https://youtu.be/ZfVYgWYaHmE

FUCK!!! I'm in.

Shout out to Phoebe for getting the role. And Ford looks pretty spry. Didn't know he was in that kind of shape at 80.

Also, there's probably another thread that needs to be made about the lack of male American actors who could pull a film like this off. Granted, this isn't a new IP, but do you mean the studio couldn't reboot the franchise with another actor? Or is the plan for Waller-Bridge to become the new Indy?

> And Ford looks
>pretty spry. Didn't know he was in that kind of shape at 80.

Guaranteed they’ll be doing some fairly significant face replacement on stuntmen to make it look like Ford moves younger than he can. He had rather obvious stuntmen replacements on the *last one,* lol— but at least now FX can replace a face a lot more cleanly (Marvel movies do it *all* the time).

Winston Duke would kill this....they could set up a hand off as him being one of Indy's former students but goddamn man...enough with the geriatric greenlighting.

indy is an iconic big screen character with multiple generations of fans globally now this point.

do you wanna be the studio exec rolling the dice on a summer tentpole with a less-than-well-known *black* actor who hasnt been a notable draw yet?

i love winston duke but thats a tough sell lol.

plus part of the appeal of indy at this point is his age and grumpiness.

..the last few attempts were boring at best.

to reimagine the franchise through the eyes/actions of a non-believer/opportunist with a good heart. *The former student who somehow stumbles into an adventure works.

There's only one Harrison Ford. If they want to continue this franchise, its time to think outside the box.


*skatin' the rings of saturn*


..and miles to go before i sleep...

on their own in the same way, especially one like this.

Since the 4th movie wasn't especially well-received and certainly isn't well-remembered (and a studio isn't going to put their faith in Shia at this point anymore), they're hoping this one does well enough that it can serve as a "hand-off" of sorts to her character, to allow to get to do the crazy running and stunts and what not.

Will it work? No clue. And studios have tried to do this since the beginning of time with IP-- the old "hand it off to the kid/student/friend/etc" thing. And, like... I can't think of one time it's *actually* worked and the kid became the lead in several franchise sequels? Maybe I'm forgetting an obvious one.

I ask because I didn't bother seeing Crystal Skull. But I remember that being the plan.

Maybe they'll have better luck with PWB. I'll be interested to see what Mangold can do given he makes good genre films but not great ones.

John David Washington answers the question: "What if Denzel had a third of the talent and a quarter of the charisma?" I wouldn't try and build a franchise around him much less try and try to retcon a beloved one with him. Winston Duke I think could actually do it because he has that mix of charisma, rogue-ish charm, and the ability to do not just phsyical stunts but the physical humor.

But trying to recapture what Ford had is nigh impossible (see: Solo, Oscar Isaac in the new trilogy," Chris Pratt in JW, and countless adventure film knock-offs and failed franchises).

They'd be smart to leave it alone and reboot the Brendan Fraser Mummy franchise.

Plus, the move from practical stunts and real locations is overlooked as a reason none of adventure films really take off and why the Indy films (Project A films) stand the test of time. So much of the purpose of the films is to transport the audience to these locations and if it's obviously CGI it loses that effect. I think someone needs to take the approach of the last three MI films and study the opera house sequence and the bathroom fight (and the Langely heist in the first film) to really get a sense of stakes and action serving story/character way to see how someone is doing this in American cinema in the modern era. Hell, the opening parkour chase in Casino Royale. I'd take a Martin Campbell Indy film in a heartbeat.

And the first is basically lifted straight from Buster Keaton era death defying slapstick reels while the second is a super clever use of location, wide and sound stage shots (plus some ugly green screen near the end, lol) plus some of the better dummies in the business.


Both are really pretty simple at the end of the day, and whether it's Missions Impossible or John Wick the jury is in: audiences want to see actors doing shit. Sure you can't always get Joseph Gordon-Levitt spinning around in a hotel because that's insanely expensive, but then I wish directors could just...figure out something else to drive their action sequence than "let the computer guys figure it out".


I get all kinds of safety laws and union agreements make moviemaking a very different concern than when they were making the original Indy trilogy, but even with the amount of green screen and bad CGI that's in that franchise (some of that mine cart stuff in Doom...woof) when it's time for a stunt or a set to count, they always make sure to make it count. Unless it's Nolan, Cruise or Reeves nobody outside of the straight-to-streaming action scene seems interested anymore and that's weird. It used to feel like action scaled up, but now it's just scale that scales up.


~~~~~~~~~
"This is the streets, and I am the trap." � Jay Bilas
http://www.popmatters.com/pm/archive/contributor/517
Hip Hop Handbook: http://tinyurl.com/ll4kzz

Even if you *know* it's not the actual actors, if it's a stuntperson doing real stunt work without that sheen of CGI covering it all, the audience can *tell* it's something dangerous actually being done, and it feels more tangible than any CGI-riddled stunt possibly can.

Batty Boy : Does your character - *die* in the script?

Bobby Taylor : No.

Batty Boy : Then, it's a good script.

Bobby Taylor : But what about art?

Batty Boy : IT'S NOT ABOUT ART.. IT'S ABOUT SEQUEL! One film... one! ! You can make an entire career. Just look at me! Batty, batty, batty!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8395JgNJ0sg

I still would see it though.

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/indiana_jones_and_the_dial_of_destiny

Had it's premiere at Cannes Film Festival Friday night and even the positive messages I've gotten from friends has been faint, mixed praise at best.

For those of you keeping track, that's significantly lower than Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.

Tickets on sale tomorrow!

This felt like the virgin version of your favorite cocktail. Sure the ingredients are there, but it's not the same.

INDIANA JONES AND THE DIAL OF DESTINY felt like Disney said "Well, we have this I.P. sitting here, we may as well use it."

There's some story beats that had me scratching my head, and one that made me mad. A LOT of fan service that I'm sure INDY die-hards will filp for but had me snickering. It's a better movie than THE RISE OF SKYWALKER, but the parallels are there for what they both set out to do, which is giving the fans what they want. At a price.

The new characters are fine or don't make mark at all. There's one new character played by a very well represented leading man in his own right. Completely wasted. And when he exits the movie, I felt nothing. And above all of my problems, it's this fault where Spielberg would've made it sing.

And what they do to the minorities in this is shameful.

The action is all chases. Again, Spielberg knew how to do these. No offense to Mangold, but they were largely the same with most of them ending in heroes being captured. Again. And again.

And they only spend a total of fifteen minutes out of a 2 and a half hours movie in a tomb.

We need to put de-aging on ice for a minute as while it looks the best it has here, it still doesn't entirely work.

I'll give Spielberg this. At least he shot most of KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL on sets. Here, 90% of this is CG.

I didn't hate it, but I didn't love it. Honestly, the more I think about it, the more I don't like it.

Boy does John Williams' score do a lot of heavy lifting here.

I think much of this movie could've worked with visual tweaks, timing tweaks, little notes here and there. Spielberg doesn't let frames or beats go wasted. Mangold isn't Spielberg.

It's not a very good movie. Maybe it'd be more enjoyable if it wasn't an Indiana Jones. But it is. Alas.

Went in with low expectations (I’m not a huge fan of this franchise in the first place), and I’d say it exceeded them. Nothing to write home about, but better than Crystal Skull.

Agree with what bwood said about POC characters. There’s one scene that almost turned me off to the rest of the movie.

The de-aging and CGI during the chase sequences looked pretty bad, but I think the screen/projector in my theater wasn’t doing it any favors. I usually watch new releases in Dolby Cinema at this point, so other screens are starting to look like shit cause I’m spoiled.

If the goal is to hand the franchise off to PWB, I’d actually like to see a tv show rather than another movie every few years. These blockbuster franchises feel like they have to follow a certain format, and I think a tv show that allows her character to breathe and develop would be more interesting.

This movie sucks hard. There are many people who say that KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL is worst than this and they are fucking WRONG!

At least KOTCS had energy, rhythm, and some dynamics to it. Shit even the goofy action is better in that then what's done here.

Once Spielberg left, this should've died in the vine. Also, I'd take a Mutt movie over a Helena movie 1000%.

This tries to be the LOGAN for Indy and it just doesn't work. Also doesn't help how ugly and artificial the entire movie looks.