<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Sound Off: What Did You Think of Indiana Jones 4?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/opinions/sound-off-what-did-you-think-of-indiana-jones-4.php/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/opinions/sound-off-what-did-you-think-of-indiana-jones-4.php</link>
	<description>A Website About Movies</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 06:57:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: BrumbyJake</title>
		<link>http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/opinions/sound-off-what-did-you-think-of-indiana-jones-4.php/comment-page-1#comment-103015</link>
		<dc:creator>BrumbyJake</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Jul 2008 00:38:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/?p=6959#comment-103015</guid>
		<description>Well &quot;Carlo the man&quot; The reason we can believe a cult can rip your heart out (whilst still 
alive)  and the search for the holy grail and Ark is acceptable to us is because it had 
good cinematography, among others. All aspects worked well together giving it a sense 
of realism even if far fetched story boarding was used. The feeling of  Dread and 
anticipation of characters set the tonal values to these great movies whilst music score 
set the mood, (that is if  you are comparing it to the latest instalment). which  was 
disconnected. No depth in character or plot. It doesn&#039;t matter how good an actor is in 
conveying a story. It also doesn&#039;t matter how good the directing, editing. cinema score, 
cgi and camera work is. All aspects of a film must work together in harmony. It also 
comes down to the source material. Who cares if its bibblical, alien or other. It&#039;s all in 
character, plot summary, storyboarding  and the way it&#039;s conveyed to screen.
                              Please don&#039;t be offensive toward others views and call them 
&quot;(DORKS!!!!!)&quot; debating is healthy, People have opinions and they have a right to express 
it. Im glad you found joy in watching this movie. But in the same token don&#039;t be 
offensive to people who found it disappointing. It is niave to think everyone should have 
the same opinion. And in that, show respect. I respect your opinion, but i do not respect 
your unhealthy rude remarks to others posts. And as i recall I saw alot of families, 
husbands and wives and couples on dates watching &quot;INDIANA JONES AND THE CRYSTAL 
SKULL&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well &#8220;Carlo the man&#8221; The reason we can believe a cult can rip your heart out (whilst still<br />
alive)  and the search for the holy grail and Ark is acceptable to us is because it had<br />
good cinematography, among others. All aspects worked well together giving it a sense<br />
of realism even if far fetched story boarding was used. The feeling of  Dread and<br />
anticipation of characters set the tonal values to these great movies whilst music score<br />
set the mood, (that is if  you are comparing it to the latest instalment). which  was<br />
disconnected. No depth in character or plot. It doesn&#8217;t matter how good an actor is in<br />
conveying a story. It also doesn&#8217;t matter how good the directing, editing. cinema score,<br />
cgi and camera work is. All aspects of a film must work together in harmony. It also<br />
comes down to the source material. Who cares if its bibblical, alien or other. It&#8217;s all in<br />
character, plot summary, storyboarding  and the way it&#8217;s conveyed to screen.<br />
                              Please don&#8217;t be offensive toward others views and call them<br />
&#8220;(DORKS!!!!!)&#8221; debating is healthy, People have opinions and they have a right to express<br />
it. Im glad you found joy in watching this movie. But in the same token don&#8217;t be<br />
offensive to people who found it disappointing. It is niave to think everyone should have<br />
the same opinion. And in that, show respect. I respect your opinion, but i do not respect<br />
your unhealthy rude remarks to others posts. And as i recall I saw alot of families,<br />
husbands and wives and couples on dates watching &#8220;INDIANA JONES AND THE CRYSTAL<br />
SKULL&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: BrumbyJake</title>
		<link>http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/opinions/sound-off-what-did-you-think-of-indiana-jones-4.php/comment-page-1#comment-191322</link>
		<dc:creator>BrumbyJake</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Jul 2008 00:38:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/?p=6959#comment-191322</guid>
		<description>Well &quot;Carlo the man&quot; The reason we can believe a cult can rip your heart out (whilst still 
alive)  and the search for the holy grail and Ark is acceptable to us is because it had 
good cinematography, among others. All aspects worked well together giving it a sense 
of realism even if far fetched story boarding was used. The feeling of  Dread and 
anticipation of characters set the tonal values to these great movies whilst music score 
set the mood, (that is if  you are comparing it to the latest instalment). which  was 
disconnected. No depth in character or plot. It doesn&#039;t matter how good an actor is in 
conveying a story. It also doesn&#039;t matter how good the directing, editing. cinema score, 
cgi and camera work is. All aspects of a film must work together in harmony. It also 
comes down to the source material. Who cares if its bibblical, alien or other. It&#039;s all in 
character, plot summary, storyboarding  and the way it&#039;s conveyed to screen.
                              Please don&#039;t be offensive toward others views and call them 
&quot;(DORKS!!!!!)&quot; debating is healthy, People have opinions and they have a right to express 
it. Im glad you found joy in watching this movie. But in the same token don&#039;t be 
offensive to people who found it disappointing. It is niave to think everyone should have 
the same opinion. And in that, show respect. I respect your opinion, but i do not respect 
your unhealthy rude remarks to others posts. And as i recall I saw alot of families, 
husbands and wives and couples on dates watching &quot;INDIANA JONES AND THE CRYSTAL 
SKULL&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well &#8220;Carlo the man&#8221; The reason we can believe a cult can rip your heart out (whilst still<br />
alive)  and the search for the holy grail and Ark is acceptable to us is because it had<br />
good cinematography, among others. All aspects worked well together giving it a sense<br />
of realism even if far fetched story boarding was used. The feeling of  Dread and<br />
anticipation of characters set the tonal values to these great movies whilst music score<br />
set the mood, (that is if  you are comparing it to the latest instalment). which  was<br />
disconnected. No depth in character or plot. It doesn&#8217;t matter how good an actor is in<br />
conveying a story. It also doesn&#8217;t matter how good the directing, editing. cinema score,<br />
cgi and camera work is. All aspects of a film must work together in harmony. It also<br />
comes down to the source material. Who cares if its bibblical, alien or other. It&#8217;s all in<br />
character, plot summary, storyboarding  and the way it&#8217;s conveyed to screen.<br />
                              Please don&#8217;t be offensive toward others views and call them<br />
&#8220;(DORKS!!!!!)&#8221; debating is healthy, People have opinions and they have a right to express<br />
it. Im glad you found joy in watching this movie. But in the same token don&#8217;t be<br />
offensive to people who found it disappointing. It is niave to think everyone should have<br />
the same opinion. And in that, show respect. I respect your opinion, but i do not respect<br />
your unhealthy rude remarks to others posts. And as i recall I saw alot of families,<br />
husbands and wives and couples on dates watching &#8220;INDIANA JONES AND THE CRYSTAL<br />
SKULL&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: carlo the man</title>
		<link>http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/opinions/sound-off-what-did-you-think-of-indiana-jones-4.php/comment-page-1#comment-95259</link>
		<dc:creator>carlo the man</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 May 2008 20:27:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/?p=6959#comment-95259</guid>
		<description>I think all the negative comments that people make   you should all get your head checked!!!!!  It was a great Indy movie there was a comment that harrison did the best with what he was given ? Why would you even think that he is one or the only highest paid actors in hollywood he calls his shots! He knows what he was doing the action was awsome the sci fi was great  ---------Let me all ask you this question how is it that we can believe that a cult can rip your heart out (why you are still alive) and the search for the holy grail and the ark are all acceptable for us but the minute you add a little sci fi its crap? Get your head checked its a popcorn movie and a dam good one you losers have to much time on your hands looking for a movies weakness   here is somthing you shoud try go on a date if you are married spend some time with your family   DORKS  !!!!!   Idiana Jones rocks all of them do!!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think all the negative comments that people make   you should all get your head checked!!!!!  It was a great Indy movie there was a comment that harrison did the best with what he was given ? Why would you even think that he is one or the only highest paid actors in hollywood he calls his shots! He knows what he was doing the action was awsome the sci fi was great  &#8212;&#8212;&#8212;Let me all ask you this question how is it that we can believe that a cult can rip your heart out (why you are still alive) and the search for the holy grail and the ark are all acceptable for us but the minute you add a little sci fi its crap? Get your head checked its a popcorn movie and a dam good one you losers have to much time on your hands looking for a movies weakness   here is somthing you shoud try go on a date if you are married spend some time with your family   DORKS  !!!!!   Idiana Jones rocks all of them do!!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: carlo the man</title>
		<link>http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/opinions/sound-off-what-did-you-think-of-indiana-jones-4.php/comment-page-1#comment-191321</link>
		<dc:creator>carlo the man</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 May 2008 20:27:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/?p=6959#comment-191321</guid>
		<description>I think all the negative comments that people make   you should all get your head checked!!!!!  It was a great Indy movie there was a comment that harrison did the best with what he was given ? Why would you even think that he is one or the only highest paid actors in hollywood he calls his shots! He knows what he was doing the action was awsome the sci fi was great  ---------Let me all ask you this question how is it that we can believe that a cult can rip your heart out (why you are still alive) and the search for the holy grail and the ark are all acceptable for us but the minute you add a little sci fi its crap? Get your head checked its a popcorn movie and a dam good one you losers have to much time on your hands looking for a movies weakness   here is somthing you shoud try go on a date if you are married spend some time with your family   DORKS  !!!!!   Idiana Jones rocks all of them do!!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think all the negative comments that people make   you should all get your head checked!!!!!  It was a great Indy movie there was a comment that harrison did the best with what he was given ? Why would you even think that he is one or the only highest paid actors in hollywood he calls his shots! He knows what he was doing the action was awsome the sci fi was great  &#8212;&#8212;&#8212;Let me all ask you this question how is it that we can believe that a cult can rip your heart out (why you are still alive) and the search for the holy grail and the ark are all acceptable for us but the minute you add a little sci fi its crap? Get your head checked its a popcorn movie and a dam good one you losers have to much time on your hands looking for a movies weakness   here is somthing you shoud try go on a date if you are married spend some time with your family   DORKS  !!!!!   Idiana Jones rocks all of them do!!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: rickygee</title>
		<link>http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/opinions/sound-off-what-did-you-think-of-indiana-jones-4.php/comment-page-1#comment-95171</link>
		<dc:creator>rickygee</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 May 2008 23:22:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/?p=6959#comment-95171</guid>
		<description>Uh nope, dull and disjointed storyline.  Mr. Ford still has it - but it was wasted here.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Uh nope, dull and disjointed storyline.  Mr. Ford still has it &#8211; but it was wasted here.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: rickygee</title>
		<link>http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/opinions/sound-off-what-did-you-think-of-indiana-jones-4.php/comment-page-1#comment-191320</link>
		<dc:creator>rickygee</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 May 2008 23:22:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/?p=6959#comment-191320</guid>
		<description>Uh nope, dull and disjointed storyline.  Mr. Ford still has it - but it was wasted here.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Uh nope, dull and disjointed storyline.  Mr. Ford still has it &#8211; but it was wasted here.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Davo</title>
		<link>http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/opinions/sound-off-what-did-you-think-of-indiana-jones-4.php/comment-page-1#comment-95047</link>
		<dc:creator>Davo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 May 2008 13:43:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/?p=6959#comment-95047</guid>
		<description>I loved Raiders and I loved Temple of Doom, but I remember feeling disappointed that Last Crusade was played for the laughs and I didn&#039;t think the ending was as strong as the others, I still thought it was a great entertaining adventure film but it wasn&#039;t what I was hoping for.... but I saw it again, and again and liked it more and more each time. Now I love Last Crusade and its ending, but I still like Raiders and Temple a little more.

Now I&#039;m reading all the same criticism for Crystal Skull that I originally felt about Crusade. Well, Crystal Skull wasn&#039;t everything I was hoping for, but I knew that a two hour film could never fill a ten year expectation. When it finished I knew it was a better film then, say National Treasure, but was it Indy?

Hmmm? It looked like Indy and it sounded like Indy and now having seen it for a second time I&#039;m happy to say Yes, it is Indy. Adventure has a name and it&#039;s still Indiana Jones, and I&#039;m looking forward to seeing it again in a week or so and of course I&#039;ll buy the DVD. (that&#039;ll make George smile)

I was a little disappointed that Indy didn&#039;t fire his gun at all because I love that sound effect. But I only really have one criticism and that&#039;s that it should have been Indy 6 or higher.

Note to Steven (giant post on 23 may) : Watch it a few more times and you&#039;ll get over it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I loved Raiders and I loved Temple of Doom, but I remember feeling disappointed that Last Crusade was played for the laughs and I didn&#8217;t think the ending was as strong as the others, I still thought it was a great entertaining adventure film but it wasn&#8217;t what I was hoping for&#8230;. but I saw it again, and again and liked it more and more each time. Now I love Last Crusade and its ending, but I still like Raiders and Temple a little more.</p>
<p>Now I&#8217;m reading all the same criticism for Crystal Skull that I originally felt about Crusade. Well, Crystal Skull wasn&#8217;t everything I was hoping for, but I knew that a two hour film could never fill a ten year expectation. When it finished I knew it was a better film then, say National Treasure, but was it Indy?</p>
<p>Hmmm? It looked like Indy and it sounded like Indy and now having seen it for a second time I&#8217;m happy to say Yes, it is Indy. Adventure has a name and it&#8217;s still Indiana Jones, and I&#8217;m looking forward to seeing it again in a week or so and of course I&#8217;ll buy the DVD. (that&#8217;ll make George smile)</p>
<p>I was a little disappointed that Indy didn&#8217;t fire his gun at all because I love that sound effect. But I only really have one criticism and that&#8217;s that it should have been Indy 6 or higher.</p>
<p>Note to Steven (giant post on 23 may) : Watch it a few more times and you&#8217;ll get over it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Davo</title>
		<link>http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/opinions/sound-off-what-did-you-think-of-indiana-jones-4.php/comment-page-1#comment-191319</link>
		<dc:creator>Davo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 May 2008 13:43:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/?p=6959#comment-191319</guid>
		<description>I loved Raiders and I loved Temple of Doom, but I remember feeling disappointed that Last Crusade was played for the laughs and I didn&#039;t think the ending was as strong as the others, I still thought it was a great entertaining adventure film but it wasn&#039;t what I was hoping for.... but I saw it again, and again and liked it more and more each time. Now I love Last Crusade and its ending, but I still like Raiders and Temple a little more.

Now I&#039;m reading all the same criticism for Crystal Skull that I originally felt about Crusade. Well, Crystal Skull wasn&#039;t everything I was hoping for, but I knew that a two hour film could never fill a ten year expectation. When it finished I knew it was a better film then, say National Treasure, but was it Indy?

Hmmm? It looked like Indy and it sounded like Indy and now having seen it for a second time I&#039;m happy to say Yes, it is Indy. Adventure has a name and it&#039;s still Indiana Jones, and I&#039;m looking forward to seeing it again in a week or so and of course I&#039;ll buy the DVD. (that&#039;ll make George smile)

I was a little disappointed that Indy didn&#039;t fire his gun at all because I love that sound effect. But I only really have one criticism and that&#039;s that it should have been Indy 6 or higher.

Note to Steven (giant post on 23 may) : Watch it a few more times and you&#039;ll get over it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I loved Raiders and I loved Temple of Doom, but I remember feeling disappointed that Last Crusade was played for the laughs and I didn&#8217;t think the ending was as strong as the others, I still thought it was a great entertaining adventure film but it wasn&#8217;t what I was hoping for&#8230;. but I saw it again, and again and liked it more and more each time. Now I love Last Crusade and its ending, but I still like Raiders and Temple a little more.</p>
<p>Now I&#8217;m reading all the same criticism for Crystal Skull that I originally felt about Crusade. Well, Crystal Skull wasn&#8217;t everything I was hoping for, but I knew that a two hour film could never fill a ten year expectation. When it finished I knew it was a better film then, say National Treasure, but was it Indy?</p>
<p>Hmmm? It looked like Indy and it sounded like Indy and now having seen it for a second time I&#8217;m happy to say Yes, it is Indy. Adventure has a name and it&#8217;s still Indiana Jones, and I&#8217;m looking forward to seeing it again in a week or so and of course I&#8217;ll buy the DVD. (that&#8217;ll make George smile)</p>
<p>I was a little disappointed that Indy didn&#8217;t fire his gun at all because I love that sound effect. But I only really have one criticism and that&#8217;s that it should have been Indy 6 or higher.</p>
<p>Note to Steven (giant post on 23 may) : Watch it a few more times and you&#8217;ll get over it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matt</title>
		<link>http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/opinions/sound-off-what-did-you-think-of-indiana-jones-4.php/comment-page-1#comment-94913</link>
		<dc:creator>Matt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 May 2008 19:30:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/?p=6959#comment-94913</guid>
		<description>I thought it was pretty terrible with the exception of about 25 minutes.  The pacing of the movie was off, it was one chase scene after another.  The CGI was in addition to being oversused, poorly done and the curse of George Lucas was seen and felt everywhere throughout the film.  How the story got green lighted is beyond me, it is very...silly.  Of course worst of all, the acting is just...not...there.  However, on the positive side the sound effects were great over all and some of the sets looked fantastic and I thought Shia put on a solid performance.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I thought it was pretty terrible with the exception of about 25 minutes.  The pacing of the movie was off, it was one chase scene after another.  The CGI was in addition to being oversused, poorly done and the curse of George Lucas was seen and felt everywhere throughout the film.  How the story got green lighted is beyond me, it is very&#8230;silly.  Of course worst of all, the acting is just&#8230;not&#8230;there.  However, on the positive side the sound effects were great over all and some of the sets looked fantastic and I thought Shia put on a solid performance.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matt</title>
		<link>http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/opinions/sound-off-what-did-you-think-of-indiana-jones-4.php/comment-page-1#comment-191318</link>
		<dc:creator>Matt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 May 2008 19:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/?p=6959#comment-191318</guid>
		<description>I thought it was pretty terrible with the exception of about 25 minutes.  The pacing of the movie was off, it was one chase scene after another.  The CGI was in addition to being oversused, poorly done and the curse of George Lucas was seen and felt everywhere throughout the film.  How the story got green lighted is beyond me, it is very...silly.  Of course worst of all, the acting is just...not...there.  However, on the positive side the sound effects were great over all and some of the sets looked fantastic and I thought Shia put on a solid performance.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I thought it was pretty terrible with the exception of about 25 minutes.  The pacing of the movie was off, it was one chase scene after another.  The CGI was in addition to being oversused, poorly done and the curse of George Lucas was seen and felt everywhere throughout the film.  How the story got green lighted is beyond me, it is very&#8230;silly.  Of course worst of all, the acting is just&#8230;not&#8230;there.  However, on the positive side the sound effects were great over all and some of the sets looked fantastic and I thought Shia put on a solid performance.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James</title>
		<link>http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/opinions/sound-off-what-did-you-think-of-indiana-jones-4.php/comment-page-1#comment-94890</link>
		<dc:creator>James</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 May 2008 16:29:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/?p=6959#comment-94890</guid>
		<description>It was great and all should be reminded that all the other films had a very large sci-fi base in them as well as a huge amount of unrealistic survival situations.  For the most part, people will find in this movie what they want to find in it...unrealistic expectations are never met.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It was great and all should be reminded that all the other films had a very large sci-fi base in them as well as a huge amount of unrealistic survival situations.  For the most part, people will find in this movie what they want to find in it&#8230;unrealistic expectations are never met.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James</title>
		<link>http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/opinions/sound-off-what-did-you-think-of-indiana-jones-4.php/comment-page-1#comment-191317</link>
		<dc:creator>James</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 May 2008 16:29:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/?p=6959#comment-191317</guid>
		<description>It was great and all should be reminded that all the other films had a very large sci-fi base in them as well as a huge amount of unrealistic survival situations.  For the most part, people will find in this movie what they want to find in it...unrealistic expectations are never met.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It was great and all should be reminded that all the other films had a very large sci-fi base in them as well as a huge amount of unrealistic survival situations.  For the most part, people will find in this movie what they want to find in it&#8230;unrealistic expectations are never met.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Judith</title>
		<link>http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/opinions/sound-off-what-did-you-think-of-indiana-jones-4.php/comment-page-1#comment-94863</link>
		<dc:creator>Judith</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 May 2008 11:41:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/?p=6959#comment-94863</guid>
		<description>It was my first IJ movie.  It had me on the edge of my seat several times.  If you are looking to be entertained, you will NOT be disappointed!  Cate Blanchett is a knockout.  If you like film, when Spielberg and Lucas speak, how can you not listen.
They are indisputedly masters of their craft.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It was my first IJ movie.  It had me on the edge of my seat several times.  If you are looking to be entertained, you will NOT be disappointed!  Cate Blanchett is a knockout.  If you like film, when Spielberg and Lucas speak, how can you not listen.<br />
They are indisputedly masters of their craft.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Judith</title>
		<link>http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/opinions/sound-off-what-did-you-think-of-indiana-jones-4.php/comment-page-1#comment-191316</link>
		<dc:creator>Judith</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 May 2008 11:41:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/?p=6959#comment-191316</guid>
		<description>It was my first IJ movie.  It had me on the edge of my seat several times.  If you are looking to be entertained, you will NOT be disappointed!  Cate Blanchett is a knockout.  If you like film, when Spielberg and Lucas speak, how can you not listen.
They are indisputedly masters of their craft.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It was my first IJ movie.  It had me on the edge of my seat several times.  If you are looking to be entertained, you will NOT be disappointed!  Cate Blanchett is a knockout.  If you like film, when Spielberg and Lucas speak, how can you not listen.<br />
They are indisputedly masters of their craft.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joe</title>
		<link>http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/opinions/sound-off-what-did-you-think-of-indiana-jones-4.php/comment-page-1#comment-94763</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 May 2008 22:00:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/?p=6959#comment-94763</guid>
		<description>short and sweet, Indy 4 was FREAKIN AWESOME!!! LOVED IT</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>short and sweet, Indy 4 was FREAKIN AWESOME!!! LOVED IT</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joe</title>
		<link>http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/opinions/sound-off-what-did-you-think-of-indiana-jones-4.php/comment-page-1#comment-191315</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 May 2008 22:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/?p=6959#comment-191315</guid>
		<description>short and sweet, Indy 4 was FREAKIN AWESOME!!! LOVED IT</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>short and sweet, Indy 4 was FREAKIN AWESOME!!! LOVED IT</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steven</title>
		<link>http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/opinions/sound-off-what-did-you-think-of-indiana-jones-4.php/comment-page-1#comment-94732</link>
		<dc:creator>Steven</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 May 2008 18:01:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/?p=6959#comment-94732</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m a big Indy fan. I&#039;ve seen the first 3 more times than I care to mention! And although I love them all, I do admit that all of them have weaknesses, flaws, and problems with the storytelling, but as entertainment, they beat almost everything that dares to challenge them. 

After having seen Indy 4 last night, I can say that I was underwhelmed and dissatisfied by it, especially because I had to wait 19 years for it and the best that they could offer was Crystal Skull. It&#039;s unforgivable. The talent involved, the people involved, the money involved, and the time they had to work on this should&#039;ve yielded better results. Most of all, I feel heartbroken and crestfallen. 

I&#039;m going to list the things I didn&#039;t like about Indy 4 (I can&#039;t think of things I liked, unfortunately). The reason I want to list those things is because I feel like venting, otherwise, I&#039;ll just walk around all day weeping after having been through the trauma of watching Indy 4. 

I&#039;m not interested in any mean-spirited, immature, or obnoxious posts. Please. If you have something interesting or useful to say, then by all means share it with us, we all love movies here, we all love Indy, just don&#039;t call me names just because I hated the movie and you loved it. We all have different tastes and moods when it comes to movies. Don&#039;t take my post as a personal attack on you and your family. After all, you had nothing to do with the movie. And don&#039;t tell me &quot;dude, it&#039;s just a movie!&quot; as if that statement by itself is the be-all and end-all of all arguments and states your case as fact, because it isn&#039;t and it doesn&#039;t. Indy is not &quot;just a movie&quot; and even if it was, I still expect a solid, compelling, competent piece of work from some of the best people working in the business. I still expect good storytelling, I still expect some REALITY in my FANTASY. 

So here we go: -----SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS----- 

I hated the CGI monkeys! 

I hated the idea of the Tarzan swinging. I hated just how fake the Tarzan swinging looked. 

I hated how Indy survived a nuclear explosion just because he was in a lead-lined fridge. It&#039;s not like the entire fridge was lead-lined and even if it was, it would be thin lead-lining, not enough to protect Indy from a blast, much less a nuclear blast. And he walks away from it all unscathed. This is Indy, not Superman!!! 

I hated just how boring a villain Spalko was. It&#039;s like Blanchett didn&#039;t know where to go with her character. Her accent was also the conventional Russian accent that we&#039;ve come to expect in Hollywood movies, so I expected better from this Acadeny-Award-winning actress. But we can fault the writing too. 

I hated just how adept Mutt was with the sword-fighting. He was fencing with a pro on top of those moving vehicles yet he never missed a beat! 

I hated how boring the music was. The first 3 movies had memorable themes and tunes that I could whistle to, this one didn&#039;t. 

I hated the cinematography! The cinematography of the first 3 was beautiful when it had to be and gritty/realistic when it had to be. With Indy 4, the cinematography made it look murky, hazy, out of focus, with annoying light flares and no crispness or sharpness. In fact, the cinematography gave the movie this fake, artificial, inauthentic look and feel. Kaminski&#039;s style worked in Private Ryan and Minority Report, for example, but not here. 

I hated how Mac (Winstone) was a completely unnecessary character that didn&#039;t advance the plot forward. He was also a confused character but that&#039;s the writers&#039; fault. 

Karen Allen was bad! I&#039;m sorry people! And she was too eager to please which came off as desperate. 

Indy and Marion were never given a moment to reconnect as characters after not having seen each other for so long and after having been through all these events. They just launched into their schtick immediately after they met. There wasn&#039;t a single romantic moment between them like in Raiders. 

I hated the CGI. Too much CGI (apparently Spiely was lying to us when he said that this movie was not going to rely on CGI and was going to be old-fashioned), it felt like Spiely was copying The Mummy and Lara Croft, which is ironic, since those awful movies were inspired by his work. The ending, for example, when the entire city whirls around and gets engulfed in a whirlpool of dust, debris and water... that was CGI overkill and it reminded me of the endings to the Mummy movies. Not only that, but to add insult to injury, the CGI was shoddy. Is it me or is CGI getting worse every year?! 

The whole chase scene in the jungle felt and looked absolutely fake! Almost all of it: the swordfighting, the swinging, the monkeys, the racing-near-the-cliffs, the CGI jeep landing on top of the other CGI jeep that had Indy and co. in it... 

The design and look of the aliens was boring. Been there, done that. And the moment when the alien looks at Spalko and frowns in her face was just plain stupid. 

The entire bit INSIDE the temple at the end of the sequence when it starts to fall apart and the portal to another dimension opens up and sucks everything up was just not detailed enough as a piece of CGI. It looked terrible. 

If Area 51 housed all the top secrets of the US government, why did it only have 3 guards protecting and securing it? 

Indiana (or maybe Harrison Ford) just seemed out of place, like he didn&#039;t fit with his environment/surroundings or something. I can&#039;t quite explain it, but he just seemed a bit...off. Even when he wore his Indiana Jones attire, it just didn&#039;t feel right. 

The whole 1950s time period didn&#039;t carry through the entire movie. At some point early on, I felt that the movie might as well have taken place in the 20s, 40s, or 30s again. 

The character of Mutt was not as integral to the plot as, believe it or not, Short Round was in Temple. Mutt hardly did anything to save the day even if it LOOKED like he was doing stuff to save the day. Think about it again, or watch it again, and you might realise that he was an easily expendable character and a badly-written one too. 

I hated the waterfall sequence. No one, not even in a fantasy movie, can survive such a waterfall, THREE TIMES IN A ROW!!! And most of them were over 50 years old, yet not a broken bone or even a chipped finger nail among them. 

The heavy, magnetic, quartz, mystical crystal skull looked like a light, cheap, plastic prop! 

Mac didn&#039;t really have to die. He could&#039;ve easily saved his own life or have been saved by Indy. 

If Indy blew up the tree-cutting vehicle from the side using the rocket launcher, why did the huge round sharp steel blades fly toward him? And they had not one, but two of them flying toward him, vertically! 

The dialogue was too expository or flat. A lot of the jokes and quips fell flat. There was something muted and lethargic about the non-action scenes and their dialogue. My favourite scenes in the previous three were the non-action scenes: Indy and his dad reconnecting in Crusade, Indy and Marion falling in love all over again in Raiders, just to name two. Indy 4 had none such thing. 

I didn&#039;t feel the &quot;magic&quot; of the first three... or a sense of re-discovery after all this time had passed. There were no surprises or, even worse, tension! 

The nuclear explosion was not necessary to the story even if it was a comment about the bugeoning atomic-age of the time period. 

Who the hell where those karate-playing Ecuadorian natives at the cemetary? And how and why did they disappear so quickly? And whatever happened to the Amazon indians at the lost kingdom? We saw them for a little bit and then they all got killed by Spalko&#039;s men (we don&#039;t really see the massacre and we don&#039;t really see how Spalko&#039;s team of 5 men dominated hundreds of natives) and why even include them in the story if they&#039;re not going to be used properly? 

I hated almost every movie that David Koepp had written! Now I&#039;m wondering what Frank Darabont&#039;s script looked like, especially because Spiely and Ford liked it and Lucas didn&#039;t! I don&#039;t trsut Lucas. I wish Lucas didn&#039;t have such a powerful influence on this movie because the Lucas of today is much much worse than the Lucas of yesteryear. 

Why on Earth would all hell break loose at the lost kingdom once the skull was returned to the temple and attached to the rest of the skeleton? After all, at one point, the skull WAS attached to the skeleton before somebody snatched it. So why on Earth would a portal to another dimension be activated and a saucer be launched and an alien skeleton come to life and a whole city destroyed just because a skull was returned to its rightful place? 

Half way through the movie, we learn that the skull has power over people&#039;s minds, yet up to that point we get no indication of that until Spalko conveniently happens to mention it to Indy when he was tied to the chair. 


Well, that&#039;s all I can think of right now. When I walked out of the movie at the end of it, I fell into a depression. Today, I refused to get out of bed and face the world because of the damage that had been done to me last night during the screening. 

Feel free to share your comments guys (and gals... are there any gals by the way?), and please, let&#039;s all be nice to one another on this post. 

One woman at my screening last night (AMC theatre on 84th &amp; Broadway in NYC, 8:15 p.m. Thursday show) looked at her boyfriend at the end as the credits were rolling and said simply : &quot;It was just boring.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m a big Indy fan. I&#8217;ve seen the first 3 more times than I care to mention! And although I love them all, I do admit that all of them have weaknesses, flaws, and problems with the storytelling, but as entertainment, they beat almost everything that dares to challenge them. </p>
<p>After having seen Indy 4 last night, I can say that I was underwhelmed and dissatisfied by it, especially because I had to wait 19 years for it and the best that they could offer was Crystal Skull. It&#8217;s unforgivable. The talent involved, the people involved, the money involved, and the time they had to work on this should&#8217;ve yielded better results. Most of all, I feel heartbroken and crestfallen. </p>
<p>I&#8217;m going to list the things I didn&#8217;t like about Indy 4 (I can&#8217;t think of things I liked, unfortunately). The reason I want to list those things is because I feel like venting, otherwise, I&#8217;ll just walk around all day weeping after having been through the trauma of watching Indy 4. </p>
<p>I&#8217;m not interested in any mean-spirited, immature, or obnoxious posts. Please. If you have something interesting or useful to say, then by all means share it with us, we all love movies here, we all love Indy, just don&#8217;t call me names just because I hated the movie and you loved it. We all have different tastes and moods when it comes to movies. Don&#8217;t take my post as a personal attack on you and your family. After all, you had nothing to do with the movie. And don&#8217;t tell me &#8220;dude, it&#8217;s just a movie!&#8221; as if that statement by itself is the be-all and end-all of all arguments and states your case as fact, because it isn&#8217;t and it doesn&#8217;t. Indy is not &#8220;just a movie&#8221; and even if it was, I still expect a solid, compelling, competent piece of work from some of the best people working in the business. I still expect good storytelling, I still expect some REALITY in my FANTASY. </p>
<p>So here we go: &#8212;&#8211;SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS&#8212;&#8211; </p>
<p>I hated the CGI monkeys! </p>
<p>I hated the idea of the Tarzan swinging. I hated just how fake the Tarzan swinging looked. </p>
<p>I hated how Indy survived a nuclear explosion just because he was in a lead-lined fridge. It&#8217;s not like the entire fridge was lead-lined and even if it was, it would be thin lead-lining, not enough to protect Indy from a blast, much less a nuclear blast. And he walks away from it all unscathed. This is Indy, not Superman!!! </p>
<p>I hated just how boring a villain Spalko was. It&#8217;s like Blanchett didn&#8217;t know where to go with her character. Her accent was also the conventional Russian accent that we&#8217;ve come to expect in Hollywood movies, so I expected better from this Acadeny-Award-winning actress. But we can fault the writing too. </p>
<p>I hated just how adept Mutt was with the sword-fighting. He was fencing with a pro on top of those moving vehicles yet he never missed a beat! </p>
<p>I hated how boring the music was. The first 3 movies had memorable themes and tunes that I could whistle to, this one didn&#8217;t. </p>
<p>I hated the cinematography! The cinematography of the first 3 was beautiful when it had to be and gritty/realistic when it had to be. With Indy 4, the cinematography made it look murky, hazy, out of focus, with annoying light flares and no crispness or sharpness. In fact, the cinematography gave the movie this fake, artificial, inauthentic look and feel. Kaminski&#8217;s style worked in Private Ryan and Minority Report, for example, but not here. </p>
<p>I hated how Mac (Winstone) was a completely unnecessary character that didn&#8217;t advance the plot forward. He was also a confused character but that&#8217;s the writers&#8217; fault. </p>
<p>Karen Allen was bad! I&#8217;m sorry people! And she was too eager to please which came off as desperate. </p>
<p>Indy and Marion were never given a moment to reconnect as characters after not having seen each other for so long and after having been through all these events. They just launched into their schtick immediately after they met. There wasn&#8217;t a single romantic moment between them like in Raiders. </p>
<p>I hated the CGI. Too much CGI (apparently Spiely was lying to us when he said that this movie was not going to rely on CGI and was going to be old-fashioned), it felt like Spiely was copying The Mummy and Lara Croft, which is ironic, since those awful movies were inspired by his work. The ending, for example, when the entire city whirls around and gets engulfed in a whirlpool of dust, debris and water&#8230; that was CGI overkill and it reminded me of the endings to the Mummy movies. Not only that, but to add insult to injury, the CGI was shoddy. Is it me or is CGI getting worse every year?! </p>
<p>The whole chase scene in the jungle felt and looked absolutely fake! Almost all of it: the swordfighting, the swinging, the monkeys, the racing-near-the-cliffs, the CGI jeep landing on top of the other CGI jeep that had Indy and co. in it&#8230; </p>
<p>The design and look of the aliens was boring. Been there, done that. And the moment when the alien looks at Spalko and frowns in her face was just plain stupid. </p>
<p>The entire bit INSIDE the temple at the end of the sequence when it starts to fall apart and the portal to another dimension opens up and sucks everything up was just not detailed enough as a piece of CGI. It looked terrible. </p>
<p>If Area 51 housed all the top secrets of the US government, why did it only have 3 guards protecting and securing it? </p>
<p>Indiana (or maybe Harrison Ford) just seemed out of place, like he didn&#8217;t fit with his environment/surroundings or something. I can&#8217;t quite explain it, but he just seemed a bit&#8230;off. Even when he wore his Indiana Jones attire, it just didn&#8217;t feel right. </p>
<p>The whole 1950s time period didn&#8217;t carry through the entire movie. At some point early on, I felt that the movie might as well have taken place in the 20s, 40s, or 30s again. </p>
<p>The character of Mutt was not as integral to the plot as, believe it or not, Short Round was in Temple. Mutt hardly did anything to save the day even if it LOOKED like he was doing stuff to save the day. Think about it again, or watch it again, and you might realise that he was an easily expendable character and a badly-written one too. </p>
<p>I hated the waterfall sequence. No one, not even in a fantasy movie, can survive such a waterfall, THREE TIMES IN A ROW!!! And most of them were over 50 years old, yet not a broken bone or even a chipped finger nail among them. </p>
<p>The heavy, magnetic, quartz, mystical crystal skull looked like a light, cheap, plastic prop! </p>
<p>Mac didn&#8217;t really have to die. He could&#8217;ve easily saved his own life or have been saved by Indy. </p>
<p>If Indy blew up the tree-cutting vehicle from the side using the rocket launcher, why did the huge round sharp steel blades fly toward him? And they had not one, but two of them flying toward him, vertically! </p>
<p>The dialogue was too expository or flat. A lot of the jokes and quips fell flat. There was something muted and lethargic about the non-action scenes and their dialogue. My favourite scenes in the previous three were the non-action scenes: Indy and his dad reconnecting in Crusade, Indy and Marion falling in love all over again in Raiders, just to name two. Indy 4 had none such thing. </p>
<p>I didn&#8217;t feel the &#8220;magic&#8221; of the first three&#8230; or a sense of re-discovery after all this time had passed. There were no surprises or, even worse, tension! </p>
<p>The nuclear explosion was not necessary to the story even if it was a comment about the bugeoning atomic-age of the time period. </p>
<p>Who the hell where those karate-playing Ecuadorian natives at the cemetary? And how and why did they disappear so quickly? And whatever happened to the Amazon indians at the lost kingdom? We saw them for a little bit and then they all got killed by Spalko&#8217;s men (we don&#8217;t really see the massacre and we don&#8217;t really see how Spalko&#8217;s team of 5 men dominated hundreds of natives) and why even include them in the story if they&#8217;re not going to be used properly? </p>
<p>I hated almost every movie that David Koepp had written! Now I&#8217;m wondering what Frank Darabont&#8217;s script looked like, especially because Spiely and Ford liked it and Lucas didn&#8217;t! I don&#8217;t trsut Lucas. I wish Lucas didn&#8217;t have such a powerful influence on this movie because the Lucas of today is much much worse than the Lucas of yesteryear. </p>
<p>Why on Earth would all hell break loose at the lost kingdom once the skull was returned to the temple and attached to the rest of the skeleton? After all, at one point, the skull WAS attached to the skeleton before somebody snatched it. So why on Earth would a portal to another dimension be activated and a saucer be launched and an alien skeleton come to life and a whole city destroyed just because a skull was returned to its rightful place? </p>
<p>Half way through the movie, we learn that the skull has power over people&#8217;s minds, yet up to that point we get no indication of that until Spalko conveniently happens to mention it to Indy when he was tied to the chair. </p>
<p>Well, that&#8217;s all I can think of right now. When I walked out of the movie at the end of it, I fell into a depression. Today, I refused to get out of bed and face the world because of the damage that had been done to me last night during the screening. </p>
<p>Feel free to share your comments guys (and gals&#8230; are there any gals by the way?), and please, let&#8217;s all be nice to one another on this post. </p>
<p>One woman at my screening last night (AMC theatre on 84th &amp; Broadway in NYC, 8:15 p.m. Thursday show) looked at her boyfriend at the end as the credits were rolling and said simply : &#8220;It was just boring.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/opinions/sound-off-what-did-you-think-of-indiana-jones-4.php/comment-page-1#comment-191314</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 May 2008 18:01:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/?p=6959#comment-191314</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m a big Indy fan. I&#039;ve seen the first 3 more times than I care to mention! And although I love them all, I do admit that all of them have weaknesses, flaws, and problems with the storytelling, but as entertainment, they beat almost everything that dares to challenge them. 

After having seen Indy 4 last night, I can say that I was underwhelmed and dissatisfied by it, especially because I had to wait 19 years for it and the best that they could offer was Crystal Skull. It&#039;s unforgivable. The talent involved, the people involved, the money involved, and the time they had to work on this should&#039;ve yielded better results. Most of all, I feel heartbroken and crestfallen. 

I&#039;m going to list the things I didn&#039;t like about Indy 4 (I can&#039;t think of things I liked, unfortunately). The reason I want to list those things is because I feel like venting, otherwise, I&#039;ll just walk around all day weeping after having been through the trauma of watching Indy 4. 

I&#039;m not interested in any mean-spirited, immature, or obnoxious posts. Please. If you have something interesting or useful to say, then by all means share it with us, we all love movies here, we all love Indy, just don&#039;t call me names just because I hated the movie and you loved it. We all have different tastes and moods when it comes to movies. Don&#039;t take my post as a personal attack on you and your family. After all, you had nothing to do with the movie. And don&#039;t tell me &quot;dude, it&#039;s just a movie!&quot; as if that statement by itself is the be-all and end-all of all arguments and states your case as fact, because it isn&#039;t and it doesn&#039;t. Indy is not &quot;just a movie&quot; and even if it was, I still expect a solid, compelling, competent piece of work from some of the best people working in the business. I still expect good storytelling, I still expect some REALITY in my FANTASY. 

So here we go: -----SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS----- 

I hated the CGI monkeys! 

I hated the idea of the Tarzan swinging. I hated just how fake the Tarzan swinging looked. 

I hated how Indy survived a nuclear explosion just because he was in a lead-lined fridge. It&#039;s not like the entire fridge was lead-lined and even if it was, it would be thin lead-lining, not enough to protect Indy from a blast, much less a nuclear blast. And he walks away from it all unscathed. This is Indy, not Superman!!! 

I hated just how boring a villain Spalko was. It&#039;s like Blanchett didn&#039;t know where to go with her character. Her accent was also the conventional Russian accent that we&#039;ve come to expect in Hollywood movies, so I expected better from this Acadeny-Award-winning actress. But we can fault the writing too. 

I hated just how adept Mutt was with the sword-fighting. He was fencing with a pro on top of those moving vehicles yet he never missed a beat! 

I hated how boring the music was. The first 3 movies had memorable themes and tunes that I could whistle to, this one didn&#039;t. 

I hated the cinematography! The cinematography of the first 3 was beautiful when it had to be and gritty/realistic when it had to be. With Indy 4, the cinematography made it look murky, hazy, out of focus, with annoying light flares and no crispness or sharpness. In fact, the cinematography gave the movie this fake, artificial, inauthentic look and feel. Kaminski&#039;s style worked in Private Ryan and Minority Report, for example, but not here. 

I hated how Mac (Winstone) was a completely unnecessary character that didn&#039;t advance the plot forward. He was also a confused character but that&#039;s the writers&#039; fault. 

Karen Allen was bad! I&#039;m sorry people! And she was too eager to please which came off as desperate. 

Indy and Marion were never given a moment to reconnect as characters after not having seen each other for so long and after having been through all these events. They just launched into their schtick immediately after they met. There wasn&#039;t a single romantic moment between them like in Raiders. 

I hated the CGI. Too much CGI (apparently Spiely was lying to us when he said that this movie was not going to rely on CGI and was going to be old-fashioned), it felt like Spiely was copying The Mummy and Lara Croft, which is ironic, since those awful movies were inspired by his work. The ending, for example, when the entire city whirls around and gets engulfed in a whirlpool of dust, debris and water... that was CGI overkill and it reminded me of the endings to the Mummy movies. Not only that, but to add insult to injury, the CGI was shoddy. Is it me or is CGI getting worse every year?! 

The whole chase scene in the jungle felt and looked absolutely fake! Almost all of it: the swordfighting, the swinging, the monkeys, the racing-near-the-cliffs, the CGI jeep landing on top of the other CGI jeep that had Indy and co. in it... 

The design and look of the aliens was boring. Been there, done that. And the moment when the alien looks at Spalko and frowns in her face was just plain stupid. 

The entire bit INSIDE the temple at the end of the sequence when it starts to fall apart and the portal to another dimension opens up and sucks everything up was just not detailed enough as a piece of CGI. It looked terrible. 

If Area 51 housed all the top secrets of the US government, why did it only have 3 guards protecting and securing it? 

Indiana (or maybe Harrison Ford) just seemed out of place, like he didn&#039;t fit with his environment/surroundings or something. I can&#039;t quite explain it, but he just seemed a bit...off. Even when he wore his Indiana Jones attire, it just didn&#039;t feel right. 

The whole 1950s time period didn&#039;t carry through the entire movie. At some point early on, I felt that the movie might as well have taken place in the 20s, 40s, or 30s again. 

The character of Mutt was not as integral to the plot as, believe it or not, Short Round was in Temple. Mutt hardly did anything to save the day even if it LOOKED like he was doing stuff to save the day. Think about it again, or watch it again, and you might realise that he was an easily expendable character and a badly-written one too. 

I hated the waterfall sequence. No one, not even in a fantasy movie, can survive such a waterfall, THREE TIMES IN A ROW!!! And most of them were over 50 years old, yet not a broken bone or even a chipped finger nail among them. 

The heavy, magnetic, quartz, mystical crystal skull looked like a light, cheap, plastic prop! 

Mac didn&#039;t really have to die. He could&#039;ve easily saved his own life or have been saved by Indy. 

If Indy blew up the tree-cutting vehicle from the side using the rocket launcher, why did the huge round sharp steel blades fly toward him? And they had not one, but two of them flying toward him, vertically! 

The dialogue was too expository or flat. A lot of the jokes and quips fell flat. There was something muted and lethargic about the non-action scenes and their dialogue. My favourite scenes in the previous three were the non-action scenes: Indy and his dad reconnecting in Crusade, Indy and Marion falling in love all over again in Raiders, just to name two. Indy 4 had none such thing. 

I didn&#039;t feel the &quot;magic&quot; of the first three... or a sense of re-discovery after all this time had passed. There were no surprises or, even worse, tension! 

The nuclear explosion was not necessary to the story even if it was a comment about the bugeoning atomic-age of the time period. 

Who the hell where those karate-playing Ecuadorian natives at the cemetary? And how and why did they disappear so quickly? And whatever happened to the Amazon indians at the lost kingdom? We saw them for a little bit and then they all got killed by Spalko&#039;s men (we don&#039;t really see the massacre and we don&#039;t really see how Spalko&#039;s team of 5 men dominated hundreds of natives) and why even include them in the story if they&#039;re not going to be used properly? 

I hated almost every movie that David Koepp had written! Now I&#039;m wondering what Frank Darabont&#039;s script looked like, especially because Spiely and Ford liked it and Lucas didn&#039;t! I don&#039;t trsut Lucas. I wish Lucas didn&#039;t have such a powerful influence on this movie because the Lucas of today is much much worse than the Lucas of yesteryear. 

Why on Earth would all hell break loose at the lost kingdom once the skull was returned to the temple and attached to the rest of the skeleton? After all, at one point, the skull WAS attached to the skeleton before somebody snatched it. So why on Earth would a portal to another dimension be activated and a saucer be launched and an alien skeleton come to life and a whole city destroyed just because a skull was returned to its rightful place? 

Half way through the movie, we learn that the skull has power over people&#039;s minds, yet up to that point we get no indication of that until Spalko conveniently happens to mention it to Indy when he was tied to the chair. 


Well, that&#039;s all I can think of right now. When I walked out of the movie at the end of it, I fell into a depression. Today, I refused to get out of bed and face the world because of the damage that had been done to me last night during the screening. 

Feel free to share your comments guys (and gals... are there any gals by the way?), and please, let&#039;s all be nice to one another on this post. 

One woman at my screening last night (AMC theatre on 84th &amp; Broadway in NYC, 8:15 p.m. Thursday show) looked at her boyfriend at the end as the credits were rolling and said simply : &quot;It was just boring.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m a big Indy fan. I&#8217;ve seen the first 3 more times than I care to mention! And although I love them all, I do admit that all of them have weaknesses, flaws, and problems with the storytelling, but as entertainment, they beat almost everything that dares to challenge them. </p>
<p>After having seen Indy 4 last night, I can say that I was underwhelmed and dissatisfied by it, especially because I had to wait 19 years for it and the best that they could offer was Crystal Skull. It&#8217;s unforgivable. The talent involved, the people involved, the money involved, and the time they had to work on this should&#8217;ve yielded better results. Most of all, I feel heartbroken and crestfallen. </p>
<p>I&#8217;m going to list the things I didn&#8217;t like about Indy 4 (I can&#8217;t think of things I liked, unfortunately). The reason I want to list those things is because I feel like venting, otherwise, I&#8217;ll just walk around all day weeping after having been through the trauma of watching Indy 4. </p>
<p>I&#8217;m not interested in any mean-spirited, immature, or obnoxious posts. Please. If you have something interesting or useful to say, then by all means share it with us, we all love movies here, we all love Indy, just don&#8217;t call me names just because I hated the movie and you loved it. We all have different tastes and moods when it comes to movies. Don&#8217;t take my post as a personal attack on you and your family. After all, you had nothing to do with the movie. And don&#8217;t tell me &#8220;dude, it&#8217;s just a movie!&#8221; as if that statement by itself is the be-all and end-all of all arguments and states your case as fact, because it isn&#8217;t and it doesn&#8217;t. Indy is not &#8220;just a movie&#8221; and even if it was, I still expect a solid, compelling, competent piece of work from some of the best people working in the business. I still expect good storytelling, I still expect some REALITY in my FANTASY. </p>
<p>So here we go: &#8212;&#8211;SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS&#8212;&#8211; </p>
<p>I hated the CGI monkeys! </p>
<p>I hated the idea of the Tarzan swinging. I hated just how fake the Tarzan swinging looked. </p>
<p>I hated how Indy survived a nuclear explosion just because he was in a lead-lined fridge. It&#8217;s not like the entire fridge was lead-lined and even if it was, it would be thin lead-lining, not enough to protect Indy from a blast, much less a nuclear blast. And he walks away from it all unscathed. This is Indy, not Superman!!! </p>
<p>I hated just how boring a villain Spalko was. It&#8217;s like Blanchett didn&#8217;t know where to go with her character. Her accent was also the conventional Russian accent that we&#8217;ve come to expect in Hollywood movies, so I expected better from this Acadeny-Award-winning actress. But we can fault the writing too. </p>
<p>I hated just how adept Mutt was with the sword-fighting. He was fencing with a pro on top of those moving vehicles yet he never missed a beat! </p>
<p>I hated how boring the music was. The first 3 movies had memorable themes and tunes that I could whistle to, this one didn&#8217;t. </p>
<p>I hated the cinematography! The cinematography of the first 3 was beautiful when it had to be and gritty/realistic when it had to be. With Indy 4, the cinematography made it look murky, hazy, out of focus, with annoying light flares and no crispness or sharpness. In fact, the cinematography gave the movie this fake, artificial, inauthentic look and feel. Kaminski&#8217;s style worked in Private Ryan and Minority Report, for example, but not here. </p>
<p>I hated how Mac (Winstone) was a completely unnecessary character that didn&#8217;t advance the plot forward. He was also a confused character but that&#8217;s the writers&#8217; fault. </p>
<p>Karen Allen was bad! I&#8217;m sorry people! And she was too eager to please which came off as desperate. </p>
<p>Indy and Marion were never given a moment to reconnect as characters after not having seen each other for so long and after having been through all these events. They just launched into their schtick immediately after they met. There wasn&#8217;t a single romantic moment between them like in Raiders. </p>
<p>I hated the CGI. Too much CGI (apparently Spiely was lying to us when he said that this movie was not going to rely on CGI and was going to be old-fashioned), it felt like Spiely was copying The Mummy and Lara Croft, which is ironic, since those awful movies were inspired by his work. The ending, for example, when the entire city whirls around and gets engulfed in a whirlpool of dust, debris and water&#8230; that was CGI overkill and it reminded me of the endings to the Mummy movies. Not only that, but to add insult to injury, the CGI was shoddy. Is it me or is CGI getting worse every year?! </p>
<p>The whole chase scene in the jungle felt and looked absolutely fake! Almost all of it: the swordfighting, the swinging, the monkeys, the racing-near-the-cliffs, the CGI jeep landing on top of the other CGI jeep that had Indy and co. in it&#8230; </p>
<p>The design and look of the aliens was boring. Been there, done that. And the moment when the alien looks at Spalko and frowns in her face was just plain stupid. </p>
<p>The entire bit INSIDE the temple at the end of the sequence when it starts to fall apart and the portal to another dimension opens up and sucks everything up was just not detailed enough as a piece of CGI. It looked terrible. </p>
<p>If Area 51 housed all the top secrets of the US government, why did it only have 3 guards protecting and securing it? </p>
<p>Indiana (or maybe Harrison Ford) just seemed out of place, like he didn&#8217;t fit with his environment/surroundings or something. I can&#8217;t quite explain it, but he just seemed a bit&#8230;off. Even when he wore his Indiana Jones attire, it just didn&#8217;t feel right. </p>
<p>The whole 1950s time period didn&#8217;t carry through the entire movie. At some point early on, I felt that the movie might as well have taken place in the 20s, 40s, or 30s again. </p>
<p>The character of Mutt was not as integral to the plot as, believe it or not, Short Round was in Temple. Mutt hardly did anything to save the day even if it LOOKED like he was doing stuff to save the day. Think about it again, or watch it again, and you might realise that he was an easily expendable character and a badly-written one too. </p>
<p>I hated the waterfall sequence. No one, not even in a fantasy movie, can survive such a waterfall, THREE TIMES IN A ROW!!! And most of them were over 50 years old, yet not a broken bone or even a chipped finger nail among them. </p>
<p>The heavy, magnetic, quartz, mystical crystal skull looked like a light, cheap, plastic prop! </p>
<p>Mac didn&#8217;t really have to die. He could&#8217;ve easily saved his own life or have been saved by Indy. </p>
<p>If Indy blew up the tree-cutting vehicle from the side using the rocket launcher, why did the huge round sharp steel blades fly toward him? And they had not one, but two of them flying toward him, vertically! </p>
<p>The dialogue was too expository or flat. A lot of the jokes and quips fell flat. There was something muted and lethargic about the non-action scenes and their dialogue. My favourite scenes in the previous three were the non-action scenes: Indy and his dad reconnecting in Crusade, Indy and Marion falling in love all over again in Raiders, just to name two. Indy 4 had none such thing. </p>
<p>I didn&#8217;t feel the &#8220;magic&#8221; of the first three&#8230; or a sense of re-discovery after all this time had passed. There were no surprises or, even worse, tension! </p>
<p>The nuclear explosion was not necessary to the story even if it was a comment about the bugeoning atomic-age of the time period. </p>
<p>Who the hell where those karate-playing Ecuadorian natives at the cemetary? And how and why did they disappear so quickly? And whatever happened to the Amazon indians at the lost kingdom? We saw them for a little bit and then they all got killed by Spalko&#8217;s men (we don&#8217;t really see the massacre and we don&#8217;t really see how Spalko&#8217;s team of 5 men dominated hundreds of natives) and why even include them in the story if they&#8217;re not going to be used properly? </p>
<p>I hated almost every movie that David Koepp had written! Now I&#8217;m wondering what Frank Darabont&#8217;s script looked like, especially because Spiely and Ford liked it and Lucas didn&#8217;t! I don&#8217;t trsut Lucas. I wish Lucas didn&#8217;t have such a powerful influence on this movie because the Lucas of today is much much worse than the Lucas of yesteryear. </p>
<p>Why on Earth would all hell break loose at the lost kingdom once the skull was returned to the temple and attached to the rest of the skeleton? After all, at one point, the skull WAS attached to the skeleton before somebody snatched it. So why on Earth would a portal to another dimension be activated and a saucer be launched and an alien skeleton come to life and a whole city destroyed just because a skull was returned to its rightful place? </p>
<p>Half way through the movie, we learn that the skull has power over people&#8217;s minds, yet up to that point we get no indication of that until Spalko conveniently happens to mention it to Indy when he was tied to the chair. </p>
<p>Well, that&#8217;s all I can think of right now. When I walked out of the movie at the end of it, I fell into a depression. Today, I refused to get out of bed and face the world because of the damage that had been done to me last night during the screening. </p>
<p>Feel free to share your comments guys (and gals&#8230; are there any gals by the way?), and please, let&#8217;s all be nice to one another on this post. </p>
<p>One woman at my screening last night (AMC theatre on 84th &amp; Broadway in NYC, 8:15 p.m. Thursday show) looked at her boyfriend at the end as the credits were rolling and said simply : &#8220;It was just boring.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cole Abaius</title>
		<link>http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/opinions/sound-off-what-did-you-think-of-indiana-jones-4.php/comment-page-1#comment-94718</link>
		<dc:creator>Cole Abaius</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 May 2008 17:06:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/?p=6959#comment-94718</guid>
		<description>Sorry James. I don&#039;t think we&#039;re on the same tip.

An illustration:

Last Crusade - Reconciliation with the father as a theme of reconciliation with God (The Father), Eternal Life as man&#039;s last great search, returning to the cradle of civilization (your beginning) as a means of escaping death (your end), the leap of faith, the immortality of evil and good, the humility of power, sacred honor, sacrificing one life for another, and disregarding what you know for what you might know.

v.

Crystal Skull - WORLD DOMINATION THROUGH THE USE OF PSYCHIC OBJECTS...PSYCH OPS

Using all caps does not make you correct, and being passive aggressive when calling me unintelligent just makes me angry. And you wouldn&#039;t like me when...forget it.

Although I will commend you on being the first ever to claim that people 
&quot;just didn&#039;t get&quot; an Indiana Jones movie in defense of it being not-that-awesome.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sorry James. I don&#8217;t think we&#8217;re on the same tip.</p>
<p>An illustration:</p>
<p>Last Crusade &#8211; Reconciliation with the father as a theme of reconciliation with God (The Father), Eternal Life as man&#8217;s last great search, returning to the cradle of civilization (your beginning) as a means of escaping death (your end), the leap of faith, the immortality of evil and good, the humility of power, sacred honor, sacrificing one life for another, and disregarding what you know for what you might know.</p>
<p>v.</p>
<p>Crystal Skull &#8211; WORLD DOMINATION THROUGH THE USE OF PSYCHIC OBJECTS&#8230;PSYCH OPS</p>
<p>Using all caps does not make you correct, and being passive aggressive when calling me unintelligent just makes me angry. And you wouldn&#8217;t like me when&#8230;forget it.</p>
<p>Although I will commend you on being the first ever to claim that people<br />
&#8220;just didn&#8217;t get&#8221; an Indiana Jones movie in defense of it being not-that-awesome.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cole Abaius</title>
		<link>http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/opinions/sound-off-what-did-you-think-of-indiana-jones-4.php/comment-page-1#comment-191312</link>
		<dc:creator>Cole Abaius</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 May 2008 17:06:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/?p=6959#comment-191312</guid>
		<description>Sorry James. I don&#039;t think we&#039;re on the same tip.

An illustration:

Last Crusade - Reconciliation with the father as a theme of reconciliation with God (The Father), Eternal Life as man&#039;s last great search, returning to the cradle of civilization (your beginning) as a means of escaping death (your end), the leap of faith, the immortality of evil and good, the humility of power, sacred honor, sacrificing one life for another, and disregarding what you know for what you might know.

v.

Crystal Skull - WORLD DOMINATION THROUGH THE USE OF PSYCHIC OBJECTS...PSYCH OPS

Using all caps does not make you correct, and being passive aggressive when calling me unintelligent just makes me angry. And you wouldn&#039;t like me when...forget it.

Although I will commend you on being the first ever to claim that people 
&quot;just didn&#039;t get&quot; an Indiana Jones movie in defense of it being not-that-awesome.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sorry James. I don&#8217;t think we&#8217;re on the same tip.</p>
<p>An illustration:</p>
<p>Last Crusade &#8211; Reconciliation with the father as a theme of reconciliation with God (The Father), Eternal Life as man&#8217;s last great search, returning to the cradle of civilization (your beginning) as a means of escaping death (your end), the leap of faith, the immortality of evil and good, the humility of power, sacred honor, sacrificing one life for another, and disregarding what you know for what you might know.</p>
<p>v.</p>
<p>Crystal Skull &#8211; WORLD DOMINATION THROUGH THE USE OF PSYCHIC OBJECTS&#8230;PSYCH OPS</p>
<p>Using all caps does not make you correct, and being passive aggressive when calling me unintelligent just makes me angry. And you wouldn&#8217;t like me when&#8230;forget it.</p>
<p>Although I will commend you on being the first ever to claim that people<br />
&#8220;just didn&#8217;t get&#8221; an Indiana Jones movie in defense of it being not-that-awesome.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Page Caching using memcached
Object Caching 592/598 objects using memcached

Served from: www.filmschoolrejects.com @ 2012-02-14 01:30:30 -->
