RE: In the name of God!!!

RE: In the name of God!!! (Full Version)

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

Message

jrewing1000 -> RE: In the name of God!!! (22/5/2008 3:38:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Fritz Lang Why you blaming only Lucas for this travesty?The film has a director too... because the script is the main problem with this film.

Requiemfordudley -> In the name of God!!! (22/5/2008 3:39:18 PM)
I went to the midnight showing last night as my friends goaded me on to going. I love the original films but from the trailer i just felt that something wasn't right. Lucas has done the impossible with this film; he has made something worse the the star wars prequels. Think of the most idiotic caricature of indiana jones possible, multiply it by infinity and still you wont comprehend just how pathetic this film is. nuclear blasts, aliens and monkeys but to name a few of some of the worst choices in cinematic history. I'm not one for posting hate reviews all over the internet but this film truely deserves it, people need to be told so they don't go out and pay to see this film. Lucas and spielberg don't need any prompting to make another sequel and drag the corpse of this franchise into another terrible husk of a film. Empire's and other critics praising this film must be being paid to do so, no one can blow this much smoke up someones ass for such a pile of crap. I've never left a film like this with the whole cinema so miserable and bored with what they just saw. Take heed fans, read the message boards of movie goers opinions they will steer you in the right direction.

James2183 -> RE: In the name of God!!! (22/5/2008 3:39:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Fritz Lang Why you blaming only Lucas for this travesty?The film has a director too... Because it was up to Lucas as to when the film would go into production and in my opinion he chose to wrong story and script to go ahead with. It's been noted many times before than Ford and Spielberg were eager to get going with the script that Darabont had written but Lucas wasn't happy and veto'd it. What I would give to be able to read that script...

Fritz Lang -> RE: In the name of God!!! (22/5/2008 3:40:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jrewing1000 quote: ORIGINAL: Fritz Lang Why you blaming only Lucas for this travesty?The film has a director too... because the script is the main problem with this film. Then why most people give credit to Spielberg for Raiders?Double stantards??????

Timon -> RE: In the name of God!!! (22/5/2008 3:41:55 PM)
James, you're scaring me. I have to say I am mightily confused. Lots of negative reviews here, positive reviews from most of the critics (including the uber-fussy Aintitcool mob) and high ratings from the venomous imdb crowd. Oh well, I see it on Friday.......

Dave B -> RE: In the name of God!!! (22/5/2008 3:44:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Fritz Lang Why you blaming only Lucas for this travesty?The film has a director too... Spielberg's direction is pretty awful but you have to blame Lucas for passing Darabont's script. It surely would have been better than this mess.

Mr Selleck -> RE: In the name of God!!! (22/5/2008 3:45:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: James2183 Because it was up to Lucas as to when the film would go into production and in my opinion he chose to wrong story and script to go ahead with. It's been noted many times before than Ford and Spielberg were eager to get going with the script that Darabont had written but Lucas wasn't happy and veto'd it. What I would give to be able to read that script... Its also been said alot that that the sci-fi story was introduced in Darabonts script. I'b be interested to know just how much Koepp took from that and why Lucas refused the original only to accept what was finally used.

Larry of Arabia -> RE: Indiana Jones And The Kindom Of The Crystal Skull (22/5/2008 3:52:06 PM)
I was waiting for the suspense, the heart to start pounding, but I felt just just like a spectator. Very surprising, seeing as Spielberg managed this very well with the aliens arriving from the ground in their tripods to wreck the place in War Of The Worlds. Now that was suspense - and it was frightening. My God, what am I saying...

kenada_woo -> RE: In the name of God!!! (22/5/2008 3:52:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: James2183 quote: ORIGINAL: Fritz Lang Why you blaming only Lucas for this travesty?The film has a director too... Because it was up to Lucas as to when the film would go into production and in my opinion he chose to wrong story and script to go ahead with. It's been noted many times before than Ford and Spielberg were eager to get going with the script that Darabont had written but Lucas wasn't happy and veto'd it. What I would give to be able to read that script... I'm seeing the film later tonight but.... How does anyone know if Darabont's script was any good?

Acho -> The fridge (22/5/2008 3:53:08 PM)
Possible spoilers This isn't a reply to any one poster in particular, but a few people have mentioned their dislike of the nuclear testing site scenes, with the fridge bit. I have been reliably informed, though, that this is a knowing nod to Back to the Future. Apparently, in its original form, the time machine was going to be a fridge instead of the car and it was transformed into a time machine was when up in a nuclear testing site. Not sure if knowing that would increase or decrease one's annoyance with the scene, as in-joke reference like that runs the risk of plain indulgence. A nod to past glories mightn't be the best idea when you're looking to resurrect another beloved franchise.

JRockwell -> RE: In the name of God!!! (22/5/2008 3:53:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: James2183 Because it was up to Lucas as to when the film would go into production and in my opinion he chose to wrong story and script to go ahead with. It's been noted many times before than Ford and Spielberg were eager to get going with the script that Darabont had written but Lucas wasn't happy and veto'd it. What I would give to be able to read that script... Every time you have had to defend him, do you feel like something inside of you died? Rubberface is as much to blame for this as Beard. The scenes you talk about, they fill me with dread. I am Jake Rockwell, a man of principle. I will not allow childhood affection to influence my appreciation of great cinema. Go home, watch your favourtie films, little films and great sprawling works of art and then think about this. They have forgotten the true meaning of Cinema and anyone that panders to them deserves derision.

James2183 -> RE: In the name of God!!! (22/5/2008 3:53:38 PM)
It would be really interesting to see but sadly I doubt we will ever get the chance to read it. The fact that Darabont was so happy with the script makes me wish Lucas had gone ahead with it. When you have your director, writer and lead all happy with a script it's a good sign that things are going to work out. Sadly it wasn't the case. Timon I am sorry to scare you and I really hope that you enjoy the film, but for me it was a big miss from the filmmakers. I hate to say it but even Williams score was generic and nothing stood out that matched previous efforts in the trilogy.

JRockwell -> RE: In the name of God!!! (22/5/2008 3:57:38 PM)
Muderam, Suderam, Muderam, Suderam. Galimaaaaaaar shudidiiiiii.

Dave B -> RE: In the name of God!!! (22/5/2008 3:58:18 PM)
I also remember Spielberg saying Darabont's script was the best since Raiders of the Lost Ark. Although after making this film I'm doubting his ability to tell what a good script is.

James2183 -> RE: In the name of God!!! (22/5/2008 3:58:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kenada_woo How does anyone know if Darabont's script was any good? Because there have been multiple interviews in which Darabont, Spielberg and Ford have said what a great script it was. When you consider Darabonts track record and the recent praise for his latest films, I think Lucas just wanted too much control and went with his ideas.

kenada_woo -> RE: In the name of God!!! (22/5/2008 4:06:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: James2183 quote: ORIGINAL: kenada_woo How does anyone know if Darabont's script was any good? Because there have been multiple interviews in which Darabont, Spielberg and Ford have said what a great script it was. When you consider Darabonts track record and the recent praise for his latest films, I think Lucas just wanted too much control and went with his ideas. But then again he has written some shite (The Majestic, The Blob although I like that film etc) and David Koepp is the man Spielberg brought in to keep everyone happy. Also Spielberg and Ford wouldnt just do it for a laugh and cash in cos they would've done that years ago unless they too were happy with the script they've shot. I'm only saying this cos I hate when people throw around "why didnt they use this script?" when they havent even read it and heard interviews saying this and that. Just review the film as it is not what it could've been.

James2183 -> RE: In the name of God!!! (22/5/2008 4:08:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kenada_woo quote: ORIGINAL: James2183 quote: ORIGINAL: kenada_woo How does anyone know if Darabont's script was any good? Because there have been multiple interviews in which Darabont, Spielberg and Ford have said what a great script it was. When you consider Darabonts track record and the recent praise for his latest films, I think Lucas just wanted too much control and went with his ideas. But then again he has written some shite (The Majestic, The Blob although I like that film etc) and David Koepp is the man Spielberg brought in to keep everyone happy. Also Spielberg and Ford wouldnt just do it for a laugh and cash in cos they would've done that years ago unless they too were happy with the script they've shot. Maybe it was a case of them realising that they would never have the chance to shoot another Indy film unless they gave into Lucas' demands and so gave him the benefit of the doubt. And I liked the Majestic [:D]

Requiemfordudley -> RE: In the name of God!!! (22/5/2008 4:09:48 PM)
Timon most the positive ratings were obviously done before the movie came out. Just look at the forums and you'll see the true fan opinion. Most the people claiming to like it seem to like it for nostalgia value and are clinging onto that alone.

Dave B -> RE: In the name of God!!! (22/5/2008 4:12:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kenada_woo quote: ORIGINAL: James2183 quote: ORIGINAL: kenada_woo How does anyone know if Darabont's script was any good? Because there have been multiple interviews in which Darabont, Spielberg and Ford have said what a great script it was. When you consider Darabonts track record and the recent praise for his latest films, I think Lucas just wanted too much control and went with his ideas. But then again he has written some shite (The Majestic, The Blob although I like that film etc) and David Koepp is the man Spielberg brought in to keep everyone happy. Also Spielberg and Ford wouldnt just do it for a laugh and cash in cos they would've done that years ago unless they too were happy with the script they've shot. I'm only saying this cos I hate when people throw around "why didnt they use this script?" when they havent even read it and heard interviews saying this and that. Just review the film as it is not what it could've been. To be fair, Darabont has a much better track record than Koepp, who seems like a hack that has got very lucky.

kenada_woo -> RE: In the name of God!!! (22/5/2008 4:17:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: James2183 quote: ORIGINAL: kenada_woo quote: ORIGINAL: James2183 quote: ORIGINAL: kenada_woo How does anyone know if Darabont's script was any good? Because there have been multiple interviews in which Darabont, Spielberg and Ford have said what a great script it was. When you consider Darabonts track record and the recent praise for his latest films, I think Lucas just wanted too much control and went with his ideas. But then again he has written some shite (The Majestic, The Blob although I like that film etc) and David Koepp is the man Spielberg brought in to keep everyone happy. Also Spielberg and Ford wouldnt just do it for a laugh and cash in cos they would've done that years ago unless they too were happy with the script they've shot. Maybe it was a case of them realising that they would never have the chance to shoot another Indy film unless they gave into Lucas' demands and so gave him the benefit of the doubt. And I liked the Majestic [:D] I find that hard to believe though being that all involved are the biggest players in hollywood. Its like the story that Lucas wanted it shot in HD - why did Spielberg buckle and say yes even though he's said he'll probably use it in the future?

morg1138 -> RE: In the name of God!!! (22/5/2008 4:25:30 PM)
POSSIBLE SPOILERS Went to see it this morning. I came out of the cinema a bit stuck for words. Could not figure out what to think of it. Really enjoyed the first half, thought the Area 51 and nuclear test pieces were good and the bike chase also looked good. The second half was full of enjoyable fluff but the monkeys sucked. My friend that came along had no idea at all about any of the film prior to going in and he was spitting blood about the Aliens/inter dimensional dudes, something a few people afterwards seemed to dislike. I didn't have a problem with said aliens but I still would have liked to see a biblical artefact instead.

James2183 -> RE: In the name of God!!! (22/5/2008 4:25:41 PM)
I thought Spielberg said that he admires what shooting in HD has done for cinema and CGI, but would be the last person to shoot on 35mm as he loves it too much. Was Indy shot in HD?

kenada_woo -> RE: In the name of God!!! (22/5/2008 4:27:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Dave B quote: ORIGINAL: kenada_woo quote: ORIGINAL: James2183 quote: ORIGINAL: kenada_woo How does anyone know if Darabont's script was any good? Because there have been multiple interviews in which Darabont, Spielberg and Ford have said what a great script it was. When you consider Darabonts track record and the recent praise for his latest films, I think Lucas just wanted too much control and went with his ideas. But then again he has written some shite (The Majestic, The Blob although I like that film etc) and David Koepp is the man Spielberg brought in to keep everyone happy. Also Spielberg and Ford wouldnt just do it for a laugh and cash in cos they would've done that years ago unless they too were happy with the script they've shot. I'm only saying this cos I hate when people throw around "why didnt they use this script?" when they havent even read it and heard interviews saying this and that. Just review the film as it is not what it could've been. To be fair, Darabont has a much better track record than Koepp, who seems like a hack that has got very lucky. But they've both got good track records. Minus Shawshank and The Green Mile, what else has Darabont substancially written original? Daranbont has been a script doctor and had lots of screenplays rejected in favour for others (MI3 for example), who's to say they werent very good coming from a man who started a career out as a hack horror writer? Like I said, I aint seen the film but I'll judge it for what it is not for what it could've been.

Mr E -> RE: In the name of God!!! (22/5/2008 4:28:49 PM)
Just seen it. Overall rather dissapointing I suppose but it's not a bad film at all and I don't think it's fair to compare it to the piece of shit Phantom Menace. The action scenes were all very well done and Harrison Ford just about pulls it off but like many have mentioned there is no sense of peril! I loved the edge-of-your-seat tension and suspense of the previous three films and it was sadly lacking in this latest installment. Just not scary enough really. I thought the CGI was generally fine but it was just those silly gophers at the beginning of the film that looked a bit too cartoony stupid to me. There seemed to be too many characters tagging along with Indy this time, Shia Labeouf was very good and made a good sidekick but Ray Winstone and John Hurt didn't seem necessary and Marion especially didn't need bringing back in. Cate Blanchett's performance was fine but her character probably ended up being the least effective baddie of the series. I am still undecided about the climax of the film to be honest. Having said all that it is still an enjoyable viewing experience and if you want a good bit of silly escapism go and see it. I suppose at the end of the day it just didn't really need to be made and The Last Crusade made the perfect end to the series. 3 stars.

kenada_woo -> RE: In the name of God!!! (22/5/2008 4:32:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: James2183 I thought Spielberg said that he admires what shooting in HD has done for cinema and CGI, but would be the last person to shoot on 35mm as he loves it too much. Was Indy shot in HD? No, he did say that he'll eventually use it someday because that's where film is heading.

Dave B -> RE: In the name of God!!! (22/5/2008 4:35:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kenada_woo But they've both got good track records. Minus Shawshank and The Green Mile, what else has Darabont substancially written original? Daranbont has been a script doctor and had lots of screenplays rejected in favour for others (MI3 for example), who's to say they werent very good coming from a man who started a career out as a hack horror writer? Like I said, I aint seen the film but I'll judge it for what it is not for what it could've been. I remember Nightmare of Elm Street 3 being pretty good and although I've yet to see it I've heard good things about The Mist. I have problems with most of the films that have been written by Koepp, with the exception of Jurassic Park. He's not an awful writer but it's usually down to a brilliant director saving his script. Take Panic Room, Mission Impossible and War of the Worlds for example. None of those are particually good screenplays but the direction of the films makes them enjoyable. David Fincher had to pull out every visual trick in the book to get something out of the screenplay for Panic Room.

crimebusterofthesea -> Oh dear.. (22/5/2008 4:36:16 PM)
Too many characters, all poorly drawn.Kind of fun, not as much as the previous filmsthough.Very poor CGI and used more often than we were led to believe.Indy also takes a backseat to Mutt too much. Promising start, dipped in the middle, poor ending. Very disappointing. Bring on The Dark Knight.

JRockwell -> RE: Oh dear.. (22/5/2008 4:47:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: crimebusterofthesea Bring on The Dark Knight. Best point of the entire thread. There is way too much inane rambling by people desperate to defend two grown men who don't need defending and Empire not having the guts to call a spade a steaming pile of shite. Jame's admission that's he's defended Lucas too many times was ammusing too.

James2183 -> RE: Oh dear.. (22/5/2008 4:47:58 PM)
Dave B I have just read your review and it would seem I agree with you completely. What was the vibe at the midnight screening like? After seeing it today I am glad I made the choice to stick with the Champions League final.

Acrobat -> RE: Oh dear.. (22/5/2008 4:50:59 PM)
As has been mentioned, way too many characters tagging along. Marion brought back for nostalgia and not much else. Shia LeBouf was great which surprised me, I've never really liked him in anything before but Mutt was a welcome surprise. Decent enough action but a less than impressive plot, shallow villains, bad ending, that and it just felt so damn samey, there was no wow factor. They shouldn't have made this film unless the idea behind it was dynamite. It wasn't. Sadly I wouldn't recommend it, just remember them riding off into the sunset at the end of Last Crusade instead.

Page: << < prev 5 6 [7] 8 9 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.03125