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

[Xavier]

https://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Culture/review-harrison-ford-working-deep-true-sees-indy/story?id=100484137
 

Travers said it best: Respect

[Hatebox]

Can you imagine how incomprehensible a Verbinski Indy movie would be? I’ve never seen such large films care so little about their plot as the Pirates sequels…

[35MM-18]

4 minutes ago, Hatebox said:

Can you imagine how incomprehensible a Verbinski Indy movie would be? I’ve never seen such large films care so little about their plot as the Pirates sequels…

A Verbinski Indy movie would've probably cost more than this one too, given the budget overruns of both his Pirates sequels and The Lone Ranger, and I've heard Lucasfilm hasn't been the best in managing their production costs either lately. 

[dudalb]

1 hour ago, 35MM-18 said:

A Verbinski Indy movie would've probably cost more than this one too, given the budget overruns of both his Pirates sequels and The Lone Ranger, and I've heard Lucasfilm hasn't been the best in managing their production costs either lately. 

That is one of the reasons Verbinski has not made many big budget films recently. He seems unable to stick to a budget.

ANyway, I don't get the worship for him. He has made some good movies, but  also molre then his share of turkeys.

[BestPicturePlutoNash]

Beyond boring. And the de-aging here is as bad as any of the CGI in The Flash

[TheDude391]

5 hours ago, SpiderByte said:

Huh. Wonder why this is the case, since Disney's owned Indiana Jones for a decade now. Maybe some lingering contract hitch?

And they didnt do the mountain fade in!!! WTF

[TheDude391]

2 hours ago, 35MM-18 said:

A Verbinski Indy movie would've probably cost more than this one too, given the budget overruns of both his Pirates sequels and The Lone Ranger, and I've heard Lucasfilm hasn't been the best in managing their production costs either lately. 

Well, this Indy film cost $300m and looks awful visually, not a single good set piece. Verbinski's would've been a flop at that budget too but at least it would've LOOKED like $300m!

[OncomingStorm93]

I will forever be a defender of Dead Man's Chest, and At World's End over most of today's blockbusters. Yes, there's significant story issues across both films, and wildly inconsistent characterizations, but Verbinski's direction remains top-tier, the preformances all Stellan- I mean stellar. And the CGI remains some of the best the industry has ever created, even 15+ years later. In fact, I kind of find it weird we don't talk/hear much about ILM anymore. I know they're still chugging along, but Weta has been mom's favorite child over the past decade, and on the flip side of the convo has been the terrible VFX on tentpoles from overworked artists.

[Belakor]

I agree with this video 100%

[Webslinger]

I would have loved to see a Gore Verbinski Indy. Well, really, I would have loved to see a Spielberg Indy, but if Spielberg had to be replaced, Verbinski would have been an intriguing choice. Say what you will about some of the scripts he has worked with, but his eye for elaborate, bonkers action sequences could have been an interesting fit for this material.

[dudalb]

The More I think about Verbinski, the more I  think he is a Journseyman director which is not a put down.

Problem I have with a lot of his films are he always does actoin scenes great ..(or he kinws which Second Unit men to hire to get great action scenes) but at times his films drag between the set pieces. The marks of a really godo director is he keeps you interested even when threre are not big action scenes going on.

 

 

Edited June 30, 2023 by dudalb

[dudalb]

29 minutes ago, Webslinger said:

I would have loved to see a Gore Verbinski Indy. Well, really, I would have loved to see a Spielberg Indy, but if Spielberg had to be replaced, Verbinski would have been an intriguing choice. Say what you will about some of the scripts he has worked with, but his eye for elaborate, bonkers action sequences could have been an interesting fit for this material.

SPielberg weas not replaced, he choose not to direct the film..

[dudalb]

1 hour ago, OncomingStorm93 said:

I will forever be a defender of Dead Man's Chest, and At World's End over most of today's blockbusters. Yes, there's significant story issues across both films, and wildly inconsistent characterizations, but Verbinski's direction remains top-tier, the preformances all Stellan- I mean stellar. And the CGI remains some of the best the industry has ever created, even 15+ years later. In fact, I kind of find it weird we don't talk/hear much about ILM anymore. I know they're still chugging along, but Weta has been mom's favorite child over the past decade, and on the flip side of the convo has been the terrible VFX on tentpoles from overworked artists.

ILM has pretty much lost it dominence of the VFX world. You now have several companies which do work as good as ILM; even some Disney produced flims use other companie as the main effects house.s. And there is so much subcontracting for films that it makes sort of hard to tell which company was respinsible for which  sequence.

 

 

[Joel M]

Verbinsky is a true auteur, Hackgold wishes.

[von Kenni]

Imagine if they would have left this all to the ending of the Last Crusade where Indy & friends ride into the sunset. What a classic and poetic ending!

 

...but no. Everything needs to ultimately be dragged down and KK at LucasArts has been master in doing so, deconstructing past heros and making all of them into bitter, weak, and broken old men who need to be overshadowed by a better more modern female protagonist. That's a pretty nihilistic and even vindictive worldview but seen over and over again.

 

Imagine if they would have done Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis into a movie (and maybe 15-20 years ago). They could have even used straight up the video game plot from 1992. Atlantis is such a fascinating myth that has enticed generations. That with Indy!

 

And make it by acknowledging Indy getting older but in a respectful manner, introducing a new generation like in Top Gun Maverick without tearing down a past hero but acknowledging lessons of life and difficulties on how to transfer them to new generations.

 

That with a true Indy loving capable director (maybe Mangold without KK) and writers with Spielberg and Lucas as executive producers.

 

What a movie that would have been!

[FunkMiller]

2 minutes ago, von Kenni said:

Imagine if they would have left this all to the ending of the Last Crusade where Indy & friends ride into the sunset. What a classic and poetic ending!

 

...but no. Everything needs to ultimately be dragged down and KK at LucasArts has been master in doing so, deconstructing past heros and making all of them into bitter, weak, and broken old men who need to be overshadowed by a better more modern female protagonist. That's a pretty nihilistic and even vindictive worldview but seen over and over again.

 

Imagine if they would have done Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis into a movie (and maybe 15-20 years ago). They could have even used straight up the video game plot from 1992. Atlantis is such a fascinating myth that has enticed generations. That with Indy!

 

And make it by acknowledging Indy getting older but in a respectful manner, introducing a new generation like in Top Gun Maverick without tearing down a past hero but acknowledging lessons of life and difficulties on how to transfer them to new generations.

 

That with a true Indy loving capable director (maybe Mangold without KK) and writers with Spielberg and Lucas as executive producers.

 

What a movie that would have been!

Baffled why they never did Indiana Jones and son properly. Call him Illinois Jones, or something. They could have easily set up a successful continuation of the IP with a new actor and a new(ish) character.

[ListenHunnyUrOver]

12 minutes ago, FunkMiller said:

Baffled why they never did Indiana Jones and son properly. Call him Illinois Jones, or something. They could have easily set up a successful continuation of the IP with a new actor and a new(ish) character.

Older audiences would’ve wanted Ford though. 

[AdamKendall]

This doesn't really bother me for this specific movie as I'm not really interested in seeing it, but I'm absolutely annoyed at this more recent trend of studios seemingly approving trades to just put out spoilers or in the case of Indiana Jones put out the stuff like 'who's involved in the last scene' ... or 'stuff with his Fedora'. 

 

I mean, it's Variety, Hollywood Reporter, EW doing this so it's obviously stuff studio wants out, but just no fucking respect for viewers to do this shit the day a movie opens.

Edited June 30, 2023 by AdamKendall

[dudalb]

35 minutes ago, FunkMiller said:

Baffled why they never did Indiana Jones and son properly. Call him Illinois Jones, or something. They could have easily set up a successful continuation of the IP with a new actor and a new(ish) character.

Becuase Ford's Indy is so beloved a charecter.

Thye tried an Fordless Indians Jones idea in Young Indy, and it did not sucees.

Hate to say it, buy you just don't get the iconic appeal of Indiana Jones.

In the end, the series is about Iniana Jones, and I just don't  think a "Son of Indy : would work. Put the money in a Uncharted Reboot, or another attempt at reviving Tomb Raider.

Only way to keep this franchise laive in movie would be to recast Indy, and put it in the 30s or 40's where I think it really belongs. And, of course, a recast Indy did no work with Young Idiana Jones>

Edited June 30, 2023 by dudalb

[CoolioD1]

Just got back. Consistently almost fun. I suppose the worst thing about it is that i rewatched all the other ones through the week and yeah the set pieces just don't hold a candle. even compared to crystul skull honestly. Thinking an Indiana Jones without Spielberg is a worse idea than an Indiana Jones without Ford.