Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny | June 30 2023 | Very mixed reviews out of Cannes

[WittyUsername]

I think there’s an argument to be made that Disney films feel more homogeneous than films from the other major studios. That has sort of begun to change after they acquired 20th Century Fox. 

Edited June 29, 2023 by WittyUsername

[ZattMurdock]

3 minutes ago, MightyDargon said:

You're awfully uppity for someone with no financial stake in any of this. I can like and dislike what I please.

I like film. I like discussing film. I like good film discussions without hypocrisy, and like I’ve said on the post, yes you can like what you like. That’s for all of us, but don’t be surprised when someone points out the hypocrisy of something you say, not a dig, but since you were to the point of randomly mentioning the other day out of nowhere, I thought it was fair game to quote you and point that out.

[ThomasNicole]

15 minutes ago, MightyDargon said:

You're awfully uppity for someone with no financial stake in any of this. I can like and dislike what I please.

Sure you can, but it’s funny to have a problem with how this movie is only a product of nostalgia and defend other movies that follow the same logic.

 

All this movies come from the same industry ideology, you can like some and dislike others, but still recognize that in the end they’re all the same so the problem of why you dislike this idea have less to do with being nostalgia only and more that this specific nostalgic trip doesn’t have emotional effect on you

Edited June 29, 2023 by ThomasNicole

[wildphantom]

The reality of the situation is it seems Disney took too long to make this movie. Probably ten years too long, for it to make a big splash at the box office. That is what it is.  If the audience who will enjoy it don’t show up - then, ok. I get it. 
 

But….I’m at peace as an age old Indy fan that at least we got one more good Indiana Jones movie to enjoy.  It would be worse if it financially tanked and the film sucked. 
 

I hope those that will feast on its inevitably disappointing figures remember that the film itself is what mattered to people like me. Try and separate the two if you can, whilst rightly analysing why this isn’t going to make what it should have. 

[Jonwo]

24 minutes ago, wildphantom said:

The reality of the situation is it seems Disney took too long to make this movie. Probably ten years too long, for it to make a big splash at the box office. That is what it is.  If the audience who will enjoy it don’t show up - then, ok. I get it. 
 

But….I’m at peace as an age old Indy fan that at least we got one more good Indiana Jones movie to enjoy.  It would be worse if it financially tanked and the film sucked. 
 

I hope those that will feast on its inevitably disappointing figures remember that the film itself is what mattered to people like me. Try and separate the two if you can, whilst rightly analysing why this isn’t going to make what it should have. 

I suspect Disney didn't really want to make it, the priority for them when they bought Lucasfilm was new Star Wars films. 

 

 

 

[XXRDJisDoctorDoom]

Looking over the numbers in the tracking thread, there’s at least a non-zero shot that Indy 5 opens below $40M domestically. We will see how walkups go but right now I’m thinking $47-55M.

[TwoMisfits]

2 hours ago, Cmasterclay said:

I actually felt some hope for this to sprout good legs but seeing the final sale numbers and the Europe numbers the writing is on the wall. It'll still top the Flash but Transformers is dubious.

 

Of course, it cost way more than both, so the biggest bomb of the year contest is still in play...

[Xavier]

It's crazy to think that Indy 5 was at one time considered to top the summer box office. I don't know what the hell happened, but it seems people liked... Super Mario more than spending some time with a cinematic legend...

 

There's irrational hate here, it's not only that they will not see it, they want it to actually bomb. It makes no sense to me, not coming from people who follow other (and much more cookie cutter) franchises anyway. And the argument about cynical cash grab and whatnot? Pleeeease, this is not a Yorgos Lanthimos movie, it's blockbuster film making...

Edited June 29, 2023 by Xavier

[ZattMurdock]

 

[ZattMurdock]

 

[Maggie]

Would a James Bond with an 80 yo Daniel Craig light the BO on fire, especially after a badly received predecessor? I am not ageist, i was in @Brainbug's club, but people are not buying it

[ListenHunnyUrOver]

3 hours ago, sabrecmc said:

Pretty much all major movies are cynical cash grabs.  No studio is out there making "passion projects" for "the sake of art".  Of course, this is a cash grab. Take my money!  I love Harrison. I'm looking forward to seeing one more ride with Indy. Yay for older actors and actresses getting to do things like this. As long as I'm entertained for a couple hours, I got my money's worth.

I think studios used to be better at making their cash grabs look like fun, and found ways to still make them feel essential. 

[CoolioD1]

2 minutes ago, Maggie said:

Would a James Bond with an 80 yo Daniel Craig light the BO on fire, especially after a badly received predecessor? I am not ageist, i was in @Brainbug's club, but people are not buying it

It's been said before but both James Bond and Indiana Jones are just wish fulfilment characters and it becomes a little harder when you're worried dude is gonna break his hip in every action scene.

[sabrecmc]

2 minutes ago, ListenHunnyUrOver said:

I think studios used to be better at making their cash grabs look like fun, and found ways to still make them feel essential. 

We have very different memories or impressions of the movies coming out in the 1980s-present lol.  I would not describe most as essential in any way.

[LegionWrex]

53 minutes ago, Jonwo said:

I suspect Disney didn't really want to make it, the priority for them when they bought Lucasfilm was new Star Wars films. 

 

 

 

Considering the way the Lucasfilm deal worked, all future Indy films would still have "financial participation" from Paramount Pictures cause of the first four films so in essence, Paramount would profit from all future Indy films while having to do nothing.

 

Not surprising Disney isn't too keen on making more of these.

[ListenHunnyUrOver]

9 minutes ago, sabrecmc said:

We have very different memories or impressions of the movies coming out in the 1980s-present lol.  I would not describe most as essential in any way.

Maybe the word I’m looking for is fun. Movies in the 1980s-2013 looked a lot more fun to me. The marketing material for Disney’s Solo and Indy 5 have given me the impression of them being chores to sit through.

[Avatree]

1 hour ago, XXRkham Asylum said:

Looking over the numbers in the tracking thread, there’s at least a non-zero shot that Indy 5 opens below $40M domestically. We will see how walkups go but right now I’m thinking $47-55M.

literally impossible to open sub 40m.

[ZeroHour]

20 minutes ago, CoolioD1 said:

It's been said before but both James Bond and Indiana Jones are just wish fulfilment characters and it becomes a little harder when you're worried dude is gonna break his hip in every action scene.

The James Bond comparison is interesting because from the looks of it, at least in America, this movie is looking to open very similar to NTTD. Pretty similar situations really, both movies come after a previous film that audiences disliked, both marketed as big "final adventure" type films for their respective stars, both have received lukewarm "at least it's better than the last one" reviews (though NTTD obviously has a much higher RT score), and both appear to be characters and franchises that mean absolutely nothing to American Gen Z.

 

James Bond at least is still big internationally, whereas it's looking like overseas is not going to save this film. But this is probably less of an issue with Harrison Ford's age and more that it's a franchise that's run it's course, like with Bond in America, or something like Terminator. The classics will always be the classics, but some of these franchises just can't pull in the young diverse audiences necessary to make movies a hit in the post-covid theatrical world, at least domestically.

[ListenHunnyUrOver]

5 hours ago, JimmyB said:

hmm, If i'm remembering right she loved The Flash and hated Mario. But, after seeing the movie I kinda feel the same as her. The movie is okay. It felt soulless (not sure if thats the right word) like something was missing. The wit and charm of the first 3 were missing IMO.  It didn't feel like it earned the ending. Hmmm, i love the first 3 movies and this was better than Crystal Skull but not much better.

Thoughts on her full review? 

[Bob Train]

56 minutes ago, Xavier said:

It's crazy to think that Indy 5 was at one time considered to top the summer box office. I don't know what the hell happened, but it seems people liked... Super Mario more than spending some time with a cinematic legend...

 

There's irrational hate here, it's not only that they will not see it, they want it to actually bomb. It makes no sense to me, not coming from people who follow other (and much more cookie cutter) franchises anyway. And the argument about cynical cash grab and whatnot? Pleeeease, this is not a Yorgos Lanthimos movie, it's blockbuster film making...

Everyone here wanted Transformers and Fast X to flop because they are "tired franchises" or "unoriginal". But say that you wanted Mermaid Indy 5 or Flash to flop because they are unoriginal and tired franchises and you get crucified.

 

Curious.