Oh, we did indeed rip on TOD back then on lots of the stupid stuff. Raiders it wasn’t. But Ford in his prime and a great villain performance helped a lot.
if they just had that damn life raft land on a steep slope and gradually slide down. oh well.
Indiana Jones 5 officially announced
- Thread starter ghostryder
- Start date
Oh, we did indeed rip on TOD back then on lots of the stupid stuff. Raiders it wasn’t. But Ford in his prime and a great villain performance helped a lot.
if they just had that damn life raft land on a steep slope and gradually slide down. oh well.
All I see is SPLAT! Minimum ruptured hearts from the sudden deceleration forces.
Riceball
Master Member
I wonder if there aren't certain factors in play that are causing this. While it seems like it should be easy to write for only 6 - 10 episodes but maybe these writers just don't know how to. It's entirely possible that all of their previous experience and training is in writing for much longer seasons and they really don't know to boil down their ideas to fit just 6 - 10 episodes. Then there could also be studio interference or mandates, like with the Disney Star Wars shows, many of them feel like they were written with at least 10 episodes in mind and Disney wants 10 episodes worth of story but only allows the writers 6 episodes to do it.
Having said that above, I am finding that the Koreans and Japanese seem to be much better at writing shows with 6 episode seasons. I finished watching Black Knight and Yakitori on Netflix and while both were only 6 episodes long, I found that they had a very cohesive story that were well paced. They didn't feel like shows plotted out for 10 episodes but were told they could only do 6 like some of the Star Wars shows.
Cephus
Master Member
The problem that we see is that when TV was 20-22 episodes, they had 50% filler. Now that series are 10-12 episodes, they still have 50% filler. They have never learned how to just cut all of the filler out and just put in the relevant stuff. Instead of writing tighter stories, they just write smaller stories with just as much crap shoveled in.
Modern TV (last 10-15 years) has gone into realms that TV writers haven't really dealt with before. They are trying to combine the strengths of 20th-century TV and movies into a hybrid product. We call it a TV series but it only has a dozen episodes a year and the budgets & expectations are up there with theatrical movies. The writing has to deliver both standalone episode stories and season-long stories at once.
The only things close to this in the past were a big-time TV miniseries (which was still much shorter) or a soap opera (low budget and much lower quality demands).
The only things close to this in the past were a big-time TV miniseries (which was still much shorter) or a soap opera (low budget and much lower quality demands).
ScourgiousJinx
Master Member
I get what you're going for and I agree that open means entirely open when it comes down to it. Truly. However the line between what people can say and what serves them best to say isn't always the same. I only offered my opinion on these issues, just as you offered yours.
Retreading the same things over and over that were just said an hour ago or over a long span of time broken record style is frustrating for many to read, more importantly doesn't often effectively alter anyone's opinion no matter who is saying it or what they're saying...pro Disney, anti Disney, positive, negative, whatever. The issue at hand has nothing to do with the actual viewpoints itself. One can try to twist this into a viewpoint agenda issue but its not- especially with our conversation in particular since personally I agree with much of what you said about not supporting bad content. I understood why it's important years and years before I read any discussion about it on this forum.
I told you what I think multiple times. I'm willing to make an exception to not supporting crappy content in rare instances (and I mentioned why), you apparently aren't which is fine. I don't have any more to add but if anyone would like to continue on that supporting the great evil Disney machine is wrong or use it as a springboard to repeat redundant rhetoric in slightly different ways in the guise of discussion, have at it.
I agree that those who are trying to shield themselves from opposing viewpoints are quite insecure as are those who are compelled to try to repeatedly beat others into submission with their viewpoints.
Anyhow back on topic...Dial of Destiny what are people looking forward to in it?
Last edited:
I still know pretty much nothing about the film.
Curious how all the scenes with him young will look.
I'm guessing they are using this whole deep fake technology, vs cgi like with Tarkin in Rogue One.
I saw a tiktok video of Harrison talking, and under it the person did a deepfake of his younger self saying the same thing. Its scary at how perfect its becoming, but will it hold up to a feature film on the big screen?
Also, is it just a short part thats a few mins long, or do they use it for half or more of the movie?
Curious how all the scenes with him young will look.
I'm guessing they are using this whole deep fake technology, vs cgi like with Tarkin in Rogue One.
I saw a tiktok video of Harrison talking, and under it the person did a deepfake of his younger self saying the same thing. Its scary at how perfect its becoming, but will it hold up to a feature film on the big screen?
Also, is it just a short part thats a few mins long, or do they use it for half or more of the movie?
I'd argue the last time that the output of television was this consistently good would probably be in the "golden age" of TV, back in its infancy, where most things were produced live. There were a number of great shows then--televised live theatrical plays, really-- that were later adapted into feature films. Marty, Requiem for a Heavyweight, 12 Angry Men, etc... Most of them got their start on these live tele-plays, a good number coming from shows like Playhouse 90.
Most commercial big features are now are hard divided into commercial dreck or commercial "art-house" and all the really good writers that typically would work on features moved to television. The budgets are almost equal to that of features on some series and there's more time to explore characters rather than story. Regardless of what I think of the streaming services, some of the work produced from TV has been, I think, some of the most engaging in all of media in nearly 20 years.
ScourgiousJinx
Master Member
I hope they use deepfake Indy sparingly. I haven't seen much in movies/shows that's believable.
All I see are three people-shaped holes in the mountainside, ala Wile E. Coyote...
I can overlook a few ludicrous action set pieces in an otherwise banger of an action adventure film. Even as a kid I thought the raft sequence was stupid. The one quality that helps me overlook it is something unique to the Indy franchise that sets it apart from every other action adventure film series.
Indy constantly gets in over his head to the point where he's sure to die. He acts on one desperate last ditch attempt to get out of the situation and it's as if fate steps in and he survives. It's shows his vulnerability but also pumps the audience up because he's a survivor and we can all root for an underdog. Especially one who has the guts to keep fighting when the chips are down.
The flying wing sequence is the perfect example of this trope. This is why the nuked fridge didn't bother me as much as it should have because he climbed in there out of pure desperation, not out of foreknowledge that he would make it out alive. His determination to never give up, even if he dies in the effort, he won't just give in willingly. Indiana Jones will never go gently into that dark night. It's not in his nature. That's why we love him so much.
Granted certain set pieces are better crafted than others. The raft and fridge are eye rolling sequences but I can overlook them because of the desperation effect. Not that they’re good ideas by any stretch. By contrast the flying wing was masterfully executed. Indy gets the absolute crap beaten out of him and he falls down to the ground almost completely spent. Just when you think he's a goner, the propeller rotates toward the mechanic, and seizing the opportunity, he ducks out of the way to escape and the mechanic is taken out for him. He gets Marion to safety and the wing blows up, eliminating the Nazis transport for the Ark.
Just typing that out gets my heart pumping thinking about the scene because it's so exciting to watch.
Indy constantly gets in over his head to the point where he's sure to die. He acts on one desperate last ditch attempt to get out of the situation and it's as if fate steps in and he survives. It's shows his vulnerability but also pumps the audience up because he's a survivor and we can all root for an underdog. Especially one who has the guts to keep fighting when the chips are down.
The flying wing sequence is the perfect example of this trope. This is why the nuked fridge didn't bother me as much as it should have because he climbed in there out of pure desperation, not out of foreknowledge that he would make it out alive. His determination to never give up, even if he dies in the effort, he won't just give in willingly. Indiana Jones will never go gently into that dark night. It's not in his nature. That's why we love him so much.
Granted certain set pieces are better crafted than others. The raft and fridge are eye rolling sequences but I can overlook them because of the desperation effect. Not that they’re good ideas by any stretch. By contrast the flying wing was masterfully executed. Indy gets the absolute crap beaten out of him and he falls down to the ground almost completely spent. Just when you think he's a goner, the propeller rotates toward the mechanic, and seizing the opportunity, he ducks out of the way to escape and the mechanic is taken out for him. He gets Marion to safety and the wing blows up, eliminating the Nazis transport for the Ark.
Just typing that out gets my heart pumping thinking about the scene because it's so exciting to watch.
Last edited:
CopperRevan
Master Member
Imagine if they showed them bouncing 20ft in the air out of the raft when it landed on the snow...lol
CopperRevan
Master Member
I know i'll get flack for this but to me the waterfall scene in Crystal Skull was worse...Maybe because by that point after the fridge scene yadda yadda etc. I was just done with it. lol. I will admit that we looked over a lot of stuff as kids that really seem ridiculous to us now...and it should! In the long run, speaking for myself here, i'm more willing to excuse things like that for the sake of the whole movie being adventurous and well written. Yes, Temple is my least favorite out of the three. I literally had a dream last night that i went to see Deepfake of Destiny, i mean, The Dial of Deepfake... and got through the whole movie to find Indy reunited with Marion at the end and asked myself two questions:
1. Why were they separated in the first place?
2. Why didn't they include that other woman in the film who is in the trailer?
Then i woke up and realized my brain had incorporated Indy 4 and Indy 5 except it erased Helena altogether.
not making this up!!
1. Why were they separated in the first place?
2. Why didn't they include that other woman in the film who is in the trailer?
Then i woke up and realized my brain had incorporated Indy 4 and Indy 5 except it erased Helena altogether.
not making this up!!
joberg
Legendary Member
The "Love/Hate" critiques of movies is and will never be solved! And, if a question/thing is too complex to resolve, it comes then to "Trade-offs".
What are the trade-offs? Sometimes, the trade-offs are worse than anticipated...but it's all trade-offs non-the-less.
IMO that's one of the crucial things to get right in an Indy movie. The tone of the action scenes. Indy is more capable than you or me but he's not capable enough for his latest (impossible) challenge. He fails as often as he wins - and that's why there is always dramatic tension when he's in action.
The million-dollar question is, why does the audience put up with one deus-ex-machina escape but not another? I think 2/3rds of it is how they are feeling about the movie in general.
Last edited:
Part of that depends on how well the agency of the character and the plot are established. In Raiders they set the stage early enough on that the Ark itself is a source of unspeakable power that could lay waste to an entire nation. Which levels the playing field for both good or evil and also ups the ante in terms of how important it is that it doesn't fall into the wrong hands.
Also Indy hasn't sat back idly and just let things happen. His choices have an impact on the story rather than having every single problem being miraculously solved instantly. That's why characters who are constantly successful are typically boring to watch and hard to relate to. He's always in over his head.
Also Indy hasn't sat back idly and just let things happen. His choices have an impact on the story rather than having every single problem being miraculously solved instantly. That's why characters who are constantly successful are typically boring to watch and hard to relate to. He's always in over his head.
Last edited:
I think 'Raiders' worked because Indy won indirectly. He didn't end up with the Ark but that was never his primary goal. His mission got rolling to keep it out of Nazi hands and that was achieved.
But more importantly, he got back together with Marion. That was THE big character arc in 'Raiders' and I think it tends to be missed because the sequels basically tossed her out again. At the start of 'Raiders' he sees her a necessary complication, a means-to-an-end. By the end of the movie he is pointing a rocket launcher at the Ark and saying "All I want is the girl!" That's a helluva change.
But more importantly, he got back together with Marion. That was THE big character arc in 'Raiders' and I think it tends to be missed because the sequels basically tossed her out again. At the start of 'Raiders' he sees her a necessary complication, a means-to-an-end. By the end of the movie he is pointing a rocket launcher at the Ark and saying "All I want is the girl!" That's a helluva change.
CopperRevan
Master Member
Good point but the series is called Indiana Jones not Indiana Jones and Marion, so i think the moves were good because we are talking about the character arc of mainly Him...He's really married to his pursuits. His arc is still growing by the time we get to Crusade as his whole life comes circling back for him to make a choice what is truly valuable to him...the relics, another girl, or the relationship restored between Him and his father. Couldn't have ended more perfectly than it did. The fact we didn't see him tie the knot with Marion then is inconsequential to the arc of the character of Indiana Jones himself since there was 3 different women in 3 films and He is the constant.
One thing these discussions has brought to light that i hadn't thought about with Indy too much is motives. Think about it. He enjoyed the pursuits but had this inner loyalty to do the right thing with the relic once found. Then off to the next adventure. The experiences he had with women were like that of the relics. They were along for the ride. He wanted to do right by them, but then off to the next adventure and next woman. In Crusade, he loses both, woman and relic and is faced with what is his true motive in life? What does he value the most? It all started with his father and ends with his father...that is the answer. That's the ribbon that needed to be tied in order for him to now see his life through the right lens and form the bow to end the story and arc. Him and his father are one and the same. Archaeologist, Adventurer and Ladies man. Not my idea of a hero but honestly, we knew who he was from Raiders and he has grown internally by the end of Crusade. There is nothing really to add to him at all but just another adventure without any real guts. He finally settles down and teaches his son or daughter the ropes? I guess they tried that but that's so telegraphed it doesn't need exploring...especially when your son is ladiesman217...hey wait, that actually makes sense! lol
Similar threads
