Indiana Jones 5? (2 Viewers)

[gboudx]

I saw it this weekend

I liked it. it was miles better that Crystal Skulls and a worthy Indiana Jones movie. Mads was really good as the villain. However it is a distant 4th after the original trilogy

I thought the de-aged opening scene was great. There were a few dodgy uncanny valley moments but for the most part held up really well. In fact it was my favorite part of the movie, so much so i kind of wish the whole movie was this. And just showed that the best Indiana Jones is Nazi Fighting WW2 Indiana Jones

I thought Phoebe Waller Jones played a good frenemy part. Didn't really think Short Round Part 2 was necessary

I liked seeing Sallah again and wished he had gone with Indy. If he had been the one to die during the scuba diving scene that would have packed a wallop. But instead we were supposed to feel sad at the murder of Indy's friend, a character we first met five minutes ago. And whose death registered at all because it was Antonio Banderas

Time Travel - Okay

I did note the "If you're worried there may be more of these movies with Shia LeBouf in the future, don't be" line

Really liked the closing scene with Marion and call back to Raiders

We saw it today. I went in with zero expectation and wanted to just enjoy watching a movie at a theater; we don’t do that much. I agree with a lot of what you said, though I did feel it went on too long.

The preview of Oppenheimer has me really looking forward to it.

 

[Optimus Prime]

We saw it today. I went in with zero expectation and wanted to just enjoy watching a movie at a theater; we don’t do that much. I agree with a lot of what you said, though I did feel it went on too long.

The preview of Oppenheimer has me really looking forward to it.

Yes it felt about 30 minutes too long

 

[Optimus Prime]

See more

Karen Allen on one last hurrah as Marion Ravenwood in 'Indiana Jones: Dial of Destiny'

Karen Allen's cameo in the last “Indiana Jones" is finally out of the bag.

apnews.com

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

Haven't seen it yet but I'm glad to hear you enjoyed it. I've avoided the reviews as I think a critics' opinion about these kind of movies (summer action/adventure blockbuster) is generally worthless, I avoid them for horror movies for the same reasons. Then the youtube brigade seems to just have an agenda against Disney/Kathleen Kennedy in general which might be fair enough but it's not going to stop me from an Indiana Jones movie, particularly the last one with Harrison Ford as the titular character. Audience score seems fairly high from what I've seen since it came out on Friday. Hoping to see it sometime this week.

I don't think the critics were wrong per se... but I think they miss the point a bit. It's very formulaic, and now with a much older Indy. So, not necessary, and follows the standard plot we've seen a few times before.

However, Harrison Ford embodies the role and Phoebe Waller-Bridge is quite good. There was good action, John Williams, competent directing, very Indiana Jones bad guy. It was a fun summer movie.

 

[RaginSaint93]

Just saw it, I think Harrison Ford can still kick our butts.

 

[CoolBrees]

Saw it the other day.

I just kept saying to myself: Dude is 80!

And I agree with those that liked the first scene. Count me with those that say they liked this bit the best. I think they may have stumbled onto the franchise that a whole movie like that would work and people would go see (well I would)

But overall good movie and a way better end to the franchise than that last thing

 

[SaintsBrazil]

I went to see the movie with some distrust that it was going to be less than Crystal Skull or somehow preachy woke, but what I got was a solid Indiana Jones movie.

The deaged sequence had a couple of spots where it looked too CGI, but a vast improvement over what's been done so far, such as Leia and Tarkin.

There were a couple of moments where you could tell they sped up the film during the tuk-tuk car chase scene.

I think seeing Indiana Jones in 1969 underscored how quickly things moved after World War II.

 

[Optimus Prime]

Don't know if this is true or not but I read that the severe fan backlash to Crystal Skulls was a major factor in both Spielberg and Lucas skipping this one. Curious how different it would have been with Spielberg directing
===================================

One of the biggest movies of the summer recently hit theaters in the form of "Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny." Billed as the last ride for Harrison Ford as the cinematic icon, the film hoped to send Indy out with a bang. Unfortunately, the opening weekend box office came in on the low end of projections at $60 million. For context, "Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" opened to $100 million 15 years ago. So this was, to say the very least of it, a disappointment for Disney and Lucasfilm.

But what went wrong, exactly? Why didn't director James Mangold's take on the character resonate as strongly with moviegoers? There is one glaring issue this movie had to face (we'll get to that) but, as is often the case, there are multiple factors at play that lead to a film's failure to deliver against expectations. Let's get into it, shall we?

Steven Spielberg Not Being In The Director's Chair​

I'm not going to sit here and argue that the average person cared -- or even knew -- that Steven Spielberg didn't direct the fifth and final "Indiana Jones" movie. But these things are often multifaceted and everything counts. Spielberg is one of the most trusted and celebrated filmmakers in history. He directed every other movie in this franchise, beginning with the all-time classic "Raiders of the Lost Ark." Not having that "from director Steven Spielberg" card in the trailers and TV spots may have mattered on some level. Am I saying if Spielberg had directed it the movie would have been a smash hit? No. But I think a few moviegoers would have been convinced to get off the couch for a new Spielberg movie.

The Cannes Screening​

Disney decided to roll out the red carpet and bring "Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny" to Cannes, one of the most prestigious film festivals in the world, for its premiere screening. This proved to be a pretty big miscalculation. Critics who saw the film at the festival were mixed-to-negative on it (read our review here), with the film debuting in the 50% range on Rotten Tomatoes. So, the first, highly-publicized reviews a lot of people read were negative, and people who just looked for a consensus were getting mixed signals. Things have improved dramatically since, as the film currently holds a 69% critical approval rating and an 88% audience rating. While that's not glowing, the general reception is certainly a lot better than that initial wave suggested it would be............

5 Reasons Indiana Jones And The Dial Of Destiny Failed At The Box Office - SlashFilm

Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny's $60 million opening weekend might have been a success for a movie that didn't cost $295 million to make.

www.slashfilm.com

 

[gboudx]

Don't know if others saw it,

but

there's a scene in the cave where Teddy and the huge bad guy break the rope bridge and fall into the water. Later, we see Indy and Helena escaping from the cave using the same rope bridge, except it's not broken. Or at least it appeared to be not broken. Anyone else catch this? I was wondering if there were scenes cut out, where the fate of Teddy and the huge bad guy didn't involve the broken rope bridge. And due to lazy editing and/or not wanting to film more scenes for how to cross the raging cave river with a broken bridge, they just said, f-it and rolled with it.

 

[itztime]

Don't know if others saw it,

but

there's a scene in the cave where Teddy and the huge bad guy break the rope bridge and fall into the water. Later, we see Indy and Helena escaping from the cave using the same rope bridge, except it's not broken. Or at least it appeared to be not broken. Anyone else catch this? I was wondering if there were scenes cut out, where the fate of Teddy and the huge bad guy didn't involve the broken rope bridge. And due to lazy editing and/or not wanting to film more scenes for how to cross the raging cave river with a broken bridge, they just said, f-it and rolled with it.

Did it break though? I thought they fell in? Not saying I am right, but I thought they fell in.

 

[gboudx]

Did it break though? I thought they fell in? Not saying I am right, but I thought they fell in.

See more

What me and wife "think" we remember, is the top support rope breaking, causing the boards to only be attached on the other side, so their footing was gone and they fell in. And when we see the bridge again, it's not damaged. I don't know, maybe we saw it wrong.

 

[Optimus Prime]

Don't know if others saw it,

but

there's a scene in the cave where Teddy and the huge bad guy break the rope bridge and fall into the water. Later, we see Indy and Helena escaping from the cave using the same rope bridge, except it's not broken. Or at least it appeared to be not broken. Anyone else catch this? I was wondering if there were scenes cut out, where the fate of Teddy and the huge bad guy didn't involve the broken rope bridge. And due to lazy editing and/or not wanting to film more scenes for how to cross the raging cave river with a broken bridge, they just said, f-it and rolled with it.

I actually did notice that

 

[MarylandWHODAT]

We went to see Dial of Destiny last night and I must say, I really enjoyed it. Is it over the top and completely unbelievable? Yes but that is what Indiana Jones is about: that Saturday matinee, over the top type of film where you just strap in and go for a ride. My 20 year old son loves Indiana Jones and has since a little kid. We were discussing why the first three were so successful and widely loved whereas the last two were received with less than favorable reviews. One, obviously, is the time. Raiders, Tomb and Crusade were all 80’s movies. Skull and Dial were 2000’s and arguably, we are a much more jaded and angry society than we were in the past so we all have critical glasses on.

The second thing though is that the first three dealt with religion and the last two were more mystical and fantastical. All of us had some sort of religion in our lives so we could relate to the stories, characters and themes in some sort of fashion. Aliens and dials? Not so much.

With that said though, I did enjoy the movie and thought it was a nice send off for Indiana. Lots of Disney infused fan service but fun nonetheless.

And after the movie, I asked my son what he thought. He said, “TIME TRAVELING NAZI’S!!”

 

[bigdaddysaints]

finally got around to seeing it.
it was leaps and bounds better than Crystal skull. Crystal Skull action was Indiana Jones, but the story wasn't. This one went back to what it was good at.

the scene with the bridge. my take on it was, it wasn't the same bridge. it seemed there were a few different passages in that cave. not unreasonable there were multiple bridges.

I was disappointed that Indy wasn't the one who took out the big guy. I kept waiting on it..lol
I did like the scene at the end where she was telling him where it didn't hurt. a good throw back from the original..

 

[Optimus Prime]

Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny star Boyd Holbrook defends the film's wild ending, which has proven somewhat controversial. Directed by James Mangold, the new sequel serves as Harrison Ford's fifth and final time playing the intrepid archeologist. Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny follows Indy as he quests after Archimedes' Antikythera device, with the climax involving the hero traveling back in time to 212 BCE to the Siege of Syracuse.

Now, Holbrook, who plays villainous henchman Klaber, defends the Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny ending. In a recent interview with THR, the actor argues that the ending feels "earned" and praises Mangold's thoughtful approach to it. Check out Holbrook's full comment below:

“I thought it was a bold, earned choice. It’s so cleverly speckled in throughout the film. Those seeds are planted, and it’s preparing you for it, subliminally. You don’t really know it until it’s happening and it’s so elegantly done that it’s not farcical whatsoever. It bottlenecks to a really touching moment where you feel that Indiana has earned this moment and wants to stay. When I saw it, I was surprised that it grabbed me by the throat. I was a little emotional even though I’m so close to it.”

The Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny ending is a big swing and, while some critics praised the bold choice, it proved to be a little too much for others. On the surface, the decision to travel back in time to 212 BCE does seem like a fairly significant departure from what the franchise is known for, but it's not actually without precedent.

As Mangold himself has argued, "the relic always defines the third act" of every movie in the Indiana Jones franchise, "and the power of the relic always defines the magic of the movie." In Raiders of the Lost Ark, for example, the titular Ark of the Covenant is the relic Indy is questing after, and the third act sees this relic quite literally unleash the power of God to destroy the Nazis that Ford's hero has been facing off against throughout the film...............

https://www.msn.com/en-us/movies/ne...p&cvid=fc5148d61088429cb2306e02d9c58de6&ei=30