Spoilers Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny grade and discussion
- Thread starter The Nth Doctor
- Start date
Sorry, I got No Time to Die mixed up with the Quantum of Solace song "Another Way to Die."
I'm willing to believe that even a crook like her can quickly become invested in stopping a Nazi from rewriting history; the problem is there's absolutely no reason for the character to think that's even remotely possible. A well-written screenplay would have given her some evidence to motivate her to work for the greater good.
Should have tied it into the Spear of Longinus being made from the alloy of the crashed plane. Have the spear have provenance from before the invention of it's alloy, so it can't be immediately dismissed as a modern fake, thus lending credence to the existence of time travel.
Okay, watched the Hover round of Destiny the other day, I liked it more than I thought I would. While I didn't care for the Lebouf sad the killed him.
Ms Shaw and the kid were good.
Love Mads, but just like the last Dubledore movie, he wasn't given a good script, he was Meh as a villain. I mean he had No knowledge of the Dial, like your a high level physicist.. and hes written like a buffoon.
Oh look! Its Antonio Bandareas! Never mind he's dead..
I give it B, entertaining but not as good as the others, maybe even with Crystal Skull
Ms Shaw and the kid were good.
Love Mads, but just like the last Dubledore movie, he wasn't given a good script, he was Meh as a villain. I mean he had No knowledge of the Dial, like your a high level physicist.. and hes written like a buffoon.
Oh look! Its Antonio Bandareas! Never mind he's dead..
I give it B, entertaining but not as good as the others, maybe even with Crystal Skull
Disagree; I think time travel is big enough that it's got to be something she sees with her own eyes, not relying on any other person's metallurgical analysis. Ideally, the opening sequence should probably have featured her witnessing a successful time travel test of some sort, and then she'd go to Indy asking for his help. (Or, she could have discovered ancient remains of something modern, but that wouldn't be as dramatic.) Or, she could have been Indy's assistant from the start, and they could witness the phenomenon together.
Or Indy could have witnessed something, and needed her help for some reason, though that might have been veering pretty close to his reason for enlisting Marion's help in Raiders. But what they went with - Indy suddenly believing, with zero evidence, that time travel is possible and can be taken advantage of, and then instantly convincing Helena of the same... nope.
Not really, there are plenty of ways a smaller person can use their speed, agility, and strategy to beat a bigger opponent. There's a lot more to fighting than just strength.
There's a reason combat sports have weight classes, and let's say it, gender separations. That said, when I'm watching action movies I don't have a problem with quick lithe fighters but it can be hard to suspend belief when the combatants seem too disproportionate.
I gave it a C
Just a minute or two over 2 1/2 hours long and you feel every single minute of it.
The story felt a bit hit and miss and honestly I felt it could have been told in a lot less time than we were given and the last 30 minutes OK well that's it folks end movie......
Some of Ford's lines annoyed the life out of me. He doesn't believe in magic or the supernatural, even says so on screen but "he has seen strange things he can't explain" but yeah ok let's roll with that. You witnessed the Ark of the bloody covenant doing its thing to people. What did you think that was some illusion? OK let's roll with that too.
I wasn't thrilled with this movie.
Just a minute or two over 2 1/2 hours long and you feel every single minute of it.
The story felt a bit hit and miss and honestly I felt it could have been told in a lot less time than we were given and the last 30 minutes OK well that's it folks end movie......
Some of Ford's lines annoyed the life out of me. He doesn't believe in magic or the supernatural, even says so on screen but "he has seen strange things he can't explain" but yeah ok let's roll with that. You witnessed the Ark of the bloody covenant doing its thing to people. What did you think that was some illusion? OK let's roll with that too.
I wasn't thrilled with this movie.
This is the only Indy movie I have not bought, even after I purchased the previous 4 on Blu-Ray, There was so much potential wasted, especially when you consider earlier pitches (Short Round carrying on the legacy?) and the endings of the previous two films. The complete emasculation of Indy as a heroic character is unforgivable. For my money, "Raiders of the Lost Ark" is a virtually perfect film and my personal second favorite barely behind "The Lord of the Rings". "Last Crusade" is close, and "Temple of Doom" complements them reasonably well enough. Even "Crystal Skull" brought back Marian in all her feisty glory. It also had at least that enjoyable ending though it had a great many other flaws, yet it still felt like a proper Indiana Jones movie. "Dial"? It never felt like it belonged in the same vein as its predecessors.
To each their own, but I did not care one whit for what Mangold and the script did to Indy as a character. Granted, Ford's age did hamstring them quite a bit, but to bring Indy so low smacks of almost cruelty. It was rescued by that last-minute addition of Marion at the end. Again, if a person likes the film, then more power to them, especially since the world needs ways to give us a break from the stress in our lives. However, for me and my love of the films ever since "Raiders..." first came out this fifth film was supremely disappointing.
Whilst I doubt you’d ever like it, try looking at it again from the perspective of Helena being very much like Young Indy (as in, Temple of Doom, working for gangsters etc) and Indy being more like his father, to the point of even getting shot by the end.
Put Helena not only next to Indy, but to the other leading ladies in the series, and also the films of the thirties than inspired them.
Indy is *still* Indy, to the point that he rides a horse chasing a train (like the Crusade opening) and is now in the position of guiding his godchild (who is insanely similar to him, and that’s just obvious) in the right direction.
We don’t see Indy lose his ‘hero’ status — that happened off screen before the story began, we see him *get it back*.
In the end, yes, you can say Helena saves him from his intended ‘die in the past’ path, and his depression from his loss of his son, but she can *only* do that because Indy, acting in loco parentis, has already saved her from the same path he could have taken when he was younger.
There’s repeated elements from the classic films time and again, recontextualised, because history is repeating - theme of the film, and right *there* in the title.
It’s a smart way not only around Fords age, but also the fact that there was no way Shia was coming back. Helena, as Indy’s godchild, is acting as child/young Indy. She’s also acting exactly like the previous female leads, except Willie (who was in the rubbish one) except without any romance angle.
Because anyone who has seen A View To A Kill knows sometimes it’s best to not go there…
There’s no ‘emasculation’ because Indy is still being Indy, fighting, getting shot, getting captured etc — it’s all standard fare. He is also fulfilling the role his father did in Crusade though, not least as Helena is so very much like him.
Put Helena not only next to Indy, but to the other leading ladies in the series, and also the films of the thirties than inspired them.
Indy is *still* Indy, to the point that he rides a horse chasing a train (like the Crusade opening) and is now in the position of guiding his godchild (who is insanely similar to him, and that’s just obvious) in the right direction.
We don’t see Indy lose his ‘hero’ status — that happened off screen before the story began, we see him *get it back*.
In the end, yes, you can say Helena saves him from his intended ‘die in the past’ path, and his depression from his loss of his son, but she can *only* do that because Indy, acting in loco parentis, has already saved her from the same path he could have taken when he was younger.
There’s repeated elements from the classic films time and again, recontextualised, because history is repeating - theme of the film, and right *there* in the title.
It’s a smart way not only around Fords age, but also the fact that there was no way Shia was coming back. Helena, as Indy’s godchild, is acting as child/young Indy. She’s also acting exactly like the previous female leads, except Willie (who was in the rubbish one) except without any romance angle.
Because anyone who has seen A View To A Kill knows sometimes it’s best to not go there…
There’s no ‘emasculation’ because Indy is still being Indy, fighting, getting shot, getting captured etc — it’s all standard fare. He is also fulfilling the role his father did in Crusade though, not least as Helena is so very much like him.
^ I especially appreciate the constructive approach you took in your response
The fuck are you talking about?
There was no "emasculation" in this movie. Indy was still Indy, just older, so of course he wouldn't be able to do all the same things he could have when he was younger.
Yeah, anybody who was going into this expecting Ford to still be able to do the kind of stuff he did in the first three, was fooling themselves. It was clear the moment they announced that Ford was coming back, that they were going to have to bring in someone else younger to handle the action scenes, and I thought Phoebe Waller-Bridge filled that role great as Helena.
Sounds like the third Beowulf story.
Similar threads
- Poll
