I bet he wishes he'd never made those Star Wars prequels sometimes.
I expect he cries at night into his gold pillows, stuffed with billions and billions of dollars
Gosh, I hate to see him painted as some soulless greedhead. That makes me a bit uncomfortable
I wonder if Lucas will ever get out from underneath the giant hammer of the critics and detractors of his second SW trilogy; probably not. The backlash seems permanent. Even more disheartening than the expectation he will fail is the widespread 'piling on' if (or when) he does
In fact, his challenge in following up the huge success of the original SW trilogy mirrors his challenge in trying to recapture Indy glory with a fourth picture---only it's compounded in Indy's case, because he's trying to do it with the same actor 19 years later. He seems to insist upon projects with a built-in 'disappointment factor'...
The best thing George Lucas can do---once he's endured what is about come his way---is try something new, and fresh. He's a much better producer than he is a director, that much is for sure. He needs to try something unexpected, and counter-intuitive---say, a retro piece about a 1940s P.I. in Miami Beach B-)
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
I read an interesting tidbit this morning that said it was Harrison Ford that really pushed to get a fourth movie made, and eventually he managed to get Spielberg and Lucas on board. Interesting, if true.
I read that Spielberg made this movie 'for the fans' since he felt he was pretty much done with Indiana Jones after Last Crusade. That sounds like a nice sentiment, but he pretty much said the same thing about Jurassic Park II.
Lucas seems to take a different approach. My inference is that Lucas doesn't care about the fans at all. Time and time again, I read in interviews how he makes the movies he wants because it's simply impossible to please everybody all the time, and there's inevitably people who are going to hate whatever he does. I also heard that Spielberg and Ford really overruled Lucas on some the aspects that he wanted to bring to the story, too.
Based on these attitudes from the three main contributors, I'm curious to see what shines forth most. If Ford's enthusiasm and Spielberg's sincerity are the overriding passions that steer the film, I'm sure it will be enjoyable. I'm not expecting the film to be as good as Raiders, but I certainly hope it to thrill me more than my least favorite of the three (which I named in another thread).
To be fair, it has been the fans who've been asking for another Indy movie for years, and I'd read stuff for over a decade about how Ford, Spielberg, and Lucas all wanted to do a fourth movie but they had conflicting schedules and no one could seem to come up with a decent script. I still plan to see it, but, as I said before, I won't go into it expecting it to be anywhere on the level of Raiders.
As for the AICN review, take it with a grain of salt. Remember, in the heart of most AICN insiders lurks this guy:
Vox clamantis in deserto
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
To be fair, it has been the fans who've been asking for another Indy movie for years, and I'd read stuff for over a decade about how Ford, Spielberg, and Lucas all wanted to do a fourth movie but they had conflicting schedules and no one could seem to come up with a decent script.
True enough...and I read the same articles that darenhat read, so his point is a good one as well. I guess when you play in the major leagues (and have a proven track record of gargantuan success!), you should expect---and learn to deal with---the monumentally huge front-loaded expectations of the fanboy masses.
I'm looking forward to Crystal Skull, albeit with pragmatically diminished expectations, like Hardyboy...but I'm also looking forward to what Spielberg and Lucas will do once they're clear of the Shadow of Indiana Jones.
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
If you haven't seen them yet, go to walmart and land yerselves a Crystal Skull poster for 5 dolla!
Ooh- I'm pretty jealous of that!
I did see some short trailers for the film on the Tube last night on the screens they have on the escalators (in that weird anti-widescreen format they have- like the TVs in Total Recall! )- it's getting hard not to be a little bit excited about this now!
I bet he wishes he'd never made those Star Wars prequels sometimes.
I expect he cries at night into his gold pillows, stuffed with billions and billions of dollars
Gosh, I hate to see him painted as some soulless greedhead. That makes me a bit uncomfortable
Arf! Nah- I just mean that I'm sure he finds more than his quantum of solace in the rewards he's earnt! (10 points to the next person who manages to use that title in a sentence! )
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
Gosh, I hate to see him painted as some soulless greedhead. That makes me a bit uncomfortable
Arf! Nah- I just mean that I'm sure he finds more than his quantum of solace in the rewards he's earnt! (10 points to the next person who manages to use that title in a sentence! )
{[] Couldn't resist...
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
The way I look at this movie is like this (kind of like I do with the Bond films): It's an Indiana Jones flick. How bad can it be? Even a crappy Indiana Jones flick is ten times more fun than 99 percent of the action films out there. The character's fun, and Spielberg is the master of action set pieces. Whether I'll be as transfixed by the film as I was with Raiders of the Lost Ark, (did I ever tell you guys my Raiders story?) I doubt it. But that's only because that film introduced audiences to an iconic character. You're never going to have a connection with Indiana Jones like that again.
Sweepy the CatHalifax, West Yorkshire, EnglaPosts: 986MI6 Agent
In the UK it runs 122mins and will be rated 12A for moderate action violence and scary scenes. I think he should do one more after this and then leave Indy because it's getting a little old now.
The way I look at this movie is like this (kind of like I do with the Bond films): It's an Indiana Jones flick. How bad can it be? Even a crappy Indiana Jones flick is ten times more fun than 99 percent of the action films out there.
Well exactly. I've never expected another Raiders, I don't think anyone really did, but it's going to be a load of fun. Just turning up to see Harrison in the hat again is nearly enough on it's own- that episode of Young Indy he did in character was pretty uneventful, but I loved it because he was there. I love Indy and I find it very hard to believe that these guys have turned out a film that I won't enjoy.
Whether I'll be as transfixed by the film as I was with Raiders of the Lost Ark, (did I ever tell you guys my Raiders story?)
Is that the one where you told your date for the evening that you bet Karen Allen gave really good head, and she said, surely not as good as her, and proceeded to show you in row G?
Yes, and just seen Forgetting Sarah Marshall, I thank you for turning the page on this thread away from my shameful Friday night bawdiness, as you read this it will be a clean new Saturday morn, the lark a ready to ascend with fresh innocence in its flight...
"This is where we leave you Mr Bond."
Roger Moore 1927-2017
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
edited May 2008
Very impressive, NP...usually, one has to go to a public restroom to encounter scribblings of such erudition 8-)
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Whether I'll be as transfixed by the film as I was with Raiders of the Lost Ark, (did I ever tell you guys my Raiders story?)
Is that the one where you told your date for the evening that you bet Karen Allen gave really good head, and she said, surely not as good as her, and proceeded to show you in row G?
I guess I did. It was Row B, however.
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
edited May 2008
|)
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Asp9mmOver the Hills and Far Away.Posts: 7,504MI6 Agent
Glad to hear the early reviews are positive. I was starting to feel a little apprehensive: Spielberg and Lucas have been holding back on pre-screenings (the stated reason is because they don't want to give too much away), and some were grumbling that producers only do this when their movie is a dog. But as for that critic who said that "Macguffin" is Lucas's term. . .go to film school, dude! Everyone knows that Hitchcock coined it! X-(
I was starting to feel a little apprehensive: Spielberg and Lucas have been holding back on pre-screenings (the stated reason is because they don't want to give too much away), and some were grumbling that producers only do this when their movie is a dog.
But then they were being very secretive when they filming it (hiding Karen Allen etc.) and no-one would know the film would be a dog while they were still shooting it- the secretive thing didn't worry me too much because it's always been clear that that's how they were playing it from day one.
There's a special on Indiana Jones on the History Channel tonight at 10 p.m.
Bond: You don't think I enjoyed what we did this evening, do you? What I did tonight was for King and country! You don't think it gave me any pleasure, do you?
Fiona: But of course, I forgot your ego, Mr. Bond. James Bond, who only has to make love to a woman and she starts to hear heavenly choirs singing.
No, they're not. The movie now has its own RottenTomatoes Tomatometer, and the reviews are currently at 76% positive. Decent, but far from Iron Man levels. Still, I plan to be there!
I hate to say it, but I'm beginning to warm to the idea of Indy having a son. {:) I kinda like the idea of some boy having a father, who just happens to be Indiana Jones!
It will of course come down to the acting and on-screen chemistry, but I think the idea of giving Indy a son is pretty cool.
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
Yeah, there's a few bad ones- mostly from people saying that it's nothing new; and that's not really a concern I had. Other ones like this one seem to be trying to show off slightly... I'm not totally buying them just yet. And that review in particular- the plots of Temple and Raiders are convoluted and hard to explain? Er...
Whenever you have an eagerly anticipated movie like this, there are always a few critics who feel the need to trash it, just for the sake of raining on everyone's parade; and although the only opinion that matters in the end is your own, I think a lot of these dissenters are just looking for something to complain about.
So far, reviews have been generally positive and even Boston's own James Verniere (a franchise and blockbuster hating snob if ever there was one) has given the movie a very solid "A-":
Yeah, that's horrible, even by my Friday night standards.
I wonder about Indy as the fourth film, usually it's the third that hits the peak. It may have a whiff of Die Hard 4 about it, slick, fast but somehow not quite the same.
Comments
I expect he cries at night into his gold pillows, stuffed with billions and billions of dollars
Gosh, I hate to see him painted as some soulless greedhead. That makes me a bit uncomfortable
I wonder if Lucas will ever get out from underneath the giant hammer of the critics and detractors of his second SW trilogy; probably not. The backlash seems permanent. Even more disheartening than the expectation he will fail is the widespread 'piling on' if (or when) he does
In fact, his challenge in following up the huge success of the original SW trilogy mirrors his challenge in trying to recapture Indy glory with a fourth picture---only it's compounded in Indy's case, because he's trying to do it with the same actor 19 years later. He seems to insist upon projects with a built-in 'disappointment factor'...
The best thing George Lucas can do---once he's endured what is about come his way---is try something new, and fresh. He's a much better producer than he is a director, that much is for sure. He needs to try something unexpected, and counter-intuitive---say, a retro piece about a 1940s P.I. in Miami Beach B-)
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
I read that Spielberg made this movie 'for the fans' since he felt he was pretty much done with Indiana Jones after Last Crusade. That sounds like a nice sentiment, but he pretty much said the same thing about Jurassic Park II.
Lucas seems to take a different approach. My inference is that Lucas doesn't care about the fans at all. Time and time again, I read in interviews how he makes the movies he wants because it's simply impossible to please everybody all the time, and there's inevitably people who are going to hate whatever he does. I also heard that Spielberg and Ford really overruled Lucas on some the aspects that he wanted to bring to the story, too.
Based on these attitudes from the three main contributors, I'm curious to see what shines forth most. If Ford's enthusiasm and Spielberg's sincerity are the overriding passions that steer the film, I'm sure it will be enjoyable. I'm not expecting the film to be as good as Raiders, but I certainly hope it to thrill me more than my least favorite of the three (which I named in another thread).
As for the AICN review, take it with a grain of salt. Remember, in the heart of most AICN insiders lurks this guy:
True enough...and I read the same articles that darenhat read, so his point is a good one as well. I guess when you play in the major leagues (and have a proven track record of gargantuan success!), you should expect---and learn to deal with---the monumentally huge front-loaded expectations of the fanboy masses.
I'm looking forward to Crystal Skull, albeit with pragmatically diminished expectations, like Hardyboy...but I'm also looking forward to what Spielberg and Lucas will do once they're clear of the Shadow of Indiana Jones.
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
(would look great on Tony's already impressive wall)
Ooh- I'm pretty jealous of that!
I did see some short trailers for the film on the Tube last night on the screens they have on the escalators (in that weird anti-widescreen format they have- like the TVs in Total Recall!
Arf!
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Well exactly. I've never expected another Raiders, I don't think anyone really did, but it's going to be a load of fun. Just turning up to see Harrison in the hat again is nearly enough on it's own- that episode of Young Indy he did in character was pretty uneventful, but I loved it because he was there. I love Indy and I find it very hard to believe that these guys have turned out a film that I won't enjoy.
Is that the one where you told your date for the evening that you bet Karen Allen gave really good head, and she said, surely not as good as her, and proceeded to show you in row G?
Or am I thinking of someone else?
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Roger Moore 1927-2017
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
I guess I did. It was Row B, however.
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
...it's good.
http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=22591
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7407209.stm
http://www.variety.com/VE1117937176.html
http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/film/film_reviews/article3957935.ece
I can't wait to see it
But then they were being very secretive when they filming it (hiding Karen Allen etc.) and no-one would know the film would be a dog while they were still shooting it- the secretive thing didn't worry me too much because it's always been clear that that's how they were playing it from day one.
I'm very excited!
Fiona: But of course, I forgot your ego, Mr. Bond. James Bond, who only has to make love to a woman and she starts to hear heavenly choirs singing.
http://movies.msn.com/movies/cannes-film-festival/may18-blog?GT1=7701
No, they're not. The movie now has its own RottenTomatoes Tomatometer, and the reviews are currently at 76% positive. Decent, but far from Iron Man levels. Still, I plan to be there!
It will of course come down to the acting and on-screen chemistry, but I think the idea of giving Indy a son is pretty cool.
Yeah, there's a few bad ones- mostly from people saying that it's nothing new; and that's not really a concern I had. Other ones like this one seem to be trying to show off slightly... I'm not totally buying them just yet. And that review in particular- the plots of Temple and Raiders are convoluted and hard to explain? Er...
Whenever you have an eagerly anticipated movie like this, there are always a few critics who feel the need to trash it, just for the sake of raining on everyone's parade; and although the only opinion that matters in the end is your own, I think a lot of these dissenters are just looking for something to complain about.
So far, reviews have been generally positive and even Boston's own James Verniere (a franchise and blockbuster hating snob if ever there was one) has given the movie a very solid "A-":
http://www.bostonherald.com/entertainment/movies/reviews/view.bg?articleid=1094925&srvc=home&position=7
Where are you finding all these new (gross) emoticons?
I wonder about Indy as the fourth film, usually it's the third that hits the peak. It may have a whiff of Die Hard 4 about it, slick, fast but somehow not quite the same.
Roger Moore 1927-2017