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

[Cmasterclay]

Needed to lose about 40 minutes of mediocre action scenes against bad green screen and I would have been much happier.

 

Harrison is fantastic and the emotional core and plots choice they make are all great. There's a really great Indiana Jones story in here. But it gets lost in too much bad direction and noise.

[Xavier]

68% RT score, the highest so far. Boy, Cannes was a huge mistake...

[Zakiyyah6]

2 hours ago, Joel M said:

Verbinsky is a true auteur, Hackgold wishes.

I'm not a huge fan of Mangold all the time but Gore Verbinski's fell off for a reason. The first Pirates is good but the follow ups are just overly expensive set pieces without the heart and soul of the first. He showed that he got lucky with Pirates 1. Gore is not a hack to me but he's not a good director outside of aesthetics either.

[Webslinger]

49 minutes ago, CoolioD1 said:

Thinking an Indiana Jones without Spielberg is a worse idea than an Indiana Jones without Ford.

I haven't seen this installment yet, but I had a similar thought while rewatching the previous four this week. Ford as Indy is obviously iconic, but so much of what makes the franchise work comes down to Spielberg's instincts behind the camera. I'll reserve judgment on Mangold until I see the movie, but it's hard to imagine a tried-and-true journeyman - even one with as many solid films as Mangold - matching up with the dynamism of Steven freaking Spielberg.

[von Kenni]

2 minutes ago, Zakiyyah6 said:

I'm not a huge fan of Mangold all the time but Gore Verbinski's fell off for a reason. The first Pirates is good but the follow ups are just overly expensive set pieces without the heart and soul of the first. He showed that he got lucky with Pirates 1. Gore is not a hack to me but he's not a good director outside of aesthetics either.

 

And a friend of mine who worked at Disney at that time close to the first Pirates production told that it was an absolute mess, the studio thought they have a bomb at their hands, and with some early screenings made huge changes and reshoots to expand Orlando Bloom's role among others... He told that they got lucky with the finished product and a bomb changed into a big win. For Verbinski's role in this, I don't know and we didn't discuss him but it's not as if a director sits on the sidelines...oh, and I remember him talking about the inflated budget too.

[ddddeeee]

I thought it was mostly cute, but the ending really, really got me. I like it all the more I think about it.

 

The deepfake stuff was as awful as ever, though. Stop that nai!

[Joel M]

30 minutes ago, Zakiyyah6 said:

I'm not a huge fan of Mangold all the time but Gore Verbinski's fell off for a reason. The first Pirates is good but the follow ups are just overly expensive set pieces without the heart and soul of the first. He showed that he got lucky with Pirates 1. Gore is not a hack to me but he's not a good director outside of aesthetics either.

 

Yeah agree to disagree on that one. He "fell off" because he had two nuclear bombs in a row. It happens. To me the Pirate sequels have more heart, soul and creativity than 95% of blockbusters that have come out since, and Dead Man's Chest is actually the best of them. Also Gore has other non-Pirate movies that are great.

 

Anyway I also don't think Mangold is a hack. He's a steady hand, it's just that his best movies top out at "pretty good" for me. I sincerely hope the new IJ is at least on that level, I won't be watching until probably after the weekend.

[Boxx93]

Mangold should just stick to medium budget dramas, where he truly excels at. Hell, Logan feels like an indie character driven drama at times instead of a superhero movie and it worked wonderfully. Ford V Ferrari is his best film. Maybe a corporate behind the scenes drama of a real life company in the style of Succession could be a better fit for him.

[CoolioD1]

mangold never topped cop land.

Edited June 30, 2023 by CoolioD1

[JohnnyGossamer]

13 minutes ago, CoolioD1 said:

mangold never topped cop land.

Always a joy to watch Liotta play himself in a movie.

[MovieMan89]

29 minutes ago, Joel M said:

 

Yeah agree to disagree on that one. He "fell off" because he had two nuclear bombs in a row. It happens. To me the Pirate sequels have more heart, soul and creativity than 95% of blockbusters that have come out since, and Dead Man's Chest is actually the best of them. Also Gore has other non-Pirate movies that are great.

 

Anyway I also don't think Mangold is a hack. He's a steady hand, it's just that his best movies top out at "pretty good" for me. I sincerely hope the new IJ is at least on that level, I won't be watching until probably after the weekend.

They are definitely better than their wrap (the first two Pirates sequels) but both are also messy (to say the least about 3). They needed to not be super rushed back to back productions and we probably could have gotten one of the all time great blockbuster trilogies up there with SW OT.  4 and 5 really proved they did in fact have a lot to offer though, bc those films are void of anything memorable. 

[Vector Sigma]

Just saw it. Snooze fest. I could see an A- but I’d say the CinemaScore is a B+ or maybe even a B. Lighthearted movie but not many jokes. Some set pieces were just copied from Raiders. My biggest issue was how disrespectful the female lead was to Indy. I came around to her by the end but this movie is gonna give go woke go broke nerds ammo. This era of deconstructing icons has to stop. 

[MovieMan89]

I have already heard a few people that fall into the over 50 bracket that saw Indy and liked it. So it’s going to have to really bank on that to save any kind of face here, but I still think MI and Opp pretty much kill the chance of legs for it. That budget guarantees massive failure. 

[CoolioD1]

I didn't mind fleabag in this. but then i didn't mind Shia either and a lot of people hated what was going on there. 

[MovieMan89]

Also, didn’t know it was suddenly cool to bash Mangold??? Practically all of his movies before this have been generally well received, so I really don’t think he was the big problem…

[MovieMan89]

1 hour ago, Cmasterclay said:

Needed to lose about 40 minutes of mediocre action scenes against bad green screen and I would have been much happier.

 

Harrison is fantastic and the emotional core and plots choice they make are all great. There's a really great Indiana Jones story in here. But it gets lost in too much bad direction and noise.

Still flabbergasted it’s 2.5hrs. The long blockbuster trend has officially overstayed its welcome. 

[Youngstar]

Did anyone else see this in the deadline article:

Quote

The $250M installment directed by James Mangold and produced by Steven Spielberg and George Lucas

Is this false or were there some tax rebates taken off the budget?

Edited July 1, 2023 by Youngstar

[JohnCarterofEarth]

38 minutes ago, MovieMan89 said:

Still flabbergasted it’s 2.5hrs. The long blockbuster trend has officially overstayed its welcome. 

It’s one of the reasons why budgets are so high. They film so much sh-t for no reason and don’t like cutting much stuff out. Production has to start getting leaner and shorter quickly. 

[von Kenni]

32 minutes ago, Youngstar said:

Did anyone else see this in the deadline article:

Is this false or were there some tax rebates taken off the budget?

 

I think it's pretty well reported that at one point this year the budget was at $295m but likely 10% higher if not more after all the reshoots and post-production. The UK 25% reimbursement money will be paid later this year and will likely end up the effective budget around $250m or even lower depending how they were able to run the bills through the UK production company. Though hard to see that they would be so smart and knowledgeable to report it on Deadline. A chance that they got it straight from Disney/LucasArts.

 

Anyhow, the ballpark is right.

 

Indy's breakeven point is probably around $650m WW +-$25m.

Edited July 1, 2023 by von Kenni
Added breakeven point

[ThomasNicole]

3 hours 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!

There’s absolutely nothing disrespectful about the portrait of Indy in this movie lol 

 

He’s being old is never a moral problem, it’s just what it is. Disrespectful would be pretending everything is the same, treat this old heroes as something immaculate is disrespectful, dehumanizing actually.

 

And he’s not overshadowed by Phoebe, literally every plot point involves Indiana, including her interests. It seems you’re way more pissed with her presence because structurally, she’s only there to help Indiana arc.