|
Post by politicidal on Feb 25, 2023 0:33:04 GMT
In an exclusive interview with Variety centered around his Oscar nominated work in Steven Spielberg’s The Fabelmans, the composer looked ahead to his return to Indiana Jones. “It’s certainly got to be an hour and a half of music, maybe more,” Williams said, “But I’m quite happy with it. There’s a lot of new material. The old material works very well as a touchstone of memory, but I had great fun, and I have a theme that I’ve written for Phoebe Waller-Bridge, the wonderful actress.”
|
|
Prometheus
New Member
@prometheus
Posts: 34
Likes: 16
|
Post by Prometheus on Feb 26, 2023 15:01:34 GMT
I hope they don’t kill off Indy. That would be too cliche at this point. What about if he changes his gender and denounces the name "Indiana" as being insensitive to the land of the hindus? The sad thing is this isn't even too-farfetched a notion to be possible in today's world.
|
|
|
Post by ShadowSouL: Padawan of Yoda on Mar 3, 2023 8:54:07 GMT
Discussing the movie with The Hollywood Reporter, Mangold said: “It reminds the audience of the contrast between a hero in his physical prime and a hero at 70. We’re not relying solely on the audience’s memory of the previous films. It reminds everyone what he’s done, what he’s survived, what he’s accomplished. By showing him in his most hearty and then finding him at 70 in New York City, it produces for the audience a kind of wonderful whiplash of how they’re going to have to readjust and retool their brains for this guy. His past is a live memory for the audience, hanging over a man who is now living with anonymity in a world that no longer cares or recognizes the things he felt so deeply about. You’re left with a multilayered perception of his character, both what he was and what he is, and how the world is different between the first 20 minutes of the movie.”
That's all fine and well and all, but if Indy's supposed to be 70, he looks pretty bad for his age, since Harrison Ford does look his real age of 80 and not 70, although he looks good for 80. But he definitely looks way past 70. They should have set this movie accordingly in the late 1970s/early 1980s. Because this movie and Crystal Skull have Ford playing Indy 10 years younger than Ford actually is, the time span between the last two movies' time periods and the actual years in which they were made is 50 years, which is even longer than the time span in which all five movies were made and released (42 years). Not only is the time span between the last two movies' time periods and their actual production and release 50 years and the time span in which all five movies were made and released 42 years, but the actual time span of the stories through all five movies is 30 years. So they're acknowledging that Indy was in his 40s about the time of the first three movies, just like Harrison Ford, but in the last two movies, Ford is playing Indy 10 years younger than Ford actually is. Something is off about that. It would have been cooler for this movie to be set in the late 1970s/early 1980s with Ford actually playing his age, rather than being set in 1969.
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Mar 3, 2023 23:25:25 GMT
Discussing the movie with The Hollywood Reporter, Mangold said: “It reminds the audience of the contrast between a hero in his physical prime and a hero at 70. We’re not relying solely on the audience’s memory of the previous films. It reminds everyone what he’s done, what he’s survived, what he’s accomplished. By showing him in his most hearty and then finding him at 70 in New York City, it produces for the audience a kind of wonderful whiplash of how they’re going to have to readjust and retool their brains for this guy. His past is a live memory for the audience, hanging over a man who is now living with anonymity in a world that no longer cares or recognizes the things he felt so deeply about. You’re left with a multilayered perception of his character, both what he was and what he is, and how the world is different between the first 20 minutes of the movie.”
That's all fine and well and all, but if Indy's supposed to be 70, he looks pretty bad for his age, since Harrison Ford does look his real age of 80 and not 70, although he looks good for 80. But he definitely looks way past 70. They should have set this movie accordingly in the late 1970s/early 1980s. Because this movie and Crystal Skull have Ford playing Indy 10 years younger than Ford actually is, the time span between the last two movies' time periods and the actual years in which they were made is 50 years, which is even longer than the time span in which all five movies were made and released (42 years). Not only is the time span between the last two movies' time periods and their actual production and release 50 years and the time span in which all five movies were made and released 42 years, but the actual time span of the stories through all five movies is 30 years. So they're acknowledging that Indy was in his 40s about the time of the first three movies, just like Harrison Ford, but in the last two movies, Ford is playing Indy 10 years younger than Ford actually is. Something is off about that. It would have been cooler for this movie to be set in the late 1970s/early 1980s with Ford actually playing his age, rather than being set in 1969.
That would almost essentially line it up with the original release date for Raiders of the Lost Ark. I guess all things come full circle.
|
|
|
Post by ShadowSouL: Padawan of Yoda on Mar 4, 2023 1:49:57 GMT
That's all fine and well and all, but if Indy's supposed to be 70, he looks pretty bad for his age, since Harrison Ford does look his real age of 80 and not 70, although he looks good for 80. But he definitely looks way past 70. They should have set this movie accordingly in the late 1970s/early 1980s. Because this movie and Crystal Skull have Ford playing Indy 10 years younger than Ford actually is, the time span between the last two movies' time periods and the actual years in which they were made is 50 years, which is even longer than the time span in which all five movies were made and released (42 years). Not only is the time span between the last two movies' time periods and their actual production and release 50 years and the time span in which all five movies were made and released 42 years, but the actual time span of the stories through all five movies is 30 years. So they're acknowledging that Indy was in his 40s about the time of the first three movies, just like Harrison Ford, but in the last two movies, Ford is playing Indy 10 years younger than Ford actually is. Something is off about that. It would have been cooler for this movie to be set in the late 1970s/early 1980s with Ford actually playing his age, rather than being set in 1969.
That would almost essentially line it up with the original release date for Raiders of the Lost Ark. I guess all things come full circle. I didn't even think about that! All the more reason they should have done it this way, and really make it come full circle! And if they did do that, they could have even sweetened the pot a little more and have talk in the movie about a movie being made about Indy's life. Talk about a bookend! But 70, 80, what's the difference, right? Although there can and have been huge differences between 70 and 80. I have been an eyewitness to that fact a couple of times over. But I'm glad at least they're giving Harrison Ford and he's giving it one more shot and closure.
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Mar 4, 2023 2:46:44 GMT
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Mar 9, 2023 20:18:07 GMT
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Mar 13, 2023 15:35:03 GMT
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Mar 27, 2023 20:27:33 GMT
|
|
|
Post by timshelboy on Mar 27, 2023 21:21:47 GMT
I guess it only a matter of time before TO HAVE AND HAVE NOT, CLASH BY NIGHT and TORCH SONG get rerated as PG13 because of the nicotine consumption therein.
|
|
|
Post by timshelboy on Mar 27, 2023 21:27:14 GMT
Yeah, it's a shame he got blamed for SOLO flopping;I thought he was fine. He was wonderful in HAIL CAESAR - one of favourite acting gigs this millenium
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Mar 27, 2023 21:51:01 GMT
Yeah, it's a shame he got blamed for SOLO flopping;I thought he was fine. He was wonderful in HAIL CAESAR - one of favourite acting gigs this millenium Yeah he was good in that.
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Mar 27, 2023 22:23:46 GMT
The movie should end with Indiana Jones
going to
Hawaii in 1977 and sitting on a beach, talking about his experiences and someone nearby says
"I'm glad that didn't happen to me."
And the man talking is Tom Selleck.
|
|
|
Post by Nora on Jun 30, 2023 20:18:08 GMT
well there is cca 10 of us here in the entire auditorium that tells u something. But I still enjoyed it. Indy still rocks.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Jul 1, 2023 4:45:37 GMT
well there is cca 10 of us here in the entire auditorium that tells u something. But I still enjoyed it. Indy still rocks. Sadly, the movie is likely to bomb, because it was betrayed by misguided 'fans' who wanted it to fail. They were convinced Kathleen Kennedy was out to ruin Indiana Jones and that the character of Helena would be thrust into the spotlight to the detriment of Indy. Well that wasn't the case at all, Indy still kicks ass in this movie. I hope the people talking trash about this movie and trying to convince other people not to see it actually watch the film and realize how wrong they were. It's fantastic, it really is. It recaptures the spirit of Indiana Jones without feeling like a rehash. You feel like you're watching a new Indy movie, not something trying to be an Indy movie you've already seen. Our theater was maybe 2/3rds full, mostly an older (I'd say 50s/60s) crowd. They all seemed to enjoy it, my wife and enjoyed it (we're in our 40s) and our son enjoyed it (he's 8). So it seems like it's a movie any Indy fan can and should enjoy, we can only hope positive word of mouth convinces a few more people to check it out.
|
|
|
Post by Nora on Jul 1, 2023 8:12:56 GMT
well there is cca 10 of us here in the entire auditorium that tells u something. But I still enjoyed it. Indy still rocks. Sadly, the movie is likely to bomb, because it was betrayed by misguided 'fans' who wanted it to fail. They were convinced Kathleen Kennedy was out to ruin Indiana Jones and that the character of Helena would be thrust into the spotlight to the detriment of Indy. Well that wasn't the case at all, Indy still kicks ass in this movie. I hope the people talking trash about this movie and trying to convince other people not to see it actually watch the film and realize how wrong they were. It's fantastic, it really is. It recaptures the spirit of Indiana Jones without feeling like a rehash. You feel like you're watching a new Indy movie, not something trying to be an Indy movie you've already seen. Our theater was maybe 2/3rds full, mostly an older (I'd say 50s/60s) crowd. They all seemed to enjoy it, my wife and enjoyed it (we're in our 40s) and our son enjoyed it (he's 8). So it seems like it's a movie any Indy fan can and should enjoy, we can only hope positive word of mouth convinces a few more people to check it out. i absolutely loved the early scene with him in his wifebeater and with the baseball bat. was so funny to see Indy like that. I agre he kicked ass. Still funny, smart, still sexy. Didnt mind Helena at all. Loved the amount of nazis in the movie. they simply make the best antagonists in adventure and action movies i think. Mad asking the black bellboy if he is happy with his victory gave me “Christoph Waltz opening scene of Inglorious Basterds” wibe. Great storytelling.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Jul 1, 2023 12:59:04 GMT
Sadly, the movie is likely to bomb, because it was betrayed by misguided 'fans' who wanted it to fail. They were convinced Kathleen Kennedy was out to ruin Indiana Jones and that the character of Helena would be thrust into the spotlight to the detriment of Indy. Well that wasn't the case at all, Indy still kicks ass in this movie. I hope the people talking trash about this movie and trying to convince other people not to see it actually watch the film and realize how wrong they were. It's fantastic, it really is. It recaptures the spirit of Indiana Jones without feeling like a rehash. You feel like you're watching a new Indy movie, not something trying to be an Indy movie you've already seen. Our theater was maybe 2/3rds full, mostly an older (I'd say 50s/60s) crowd. They all seemed to enjoy it, my wife and enjoyed it (we're in our 40s) and our son enjoyed it (he's 8). So it seems like it's a movie any Indy fan can and should enjoy, we can only hope positive word of mouth convinces a few more people to check it out. i absolutely loved the early scene with him in his wifebeater and with the baseball bat. was so funny to see Indy like that. I agre he kicked ass. Still funny, smart, still sexy. Didnt mind Helena at all. Loved the amount of nazis in the movie. they simply make the best antagonists in adventure and action movies i think. Mad asking the black bellboy if he is happy with his victory gave me “Christoph Waltz opening scene of Inglorious Basterds” wibe. Great storytelling. Helena was a great character, so was Teddy. The villains could've worked in a Bond movie or an Indy movie. (Mikkelson has done both!) But nobody outshines Indy in this movie. I thought there were times where they went a while between action sequences, but the action scenes were still excellent. Whatever you want from an Indy movie, you got in this picture.
|
|
|
Post by Nora on Jul 1, 2023 23:07:47 GMT
i absolutely loved the early scene with him in his wifebeater and with the baseball bat. was so funny to see Indy like that. I agre he kicked ass. Still funny, smart, still sexy. Didnt mind Helena at all. Loved the amount of nazis in the movie. they simply make the best antagonists in adventure and action movies i think. Mad asking the black bellboy if he is happy with his victory gave me “Christoph Waltz opening scene of Inglorious Basterds” wibe. Great storytelling. Helena was a great character, so was Teddy. The villains could've worked in a Bond movie or an Indy movie. (Mikkelson has done both!) But nobody outshines Indy in this movie. I thought there were times where they went a while between action sequences, but the action scenes were still excellent. Whatever you want from an Indy movie, you got in this picture. agreed. i hear people hating on the de-aging cgi - I am SO tired of that whining. Ok there are some linits to current technilogy, and challenges with faces we know So well, just face it. I didnt mind AT ALL, how they de-aged Harrison Ford. Like not even a little bit. Did i see its cgi/fake? Yes (although tbh not in All the shots). Did I mind? Not at all. It worked for the story.
|
|
|
Post by darkpast on Jul 2, 2023 6:56:54 GMT
6/10 , better than Crystal Skull , buts that's about it
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Jul 2, 2023 14:33:16 GMT
Helena was a great character, so was Teddy. The villains could've worked in a Bond movie or an Indy movie. (Mikkelson has done both!) But nobody outshines Indy in this movie. I thought there were times where they went a while between action sequences, but the action scenes were still excellent. Whatever you want from an Indy movie, you got in this picture. agreed. i hear people hating on the de-aging cgi - I am SO tired of that whining. Ok there are some linits to current technilogy, and challenges with faces we know So well, just face it. I didnt mind AT ALL, how they de-aged Harrison Ford. Like not even a little bit. Did i see its cgi/fake? Yes (although tbh not in All the shots). Did I mind? Not at all. It worked for the story. I actually thought CGI Ford looked great. That entire sequence was a little too CGI heavy for my taste, at least in a movie like this. But it was a great sequence overall. If I had to nitpick that part of the film, I'd say the action on the train roof was a little hard to follow because it was so dark (again, to cover up the fact that this is a CGI Harrison Ford), and I thought it was weird to use his current voice with a 30 years younger face. I feel like they could've touched that up with AI or something.
|
|