Ruling the outcasts (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews



Message


Mr. Chumba -> Ruling the outcasts (19/5/2008 6:10:53 PM)

Saw it at Cannes film festival. I thought it was worthy of 5 stars




IsabelB -> (19/5/2008 6:35:32 PM)

wahey!!




xboyo123 -> please re-review (19/5/2008 7:53:10 PM)

watch the film again
re-review
and really think about how gd this film is
4 stars is a kind of insult tbh




tt904 -> (19/5/2008 8:05:34 PM)

As a barometer of how well a film's being recieved you can't beat Rottentomatoes.com which has Indy 4 running at 76% positive. With a film as vulnerable to criticism as this that's about as good as we could have hoped for. Let's not forget that Temple of Doom got a pretty rough ride when it was released, but now we recognise it as a flawed classic. I would say Empire have judged this one correctly, 4 stars on balance seems to be the critical consensus.




Mr. Chumba -> Ruling the outcasts (19/5/2008 8:42:46 PM)

Saw it at Cannes film festival. I thought it was worthy of 5 stars




holsy -> (19/5/2008 10:57:30 PM)

Well done Damon Wise, thats a very well written and thoughtful review. And i whole heartedly agree with your closeing point, that Indy was never intended to be anthing more than a release. Entertainment doesnt come any purer than Indy.




skippy82 -> RE: (20/5/2008 12:57:04 AM)

Very happy with that review, Empire have taken the perfect approach. I now know this will feel familiar & never be less than entertaining - the only two boxes a fourth Indy film really needed to tick.




tt904 -> (20/5/2008 2:52:45 AM)

The overall critical consesus seems to be much more solid than many pundits seem to want to acknoweldge. I guess the problem is the only way this film can carry as a media story is if it's a masterpiece or a disaster. In reality it seems that it's a very enjoyable way to spend your Saturday night. What else did we expect... if you try to be objective and put aside your childhood memories (Temple of Doom is the first film I recall seeing in the cinema) you will probably acknoweldge that Raiders is the only true classic of the original trilogy the following two film were great fun, with individual sequences of utter genius and an iconic central character that we all loved. Rottentomatoes.com has Crystal Skull at an 80% positive rating... what more could we have hoped for? The criticism that the film is 'creaky' and 'old-fashioned' seems completely undermined by Spielberg's initial mission-statement that he wanted to create the look and feel of the other films. Would we have wanted anything different? How would critics and audiences respond if the film used Matrix-style bullet-time, or the rabid-jittery camera work of the last two Bourne movies, why not throw in some Mo-Cap. There is no way to calmly judge a film that is so tied up with our lives - atleast if your around my age. If in a few years time you can buy the now four DVD box set and not feel let down by the last movie than Indy's last hurrah (probably) will have been worthwhile. I hope you all enjoy the movie. I can't wait.




IsabelB -> (20/5/2008 7:27:16 AM)

who the hell is giving this a crap rating because the average user rating has to be at least 4 stars. anyway this is INDIANA JONES for crying out load and he's like the best character ever




Dowe2 -> (20/5/2008 7:35:58 AM)

Has anyone actually seen the film?




Dowe2 -> (20/5/2008 7:36:00 AM)

Has anyone actually seen the film?




Dave B -> RE: RE: (20/5/2008 9:40:13 AM)

Here's that interview with Lucas about the 5th film that was mentioned earlier.

This bit caught my attention, "I haven't even told Steven [Spielberg] or Harrison this but I have an idea to make Shia LaBeouf (who plays Mutt) the lead character next time and have Harrison come back like Sean Connery did in the last movie (Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade). I can see it working out."

I hope Spielberg makes you see sense. Bloody Lucas.




Castor Troy -> RE: RE: (20/5/2008 10:14:53 AM)

Don't listen to Dave George. Do what your heart tells you. I love Shia, and whilst it would have to be a different type of film, I'm all for the adventures of Mutt, especailly if Steven is behind the camera. But I'm not sure how much Harrison should be in it. I don't want him cameoing in what are essentially his own films. I'd like Kingdom to be the bridge between 2 sets of trilogies. 




missphoenix -> Why are stupid people rating this (20/5/2008 11:12:24 AM)

without seeing the film first? Ridiculous fan boys and girls. Completely undermines the film's credibility if you're all going by faith instead of the actual product itself. For your idiocy, I shall give it 1 out of 5.




Rgirvan44 -> RE: RE: (20/5/2008 11:29:08 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Castor Troy

Don't listen to Dave George. Do what your heart tells you. I love Shia, and whilst it would have to be a different type of film, I'm all for the adventures of Mutt, especailly if Steven is behind the camera. But I'm not sure how much Harrison should be in it. I don't want him cameoing in what are essentially his own films. I'd like Kingdom to be the bridge between 2 sets of trilogies. 


You not think it would be a bit odd for Mutt to be having adventures in the 1960s  - these films are suppose to be 1930s adventure serials.




Castor Troy -> RE: RE: (20/5/2008 11:42:01 AM)

quote:


You not think it would be a bit odd for Mutt t
quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

quote:

ORIGINAL: Castor Troy

Don't listen to Dave George. Do what your heart tells you. I love Shia, and whilst it would have to be a different type of film, I'm all for the adventures of Mutt, especailly if Steven is behind the camera. But I'm not sure how much Harrison should be in it. I don't want him cameoing in what are essentially his own films. I'd like Kingdom to be the bridge between 2 sets of trilogies. 


You not think it would be a bit odd for Mutt to be having adventures in the 1960s  - these films are suppose to be 1930s adventure serials.


Hence the bit where I said they'd have to be different types of films. They'd have to base them on something different. And I'm not sure how into archeology Mutt is (I guess we'll see in Kingdom) so that might have to change. But in terms of an adventure trilogy starring Shia and directed by Steven with old school stunts - then I'm all for it.




tt904 -> RE: Why are stupid people rating this (20/5/2008 12:33:13 PM)

No one so far seems to be writing a review, they just want to post comments. In order to do that on this forum you need to include a rating. No one who loves Indiana Jones is going to give much less than Empire's 4 stars because they don't want to lower the average user rating. Someone who gives one star isn't just stupid, they're also spiteful.




Scruffybobby -> RE: Why are stupid people rating this (20/5/2008 12:40:36 PM)

You don't have to include a rating . Just post your comment, like what I'm doing now




krudler -> RE: Why are stupid people rating this (20/5/2008 12:50:21 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: tt904

No one so far seems to be writing a review, they just want to post comments. In order to do that on this forum you need to include a rating. No one who loves Indiana Jones is going to give much less than Empire's 4 stars because they don't want to lower the average user rating. Someone who gives one star isn't just stupid, they're also spiteful.


says who?




Goodfella -> RE: Why are stupid people rating this (20/5/2008 1:00:58 PM)

Well I'm going to see it Thursday evening with my Dad. Dad was the ideal choice because he's far from a film fan, watcher even really, but he absolutely loves the Indy films!

And until then I won't read any Cannes bullshit, any crap from that fat ginger twat's mouth (not that I usually do anyway!) or anyone else who wants to get their name in lights by calling it rubbish.




paulyboy -> RE: Why are stupid people rating this (20/5/2008 1:37:52 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Goodfella

And until then I won't read any Cannes bullshit, any crap from that fat ginger twat's mouth (not that I usually do anyway!) or anyone else who wants to get their name in lights by calling it rubbish.



Incidentally that *"fat ginger twat" (as if being overweight with red hair has any bearing on the discussion what so ever) loved it.

*Assuming you mean Harry Knowles that is




Manny -> RE: Why are stupid people rating this (20/5/2008 2:11:10 PM)

got this far with my eyes shut, bold move by empire  to give 4 stars following recent 3* reviews and the star wars reviews, cant wait till the weekend

re reader ratings think some people have poseted directly from the review rather than through the forums where you do have to submit a rating




Goodfella -> RE: Why are stupid people rating this (20/5/2008 2:52:51 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: paulyboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Goodfella

And until then I won't read any Cannes bullshit, any crap from that fat ginger twat's mouth (not that I usually do anyway!) or anyone else who wants to get their name in lights by calling it rubbish.



Incidentally that *"fat ginger twat" (as if being overweight with red hair has any bearing on the discussion what so ever) loved it.

*Assuming you mean Harry Knowles that is


I was under the impression he hated it. Didn't AICN give it a right slating?




porntrooper -> RE: Why are stupid people rating this (20/5/2008 3:03:04 PM)

I think the general state of things over at AICN was that the main players (i.e. Knowles, Moriarty, Capone) all liked it, albeit with flaws.  The reviews from readers have been a mixed bag, most were pretty positive.  CHUD.com, however, is another story.  I think they've got three reviews up, one is scathing, another is a bit 'meh' and the third says it's good but a bit hit and miss, a little like lazy Lost World-Spielberg.  I think the general reaction from critics is positive with a few mixed and a few negative.  Not that much different from any other summer block buster.  I'm looking forward to it and will enjoy it for what it is..... cannot wait!




JRockwell -> RE: Why are stupid people rating this (20/5/2008 3:33:31 PM)

So, what have we learned? George Beard wants to shift the franchise into something else with a different lead and then probably make a cartoon out of it. And Steven Rubberface has been tinkering with the first lot of films and is releasing a new boxset before the fourth one comes out so some people buy it, then have to buy the other one. Well done to the thicky twins.




Mr. Chumba -> (20/5/2008 4:11:38 PM)

Hey JRockwell, Go fuck a horse, Dick-head.




Mr. Chumba -> (20/5/2008 4:11:58 PM)

Hey JRockwell, Go fuck a horse, Dick-head.




holsy -> RE: Why are stupid people rating this (20/5/2008 4:15:36 PM)

Show some respect JRockwell, Spielberg and Lucas have contributed to the film industry in more ways than you can possibly imagine. Im also willing to bet that if they go on to do a franchise with Shia as the lead, at the very worst it will be better than any National Treasure bullshit!!




Gazdance -> RE: Why are stupid people rating this (20/5/2008 4:50:57 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: holsy

Show some respect JRockwell, Spielberg and Lucas have contributed to the film industry in more ways than you can possibly imagine. Im also willing to bet that if they go on to do a franchise with Shia as the lead, at the very worst it will be better than any National Treasure bullshit!!


Show some respect?  He's right though.

George and Steven are the ones he need to show us some fucking respect.  Without the fans they'd be nothing and they (especially Lucas) think nothing of trying to bleed us dry at every turn.   




JRockwell -> Respect greatness not mediocrity (20/5/2008 5:03:26 PM)

I am not belittling their achievements, I respect the great things they achieved. I'm just a little tired of them running around like a couple of kids in a CGI shop, pausing only briefly to rip everyone off.




Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.03125