

-No sense of danger or suspense in any capacity
-lousy CGI out of line with the original films
-Shia LaBeouf is horrible
-terrible one-liners (you can see this from the trailer)
-phony backdrops and sets clash with "real" locations (again, obvious from seeing the ad)
-Ford looks tired

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/36667

Well with David Koepp writing this one, who's surprised?

All of that is exactly what I expected.

Now, I know I might get in trouble with this, but here goes:

Catch me If you can excepted, when was the last time Spielberg really made fun, lighthearted ,non preachy films? Hook? The 80's?

For so many years he's been mired down in such heavy handed material that even Catch Me If You Can was a pleasant surprise. I didn't think he could do "fun" anymore.

Lucas? Please. Even if you're a huge fan of the Star Wars prequels films, which I most certainly am not, the painful truth is: Lucas can't write his way out of a paper bag. He's awesome and bleeding edge with special effects, but he just can't write a good solid script and character dialogue especially to save his life.

What's sad is: Given that, did they go from bad to even worse by going with Koepp? I can't believe they couldn't find a better writer than that!

As a whole, this entire project is a good 10-15 years too late for all concerned, including Ford who, I hate to say, is showing his age rather obviously even in the trailers.


If there was going to be an Indy 4 it should have happened no later than the mid 90's IMO.

I really have no burning desire to see this, to be honest.

For me, there have been obvious warning signs floating out there for months past the obvious fact that this thing has come far too late and everyone is just too damned old.

I was satisfied enough with Indy 3 and what I thought was an obvious end to the series...they should have just left well enough alone.

It's sad how often I'm saying that these days. (Thinking of Star Wars prequels primarily, among other things.)


Any word on Willams's score?

The samples from Williams' score are up on Amazon. They sound fine, what you can gather from hearing them, and I have no doubt he's going to deliver a better score than the film probably deserves.

Truth be told it's only one "reaction" kind of review, and the place has been flooded with plants. So we'll have to reserve judgment, but it's a troubling sign IMO.

The reality is that the trailers look terrible and the "feeling" I get from the movie is that the only reason they made it is because Ford's career is near-DOA at this point and they had nothing else to do. Hate to put it that way, but this movie should've been made 10-15 years ago when all the principals could've been involved.

And keep in mind Koepp is Spielberg's pal, which is why he was brought onboard too.

As far as Lucas goes, no he's not a great writer, obviously. But truth be told there was more of a "reason" for making the prequels (he always wanted to tell that story, and said he would) than making another INDIANA JONES film. The LAST CRUSADE felt like the end, what more needed to be said? Apparently not much if this review is accurate.

AndyDursin wrote:-No sense of danger or suspense in any capacity
-lousy CGI out of line with the original films

I could say the same about Last Crusade, which is supposedly your favorite of the original trilogy, Andy. That film was filled with goofy slapstick and lousy greenscreen effects.

Anyways, even a subpar Indy film will be 100% better than those godawful Mummy movies.

"Filled with slapstick" -- yes but a LOT of it was actually funny. You didn't think so, but as Spielberg noted LAST CRUSADE played phenomenally with audiences in terms of their response to it. You must have been one of the few sourpusses who didn't have a good time

MJ do you think this movie actually looks good? The lines are flaccid and the trailers are some of the worst I can recall seeing for a Spielberg film. I just can't see how someone who hates THE LAST CRUSADE is stoked over this movie when it's so obvious the film is going to be even more humorous, it seems. And has David Koepp writing it!

AndyDursin wrote:"Filled with slapstick" -- yes but a LOT of it was actually funny. You didn't think so, but as Spielberg noted LAST CRUSADE played phenomenally with audiences in terms of their response to it. You must have been one of the few sourpusses who didn't have a good time

Last Crusade isn't a perfect film by any means, but I just can't get over the people that hate it.

If you think Jack's bad you ought to hear the way one of my best friends rags on Last Crusade. He's a bit of a thespian of sorts that does singing, acting, and the rest of it and to hear him get in on it really is somewhat amusing.

MJ do you think this movie actually looks good? The lines are flaccid and the trailers are some of the worst I can recall seeing for a Spielberg film. I just can't see how someone who hates THE LAST CRUSADE is stoked over this movie when it's so obvious the film is going to be even more humorous, it seems. And has David Koepp writing it!

I don't get that at all, either.

If you hated Crusade than this thing should clearly have you running for the hills to get away from it as fast as you possibly can.