24May/0817
Movie Review – Indiana Jones
I saw Indiana Jones, the new one, on Thursday, the day it came out. WAIT FOR DVD should be stickered at the front of the movie. I mean, really, what the heck it was in 3 words: tacky, corny, and unoriginal.
And furthermore, my popcorn was extremely salty, which also probably made me not like the movie even worse.
With a cast like that, I mean, common sense they could’ve made so many better scenarios.
Now I know why it wasn’t even sold out and there were plenty of seats to be seen. But, hey, if you disagree with me, go watch it then tell me why you think that it's worth the $8 movie ticket price.
May 24th, 2008 - 09:36
Channing, I normally agree with your movie reviews, but I’m sorry to say that this one is just plain wrong.
The other Indy movies were all a little corny and unoriginal (they were modeled on 1930s serials). So I can’t hold that against the new one. There were some fun action sequences, nice call-backs to the original trilogy and some good one-liners. Harrison Ford definitely wasn’t too old to reprise his role.
My biggest problem with Indy IV was the ending, which was out there a little bit (even for an Indy film).
May 24th, 2008 - 12:07
Wow! I ask for a post and I get three.
May 24th, 2008 - 14:16
u and i have yet to disagree on a movie.
how about ranking your top ten channing?
May 24th, 2008 - 18:14
I barely remember any trailers for it on tv so I assumed it was going to bomb. All these remakes and sequels are terrible. The only good one I can think of was the latest Die Hard.
May 25th, 2008 - 12:24
I liked it. it’s fuun and follows the previous ones style. Maybe it has TOO many lies, but whatever, it’s indiana jones…
May 26th, 2008 - 11:13
Haven’t seen it, but I think I’m gonna’ take your advice. It’s actually NINE bucks up here for a ticket. 6.50 for a large popcorn. I can buy the DVD for 5 bucks, or rent it for a couple bucks at Blockbuster.
Thanks C. This is the nail in the coffin. Was considering going, but you’re the third person I’ve had say it was bogus. So I’ll save nine bucks. Thx man!
May 26th, 2008 - 14:41
Channing my good man, I agree fully.
May 26th, 2008 - 15:13
Just saw it last night at Cinemagic on Hawthorne (good place to catch new releases… reasonable prices, awesome atmosphere, and chairs that rock back!).
Yeah, sad to say, but it’s a rental. Good action scenes, but corny dialogue.
May 26th, 2008 - 15:54
Yep, that was one stinky flick! Horrible!
May 27th, 2008 - 05:10
Damn straight Channing, the movie was ok, but started getting a little too out there. The ending totally killed it as well, I mean seriously there were 100’s of better ways to use the crystal skull story. And if they go ahead and start making Indiana Jones movies with Shia I am going to go to Lucas’s house and shoot him. Seriously you crapped all over your greatest movies when you tried to redo Star Wars and then you went and did it to the Indy series. What’s next Howard the Duck 2009!!!
May 27th, 2008 - 16:28
I actually liked it.
May 28th, 2008 - 04:34
sounds appalling … there’s definitely a difference between being unoriginal enough to look 1930’s (ok) and being unoriginal enough that you can’t think of some new reason to make a sequel. What is it next time … a race with the germans to find the ultimate keys to the universe and all of spacetime? how lucky can one archaeologist get? why do all sequels try to “improve” by making the movie “EVEN BIGGER” (and thereby just stupider, like it was invented by an eight-year-old)? why can’t we just ONCE see a sequel that tries to be small? maybe some character development as older actors reprise their roles? maybe something cerebral, but funny and interesting; and maybe just when you’re convinced it’s not an action film, a surprise bit of action?
time to open a window and dissipate that pointless fart lucas
May 28th, 2008 - 08:51
If you’re looking for realism, you probably shouldn’t watch Indy.
May 28th, 2008 - 22:35
I want to start off by saying I actually have an arcaheology degree (the most useless of all degrees) because of an interest spawned by my love of Indiana Jones movies. I have been waiting 19 long years for this movie to come out and I can only say this: it was terribel. From the incomprehensible story line to the CGI Tarzan monkey scene it was a complete disaster. I was like they videotaped a highschool play but with really old actors and one Shia Labouf (sic) who was not even close to one of the worse things about the movie which is intollerable. And I’m not even touching on the massive inconsistencies and unexplained madness like why the skull was magnetic but only sometimes and without regard to the material it attracted and also worked as a good bug repellant? I’m never watching a movie again.
May 29th, 2008 - 09:33
Yikes Adam, calm down man. To be honest, if any of y’all were thinking that a George Lucas/Steve Spielberg collaboration WOULDN’T have been corny, you have never seen a Lucas film.
I don’t think I’m gonna see it, but is it just “wow, this is so cheesy it’s good” (camp value), or more along the lines of “we get it, this movie is important” cheesy?
June 3rd, 2008 - 08:48
This movie was lame. The original “Raiders of The Lost Ark” was great and original. The second was dumb but the third “Last Crusade” was great and intelligent fun. This movie was a giant CGI cartoon that was aimed at the kids of today, who I must say are a lot dumber than those of my day (I was 10 when the original came out.)This was ridiculous and cheesy and corny and asked for an insane amout of suspending disbelief. Shia swinging like Tarzan and monkeys to the rescue just jumped the shark for me. But what do I know?
July 30th, 2008 - 04:15
Harrison Ford played a passable Indiana Jones, but he seemed to have lost his joie de vivre … although it is an enjoyable fast-moving adventure movie … I’d seen it before.