I don't have to walk on the surface of the sun to know it's hot. I take in loads of data and collate it and then offer an opinion based on it all. That it doesn't comport to your viewpoint doesn't mean it's not valid or even wrong.
I'm sure you don't believe I've done the research or looked at various viewpoints. I'm quite certain I've done more of that about this movie than you have.
But what it means to most of us is your opinion is meaningless. If you haven’t seen it I don’t care even one iota about your opinion. Even less when you rant against something you’ve never seen. I get your viewpoint that you don’t care for a direction they’ve decided to take, but that doesn’t mean you possess a scintilla of credibility about how good or bad the actual product is. You just don’t like the choices they made - and even then your dislike is only conceptually because you don’t know firsthand anything about how those choices are presented, created or how they actual impact the viewer.
But what it means to most of us is your opinion is meaningless. If you haven’t seen it I don’t care even one iota about your opinion. Even less when you rant against something you’ve never seen. I get your viewpoint that you don’t care for a direction they’ve decided to take, but that doesn’t mean you possess a scintilla of credibility about how good or bad the actual product is. You just don’t like the choices they made - and even then your dislike is only conceptually because you don’t know firsthand anything about how those choices are presented, created or how they actual impact the viewer.
Yup, even as non-movie watchers (much to my chagrin) my boys knew Star Wars. They knew the characters. Bought the toys. Watched parts of the movies. They couldn’t sit through 20 minutes of Raiders (which saddened me). I would say 1 in 5 of their friends have seen it, much less enjoyed it.
If he doesn’t like the direction and doesn’t think he’ll like it, then fine. What I don’t like is the arrogance in which the opinion was presented. “I’ve spent more time researching this than you’ll ever know” is a huge red flag to me.
If he doesn’t like the direction and doesn’t think he’ll like it, then fine. What I don’t like is the arrogance in which the opinion was presented. “I’ve spent more time researching this than you’ll ever know” is a huge red flag to me.
It’s just weird to me say “it’s going to suck” or “it sucks” while admitting you haven’t seen it nor will you watch it. I get it if you say “I don’t like what I’m hearing” or “I would ha yes but if they did ______,” but that’s not his stance.
In fact, it kinda flabbergasts me when people take any of extreme stances without any firsthand knowledge. Like the sequel diatribes. What if the sequel is better than the first? Or remakes? Who knows, they could be vastly superior to the original or just stand on their own merits. If you don’t think you want to see it, so be it. But to blanket pan the concept seems narrow minded to me.
But what it means to most of us is your opinion is meaningless. If you haven’t seen it I don’t care even one iota about your opinion. Even less when you rant against something you’ve never seen. I get your viewpoint that you don’t care for a direction they’ve decided to take, but that doesn’t mean you possess a scintilla of credibility about how good or bad the actual product is. You just don’t like the choices they made - and even then your dislike is only conceptually because you don’t know firsthand anything about how those choices are presented, created or how they actual impact the viewer.
Eh, I kinda see his point. Nobody had to see Crystal Skull, for instance, to know it was a giant steaming turd. Sadly, I did see it to confirm it. The whole "You didn't waste your money so never comment on it" stance is stale. I get he went to extremes, so I only kinda see his point.
Eh, I kinda see his point. Nobody had to see Crystal Skull, for instance, to know it was a giant steaming turd. Sadly, I did see it to confirm it. The whole "You didn't waste your money so never comment on it" stance is stale. I get he went to extremes, so I only kinda see his point.
Yeah, but he’s literally making up reasons that don’t exist to hate on and refuse to see the movie, injecting some weird political bent to the reason… for reasons.
Yeah, but he’s literally making up reasons that don’t exist to hate on and refuse to see the movie, injecting some weird political bent to the reason… for reasons.
Yeah, but he’s literally making up reasons that don’t exist to hate on and refuse to see the movie, injecting some weird political bent to the reason… for reasons.
Just got back. Fun movie and pretty fitting end. The family really enjoyed it and thought it was pretty good. Not 3rd movie great by any stretch but so much better than Crystal Skull.
Just got back. Fun movie and pretty fitting end. The family really enjoyed it and thought it was pretty good. Not 3rd movie great by any stretch but so much better than Crystal Skull.
It’s interesting…. I think that the early Cannes reviews were a blessing and a curse. Definite curse at the box office, but blessing for most who actually saw it because it dropped expectations to the point that everyone I know (save my buddy who hates everything) left the theater pleasantly surprised, if not outright happy.
Crystal Skull being beyond dogcrap was probably blessing and a curse for the same reasons with this movie.
This review from the Hollywood Reporter’s ranking article pretty perfectly sums up my thoughts while also pitching what would have been a really fun Back To The Future 2/Endgame-esque ending.
Spoilers at the very end (don’t know how to spoiler box them)
“Not as bad as the Cannes buzz suggested, yet not nearly as good as fans had hoped, Dial of Destiny represents a clear step up from Crystal Skull while still ranking miles below the original trilogy. The de-aged Indy opening sequence is surprisingly decent (Ford’s gravely voice couldn’t be de-aged as well as his face) and the film effectively shuffles along for most of its run, with Phoebe Waller-Bridge bringing some bright energy as Indy’s goddaughter Helena Shaw and Mads Mikkelsen ever-watchable as villain Jürgen Voller. Ford is compelling when he’s given something to do, though Indy also feels like a frustratingly passive character at times. Then comes the derailment:
*****SPOILERS AFTER THIS*******
After two hours of teasing the idea of Indiana Jones traveling back in time, the payoff is stupefying and disappointing. Instead of revisiting, for instance, a moment in Indy’s storied past — it’s so easy to imagine Voller wanting to use the Dial to get the Ark of the Covenant during Indy’s Raiders adventure, or the Holy Grail during Last Crusade, to accomplish his goal of helping the Nazis win World War II — we instead are transported to an ancient Roman battle the audience doesn’t care about. Even Voller’s stated plan of returning to 1939 is more exciting than what the film did instead. Ultimately, Indy is left in a fine enough place, yet one wishes the filmmakers could use a Dial of Destiny to go back and rework the film’s third act.
Kinda over done at this point coming on the heels of Endgame but would have still been fun. And they wouldn’t have had to undo anything Indiana did in Raiders. Just would have had to stop Mads from succeeding where the other Nazis failed. Also, if they did that with Raiders and Indy could have seen young Indy with Marion, would have been the perfect lead in to really hammer home the emotional epilogue.
This review from the Hollywood Reporter’s ranking article pretty perfectly sums up my thoughts while also pitching what would have been a really fun Back To The Future 2/Endgame-esque ending.
Spoilers at the very end (don’t know how to spoiler box them)
“Not as bad as the Cannes buzz suggested, yet not nearly as good as fans had hoped, Dial of Destiny represents a clear step up from Crystal Skull while still ranking miles below the original trilogy. The de-aged Indy opening sequence is surprisingly decent (Ford’s gravely voice couldn’t be de-aged as well as his face) and the film effectively shuffles along for most of its run, with Phoebe Waller-Bridge bringing some bright energy as Indy’s goddaughter Helena Shaw and Mads Mikkelsen ever-watchable as villain Jürgen Voller. Ford is compelling when he’s given something to do, though Indy also feels like a frustratingly passive character at times. Then comes the derailment:
*****SPOILERS AFTER THIS*******
After two hours of teasing the idea of Indiana Jones traveling back in time, the payoff is stupefying and disappointing. Instead of revisiting, for instance, a moment in Indy’s storied past — it’s so easy to imagine Voller wanting to use the Dial to get the Ark of the Covenant during Indy’s Raiders adventure, or the Holy Grail during Last Crusade, to accomplish his goal of helping the Nazis win World War II — we instead are transported to an ancient Roman battle the audience doesn’t care about. Even Voller’s stated plan of returning to 1939 is more exciting than what the film did instead. Ultimately, Indy is left in a fine enough place, yet one wishes the filmmakers could use a Dial of Destiny to go back and rework the film’s third act.
Kinda over done at this point coming on the heels of Endgame but would have still been fun. And they wouldn’t have had to undo anything Indiana did in Raiders. Just would have had to stop Mads from succeeding where the other Nazis failed. Also, if they did that with Raiders and Indy could have seen young Indy with Marion, would have been the perfect lead in to really hammer home the emotional epilogue.
Eh, I kinda see his point. Nobody had to see Crystal Skull, for instance, to know it was a giant steaming turd. Sadly, I did see it to confirm it. The whole "You didn't waste your money so never comment on it" stance is stale. I get he went to extremes, so I only kinda see his point.
I guess I'm the only one here that liked CS. I've watched it a couple of times like all of the Indy movies. My least favorite is ToD. But I'm easily entertained. I'm a Cardinal fan for crying out loud.
I guess I'm the only one here that liked CS. I've watched it a couple of times like all of the Indy movies. My least favorite is ToD. But I'm easily entertained. I'm a Cardinal fan for crying out loud.
Oof, wow! I've a huge soft spot for ToD, because it came out in the perfect moment in my childhood. But Crystal Skull...I doubt the new one can be as bad as Crystal Skull
Eh, I kinda see his point. Nobody had to see Crystal Skull, for instance, to know it was a giant steaming turd. Sadly, I did see it to confirm it. The whole "You didn't waste your money so never comment on it" stance is stale. I get he went to extremes, so I only kinda see his point.
This review from the Hollywood Reporter’s ranking article pretty perfectly sums up my thoughts while also pitching what would have been a really fun Back To The Future 2/Endgame-esque ending.
Spoilers at the very end (don’t know how to spoiler box them)
“Not as bad as the Cannes buzz suggested, yet not nearly as good as fans had hoped, Dial of Destiny represents a clear step up from Crystal Skull while still ranking miles below the original trilogy. The de-aged Indy opening sequence is surprisingly decent (Ford’s gravely voice couldn’t be de-aged as well as his face) and the film effectively shuffles along for most of its run, with Phoebe Waller-Bridge bringing some bright energy as Indy’s goddaughter Helena Shaw and Mads Mikkelsen ever-watchable as villain Jürgen Voller. Ford is compelling when he’s given something to do, though Indy also feels like a frustratingly passive character at times. Then comes the derailment:
*****SPOILERS AFTER THIS*******
After two hours of teasing the idea of Indiana Jones traveling back in time, the payoff is stupefying and disappointing. Instead of revisiting, for instance, a moment in Indy’s storied past — it’s so easy to imagine Voller wanting to use the Dial to get the Ark of the Covenant during Indy’s Raiders adventure, or the Holy Grail during Last Crusade, to accomplish his goal of helping the Nazis win World War II — we instead are transported to an ancient Roman battle the audience doesn’t care about. Even Voller’s stated plan of returning to 1939 is more exciting than what the film did instead. Ultimately, Indy is left in a fine enough place, yet one wishes the filmmakers could use a Dial of Destiny to go back and rework the film’s third act.
Kinda over done at this point coming on the heels of Endgame but would have still been fun. And they wouldn’t have had to undo anything Indiana did in Raiders. Just would have had to stop Mads from succeeding where the other Nazis failed. Also, if they did that with Raiders and Indy could have seen young Indy with Marion, would have been the perfect lead in to really hammer home the emotional epilogue.
Actually this guys opinion just confirms to me they did the right thing.
The second thy included time travel as component of this story they 100% could not do anything different than they did IMO. I actually really liked that they explained it as a way for Archimedes to get back to his own moment in time. If not, it opened the story up to undoing everything that came before it which is what fans feared. There were rumors ripe with them erasing Indy from the timeline to reboot the franchise. To me it was the only option in the story to protect the legacy of Indy. Could they have gone with a different story? Sure but once this became about time travel, it could have opened Pandora’s box. Indy’s speech on the boat about what he would do if he could pick a point in time to change to me was a perfect and yet tragic reality that it wasn’t possible by the end of the movie.
The further I get from Dial Of Destiny, the more I like it. Mostly because Ford is really giving a great old man Indy performance. Something that has depth instead of the cartoonish performance and arc with an awful character like Mutt in Crystal Skull. In that movie, I felt like Ford was playing Indiana Jones.
In this knew, I thought he just was Indiana Jones.
