Indiana Jones Installment #5

[guycox]

I've seen an early script draft with a working title of Indiana Jones and Last Dynasty.

It's a collaborative work between Steven Spielberg and Tom Clancy It picks up after the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull with Indiana Jones being named the Director of Central Intelligence. We're in a fight to the finish with the Chinese over oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico

[BobSch]

And Marion is the Prez, right?

[Tequila]

Just got back from seeing the fourth one. My recommendation is to save your ticket money and rewatch the old ones.

[LinuxRandal]

Just got back from seeing the fourth one. My recommendation is to save your ticket money and rewatch the old ones.

Haven't known anyone who has/admitted to seeing it. The one review I heard, called it something like Indiana Jones and the box office of gloom.

So DVD, or skip completely?

[Tequila]

Haven't known anyone who has/admitted to seeing it.

Yeah - the wife insisted despite my protests.

So DVD, or skip completely?

The action was still entertaining, but the story was just awful. Wait for the DVD and set your expectations low.

[radhak]

I went saturday - and my expectations were not too high. I just did not want to miss it, whatever it's standards be. And with that mindset, I was entertained enough .

But then, other than Terminator 2, no reprise has ever lived upto the original. So, whaddya expect?

I had both my 6 year old and my 9 year old with me; the younger one of course wanted to know right up front - (a) who were the good guys, and (b) if any of them would get hurt. Knowing Spielberg, and the Indiana Jones series, I could very easily point out to her the good guys, and also assured her about the total invulnerability of all them, with nary a doubt .

I have spent money on far worse, so no regrets.

[drumpriest]

Huh, I thought it was fairly good. Certainly not as good as the first three, but is that even possible given the legendary status we all give those films at this point? One reviewer said that it wasn't great, but it didn't destroy the Indy series ala episode 1. I kind of agree with that assessment.

There were some VERY Indy moments, which I enjoyed. There was some bad dialog towards the end, unfortunately. And not the best ending. I did immediately go back and watch the other 3 (which I have at home), and felt much better about the 4th after seeing how far fetched the first 3 were at times.

I think it was worth the ticket price, especially to take my now 12.5 year old Niece and 10 year old Nephew to go see an Indy film.

[LinuxRandal]

But then, other than Terminator 2, no reprise has ever lived upto the original. So, whaddya expect?

I had both my 6 year old and my 9 year old with me; the younger one of course wanted to know right up front - (a) who were the good guys, and (b) if any of them would get hurt. Knowing Spielberg, and the Indiana Jones series, I could very easily point out to her the good guys, and also assured her about the total invulnerability of all them, with nary a doubt .

I have spent money on far worse, so no regrets.

Phantasm 2 (excellent, much better filming then the original, but then it got, excessive (3 and 4))

Knowing Spielberg? Does anyone really? (aka afraid he would give the bad guys radio's instead of guns)

[BobSch]

We saw it over the weekend. After hearing a bunch of mixed reviews, I guess my expectations weren't much. We enjoyed it — not the best, but better than #2 (which IMHO was a pile of #2.)

[docrowan]

We saw it over the weekend. After hearing a bunch of mixed reviews, I guess my expectations weren't much. We enjoyed it — not the best, but better than #2 (which IMHO was a pile of #2.)

Ditto, much better than #2 in my opinion. We enjoyed it, although I had trouble with some of the magnetic effects (lead pellets magnetized?)

Separate subject - was #2 a "prequel" to number 1? I thought it might have been set in an earlier year than #1.

[radhak]

Ditto, much better than #2 in my opinion. We enjoyed it, although I had trouble with some of the magnetic effects (lead pellets magnetized?)

Separate subject - was #2 a "prequel" to number 1? I thought it might have been set in an earlier year than #1.

#2 was the Temple of Doom, a real hogwash; yes, it was a prequel, so it was very funny that 'marion ravenwood' was never mentioned.

but if you search 'indiana jones' on imdb, the #3, (Last Crusade) shows up as #2 . maybe it lists on popularity?

[Crash2510]

Went to see installment 4 over the weekend it wasn't terrible still love the originals

I have seen much worse lately for example cloverfield

[JoeyGee]

Like others, I am a big fan of Raiders and Last Crusade (TOD was OK) but didn't have high expectations of #4. I saw it and enjoyed it, but would have been disappointed if I expected more.

I keep in mind the intent and loved of GL and SS--old 1930's serials and early SCI-FI, so in that context, the movies are pretty good, so I don't mind some of the cheese factor.

The old joke used to be that only the even numbered Star Trek movies were any good (up to #6--I didn't see any others). I guess Indy maybe following suit.

[Kristofor]

But then, other than Terminator 2, no reprise has ever lived upto the original. So, whaddya expect?

Usually true, but there are some others that were pretty good. Aliens, Godfather Part 2, Empire Strikes Back all jump quickly to mind.

I would not include Indy4 on that list. I was looking forward to the movie but quite disappointed. The hammy Nazi acting in Raiders was 1/10 the level of the hammy commie acting in this one. For an action flick currently showing I'd recommend Iron Man much more strongly than Indy.