>>65085464 maybe because it had aliens in it? also Shia wasn't hip with the normies back then, the CGI was whack, and it simply didn't live up to the other films (excluding temple because im not personally a fan of that one)
>>65085988 How are aliens any different than biblical occult shit and ancient cursed artifacts? That doesn't make any sense. Aliens fit right into the Indiana Jones world. The CGI was fine for the era it came out in
>>65086171 It's no Raiders but it's not that bad. If you think you're a fan of Indy movies and hate this one then it's just proof you can't watch popular franchise movies without bringing internet hive mind into your opinion. Bruh.
>>65086070 >>65086105 i think the fact is that the other mcguffins had a sort of mystical biblical/spiritual vibe to them
>ark of the covenant- contained the original ten commandments >those stones from temple of doom- used to worship hindu gods >the holy grail- it's the holy grail >crystal skull- ancient alien skull with mayan origin
the skull seems to sci-fi. i understand that's what they were going for >homage to stuff like war of the worlds but it doesn't fit into indiana jones.
>>65085235 >be me >love this movie when it comes out >buy friend $50 videogame based off this movie for his birthday >feel kind of bad because mom has to spend so much money on it >excited to play it with my friend next time I see him after birthday party >next time I go over to his house I ask if he wants to play it and he says he traded it in for a different game >tfw nobody likes Indiana Jones like you do
>>65086364 That's an argument you can make, but in the context of a Spielberg blockbuster adventure series isn't that being a little autistic? It's not like Indiana went into space and started firing blasters.
>>65086364 How does Indy finding a mayan artifact not fit in with that theme? Mayan artifacts do have religious origins and themes as well do they not? Plus worship of alien beings is a type of religion. There is some evidence of it in ancient times.
>>65086306 >i didn't like the story >acting wasn't the best "part time" >you could argue the "going with the masses" point but i agreed with the plinkett review when he brought up the fact that this seemed like a nerfed indiana jones movie. like one guy gets shot on camera >it seems like they shoehorned in a lot of old references just so people would remember they're watching indiana jones (ark in the warehouse, marion ravenwood, etc) >>65086339 it's definitely not the worst movie ever made, but it's by far the worst indy movie and it's not a fun movie to watch in general. also >can't watch popular franchise movies without bringing internet hive mind into your opinion i have an opinion that seems to go with what lots of other people think, sue me
>>65086504 him finding a mayan artifact is fine, but having that mayan artifact turn into an actual alien and flying away in an actual spaceship doesn't seem to fit too well in an indiana jones movie >>65086441 i guess i am being a little nitpicky, but after decades of sitting on this franchise, i feel like they could have made a far better story
>>65086590 >i didn't like the story Fair enough >acting wasn't the best "part time" Disagree >you could argue the "going with the masses" point but i agreed with the plinkett review when he brought up the fact that this seemed like a nerfed indiana jones movie. like one guy gets shot on camera Meh. I think that's a weak point. >it seems like they shoehorned in a lot of old references just so people would remember they're watching indiana jones (ark in the warehouse, marion ravenwood, etc) I didn't think that was all that bad. It seemed to fit at the time.
>>65086679 As opposed to having a guys face melt off after he touched the ark? I don't think that is too big of a stretch.
>>65086648 >WAAAA THEY ARE TRYING TO STIMULATE CONVERSATION ON A FILM INSTEAD OF MEMEING
>>65086750 >WAAAA THEY ARE TRYING TO STIMULATE CONVERSATION ON A FILM INSTEAD OF MEMEING >NOT MEMEING >the OP says "kingdom of the crystal skull is CLEARLY the BEST Indiana Jones movie" You unironically believe this? You're not memeing at all? Like I said, fuck this board.
>>65086679 I think that the fact that they sat on it so long was why is was so difficult to remain true to the style of the series. They were basically trying to make a big budget movie in the 2000s that emulates perfectly a series of movies made in the 1980s that emulate serial adventures from decades before that. All while trying to make it different and updated enough to generate a new fan base. I agree that they could have done better, but when I watch the movie I see a genuine attempt to please everybody AND put a new scifi spin on it to pay homage to what was popular in the 1950s, when the movie is set. There was so much to fuck up and what we got was more than passable in my opinion.
But it wasn't aliens flying away in a spaceship, anon. I've never researched this beyond watching it, but when I first saw this blegh of a movie, the truth was obvious. They weren't aliens. They were "human beings" from another dimension (the space between spaces), which could possibly mean the future (the 4th dimension works that way, look it up), acting as archaeologists. This closes the loop, in a way, turning Indie's time into the history they're exploring. If they were just aliens, why didn't the guy at the end just say "aliens?"
>>65086976 First off, I love all four movies. Temple is my least favorite. Now if you want to prove you're not memeing, explain why you think Crystal Skull is the best one. Then we'll tell you why your opinion is weird.
>>65086939 Are you kidding me? Ancient alien shit that's a couple decades old doesn't count. All the crystal skulls were fake on top of ancient aliens not having the same kind of long history the other artifacts do.
>>65086750 let's look at an indiana jones movie at its roots
>adventure >action >romance
let's compare to the temple of doom, which was widely regarded as the weakest of the series before crystal skull
temple of doom >adventure- takes place somewhere in india and features indiana jones riding on elephants and eating strange foods >action- mine cart chase, guy getting crushed by a rock crushing machine, indy beating the shit out of some devil worshipers >romance- whatsherface and indiana jones have an off and on throughout the movie. also he gets pretty intimate with that one statue
crystal skull >adventure- travel to south america and check out some mayan ruins. pretty alright setting-wise. >action- cgi chase scenes (minus that one with mutt's motorcycle, that was pretty kickass) and minor character deaths >romance- literally nothing unless you include indy and marion getting married at the end
>>65087052 I liked the concept. I liked the family dynamics of the film. I thought it gave Indy more depth as a character. I liked Shia Lebouf I liked the traditional feel of the film blended with the sci fi. It didnt feel like a carbon copy of the originals (which i also like) I also felt like it didnt pander a ton. Just the right amount of old references that make you feel like the characters have history.
>>65087220 well it isn't very indiana jones level romantic. >in raiders it's heavily implied that indy and marion fuck >in temple of doom indiana jones is sneaking into that one girl's room in the middle of the night >the last crusade "she talks in her sleep" indiana jones romance is at an all time low in crystal skull
>>65087142 Thats a fair assessment. I think the film blended all the variables of the previous indy films well. Id agree about the romance but id counter that instead of the romance they went with the family dynamics and father son route and succeeded.
>>65087216 >i liked the concept interesting concept but flawed execution >i liked the family dynamics of the film i agree that i liked the idea of indy having a son. although depth wasn't really something i was looking for in indiana jones, it was okay >i liked shia lebouf he's alright >i like the traditional feel i felt 0% traditional feeling >blended with the sci fi aliens and sci fi like that never seemed to be a major part of the indiana jones world >doesn't feel like a carbon copy of the originals after a few decades i feel like it would have payed off a little more. i'm not talking force awakens/new hope levels of "poetry" but a standard indy plot would have payed off >old references i felt they were a bit shoehorned >characters have history i didn't really care about ox, i felt like i was told to care. same with mac marion felt extremely out of place and it would have been nice if they picked a whole new character so we could see that he'd been busy while we weren't watching his adventures
>>65087541 i mean this guy is indiana jones. he has the easiest pick up line ever "hey babe. i'm indiana jones" the guy has his students all over him and they didn't even know about his adventures /s for real i do agree but the fact that he's so old and still running around doing the same acrobatics and action bother me
>>65087820 Opinion is opinion, so I won't argue with you. But on an objective basis I'm pretty sure Raiders has more going for it, due to how it reflected past adventure films and opened doors for new ones. Hence, this is why people find your opinion weird.
>>65088056 Oh yeah, I think it's a great movie. That south park episode is just playing on the fact that everyone hated it. But I'm pretty sure that everyone that hated it was indeed someone with the mind of a fourth grader that "loves" Indiana Jones even though they remember nothing of the series except the boulder chase and the Indian dude pulling hearts out of peoples chests from pop culture references.
>>65088435 Anthony motherfucking Ingruber. And before people start talking shit about how it's just an impression, he's literally an actor and has already played a younger version of Harrison Ford in Age of Adeline and he fucking nailed it alongside having Ford's praise and approval
I agree with OP. Even Harrison Ford agree with us. In a recent interview he stated that the Kingdom of the crystal skull is his favorite and best Indiana Jones' movie, followed closely by the Raiders of the lost ark.
>inb4 OP and other retards think Indiana fucking Jones is wrong
>But the crystal skull alien stuff is fantasy, too! No it isn't. It's scifi. Spielberg and Lucas even said the tone of the movie was influenced by cheesy 50s scifi, and no like 30s adventure serials like the originals were. They switched genres with Crystal Skull, and it's understandable that some people would have a problem with that.
>But alien stuff has ties to old stories, and people take it seriously, too! The crystals skulls are fakes, and Ancient Aliens is basically a fictional show. And yes, this matters. Indiana Jones is supposed to be an archaeologist, and while the first movies are about religious artifacts that don't exist, they have long histories behind them and cultural precedent that an archaeologist could look for them. Crystal skulls don't. If you know anything about archaeology, and the connections the field sometimes has to religious traditions, thinking crystal skills are on par with the holy grail is ridiculous. Again, it's understandable that people would have a problem with this.
The MacGuffin of the movie is basically antithetical to what the franchise had previously established, and it changed the movie. If that doesn't bother you, cool, but it's valid criticism.
The biggest tragedy of this movie is that they could have made it in '95 but after Independence Day came out Spielberg didn't want to do another movie about aliens and Lucas wouldn't greenlight the movie without them so the project just languished in development hell until Spielberg caved in again.
>>65089620 >Spielberg and Lucas even said the tone of the movie was influenced by cheesy 50s scifi, and no like 30s adventure serials like the originals were. Well then Spielberg and Lucas don't know what they're talking. This movie looked nothing (0) like 50's scifi. There are some changes with the other three, but they mainly have to with the aesthetic of the movie and not the genre (ie practical effects, the explicitness of violence, Ford's face)
I will literally never understand Temple of Doom hate.
I lived in an Indy free bubble for my entire life and just watched the original trilogy last year for the first time and Temple was instantly my favorite.
Crusade got a little too hokey but was still fun because Sean Connery. But man Temple was just a fucking thrill ride the entire way through. I love everything about that movie.
I mean hell that fucking opening. Doing some James Bond shit in a Shanghai Nightclub after a music number. It was campy but you couldn't look away. The bridge scene is GOAT. Short Round is honestly the best Indy companion and I felt a real relationship there in the camp scene. The mine cart chase is still one of the coolest set-pieces.
What I always found so fascinating is that they managed to keep it so campy and fun while also going to some really dark places. Dark doesn't automatically mean better but the fact that the balance was for perfectly found was commendable.
Raiders is solid and safe but I never really felt heart. There was no attachment it was just an adventure to kick Nazi ass which is fine. Crusade is hokey and should have never gone anywhere near Indy's past or origin. Temple took chances while managing to bring that heart and drama into it in a way that worked.
>>65090635 It's a totally different level of acceptance in the world. Lot's of people are christian or hindus. Ancient alien people are this tiny group. There's archaeological evidence for at least the people or places mentioned in various religious texts. Ancient alien shit relies on bad archaeology and misunderstanding the facts of sites. As an archaeologist, that's where I draw the line.
Ancient aliens aren't worth an indiana jones adventure.
>>65090635 >Also the burden of proof is on you not me No it isn't. You're the one claiming that Solutreans believed aliens visited people and depicted it in cave art. You're the one making a claim that goes against all archaeological knowledge, so you should provide some valid evidence to back that up.
In reality, the entire ancient alien line of thinking is very recent, and is influenced by pulp scifi and horror:
There's no way it belongs in the same universe as the ark of the covenant or the holy grail.
>>65090382 >>65090542 While I think "too dark" is a valid criticism, I think it also misses a key difference between Temple and the other two: they had to show why the cult was bad in Temple. The Nazi's being bad is already established in everyone's mind, Indy doesn't need to sneak through Mengele's lab and fight his way out of a concentration camp to show it, everyone already knows that shit.
That said, they probably didn't have to go quite as dark as they did, you could probably drop the actual heart removal and make all the slaves adults, but I like it the way it is.
Aliens, gods, angels, weird people, who cares what they are or if they exist, but those depictions are there and have intrigued archaeologists and anthropologists since the disciplines exist, and if you think the truth about what they are matters you're missing the point for the sake of being the biggest fedora tipper around.
>>65091561 I'm an actual archaeologist, dipnuts, it's my job to know what they actually mean. Because just saying "whelp, could be aliens" is not only wrong and unscientific, it doesn't answer anything about how people actually lived or thought in the past.
>>65091810 It doesnt matter what it was. The idea was an alien artifact. They just chose a crystal skull to represent it. It could have been an alien chimichamga. It doesnt matter what the artifact was. It was based around the legend.
>>65091929 My point is that aliens in general don't have anything to do with archaeological legends.
They just don't fit. Adding scifi to a fantasy story like that doesn't make sense. And it real-word term, it's kind of retarded. I mean, why would Indiana Jones care about going after an artifact he would either either know the real story of or (in the case of the crystal skulls) would know is a twenty year old fake. And, as someone else pointed out earlier, it alienates the audience, because very few people take it seriously.
>The earliest published reference to the skull is the July 1936 issue of the British anthropological journal Man, where it is described as being in the possession of Mr. Sydney Burney, a London art dealer who is said to have owned it since 1933. No mention was made of Mitchell-Hedges. There is documentary evidence that Mitchell-Hedges bought it from Burney in 1944. >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crystal_skull
>>65092321 Yeah, and most people didn't care about it. Even the ones that did apparently didn't link it to aliens in any way. It's easy to imagine someone reading the ark of the covenant and trying to find it in the 1930s. Hell, people actually did. Interest in the crystal skulls is pretty recent.
Think about it like this: if Indiana Jones was an actual adventure serial made in 1938, could you picture him trying to find aliens?
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with the post's information.