This is a continuation of Movies You Just Watched Discussion...

Now that you have recovered the thread, can't you unlock it and continue?

I'm just afraid that it'll break again.

What, you don't like sequels?

THE CHRONICLES OF NARNIA: PRINCE CASPIAN
(First Viewing)

A good continuation in the NARNIA series but a little too fast-paced for me. Right after the opening credits begin the children are already thrust back into Narnia without much of a "how you doin?" Not as good as the original.

NATIONAL TREASURE 2: BOOK OF SECRETS 1/2
(First Viewing)

Definitely a lot better than the original. More humor, a bigger role for Harvey Keitel, and I feel Ed Harris did a better job at being the villain than Sean Bean did in the first installment. I haven't heard anything to this affect but I'd love to see a third one now.

INDIANA JONES AND THE RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK
(Nth Viewing)

Just gearing up for INDIANA JONES IV later on this week and figured I owed myself a rewatch of the trilogy. I know many believe this is the best Jones of the bunch and while I can't really argue too much against that point, for me personally, THE LAST CRUSADE does it. Everybody did a fantastic job to make this a classic. I can't imagine anyone else other than Harrison Ford playing Indiana Jones. The directing by Steven Spielberg is dead on as is the music. Paul Freeman was extremely enjoyable as Dr. Rene Belloq.

INDIANA JONES & THE TEMPLE OF DOOM (1984) - ****

I know now, and perhaps always did, that RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK is the best picture of that franchise, and a perfect masterpiece of action cinema.

But I actually prefered this movie as a kid.

Much like another 1984 release in THE LAST STARFIGHTER, Steven Spielberg's INDIANA JONES & THE TEMPLE OF DOOM is a juvenile boy's adventure, except its as well-made as such a creative endeavor could possibly be.

The tough hero has his shirt open, fist fights everyone, with a useful junior sidekick tagging along. The baddie is wild-eyed in his cartoonish yet evil presence. There is teases of sex everywhere, subliminal or overt. Henchmen are killed in creative ways. The chases and thrills are wonderfully over the top.

Adults and girls are revolted when monkey heads and snakes are eaten for lunch, and shriek as hearts are brutally ripped out of people's chests, while us boys are just loving it.

If RAIDERS was saturday matinee serials retooled and disguised as A-level filmmaking craft, TEMPLE OF DOOM is very frank and honest of its B-movie reality, and so very much in punch drunk love with its pulp trash roots.

To make my point more clear, let's use a metaphor for the Indiana Jones trilogy.

RAIDERS is the well-loved guy Valedictorian/High School Quarterback that is neat, clean, and perfect in an Aryan sort of way. LAST CRUSADE is the geek kid that imitates the RAIDERS guy in everyway, but falls well short and is sorta hollow.

Then there is TEMPLE OF DOOM is the motorcycle-riding gang leader of a badass with a chilling charisma that people either dig or fear. He stays out partying late with his drinking and smoking, he beats up the LAST CRUSADE kid because the latter is a dork, and doesn't give a goddamn if the RAIDERS guy has a problem with that.

Most people seem to hate TEMPLE OF DOOM, or at least well-prefer LAST CRUSADE, and I hang my head. TEMPLE OF DOOM has the action and popcorn one would expect from an Indiana Jones picture, but tries to be its own creature, a more dark and funhouse-quality brother to RAIDERS that is more rich and rewarding than LAST CRUSADE.

It also succeeds because its the closest time that Spielberg, Harrison Ford, and George Lucas have come in producing a James Bond picture, and TEMPLE OF DOOM is their cinema-surrogate to play 007.

There is the tension-filled opening at the Shanghai nightclub where Ford lavishes up his own Sean Connery persona. Indy Jones may be a rugged layman, but he can also be classy and slick when he wants to be. What follows is the first major action sequence, which is totally unrelated to the movie's plot.

Nevermind the hero's own calm penetration entrance into (and explosive exit from) the villain's massive stronghold fortress, intercut with sexual innuendo and spectacular stunts.

If TEMPLE OF DOOM is an unofficial Bond movie, then Amrish Puri is the essential Bondian villain. Full of dreams where his evil death cult wipes the other great world religions off the globe, a bald head covered with red paint, a menacing laugh, and he scared the hell out of me as a kid.

Imagine if Osama Bin Laden ever had a personality.

Besides his ultra-deadly fundamentalism, he also kidnaps children for slave labor. Much like Luther in THE WARRIORS, he's a great Crazy Asshole.

What surprised me though in rewatching DOOM is the surprising chemistry that Jonathan Ke Quan had with Ford as Short Round. From playing cards to teaming-up in battling guards, he is like Dick Grayson in being a good surrogate-son/sidekick outlet for boys who wish they were out there kicking ass with Indiana Jones. Sure he gets whipped and beaten, but that's the prize to be paid.

As much as I love TEMPLE OF DOOM, its not perfect. Some of the "comedy" falls flat, though they don't bother me as much as the gags in LAST CRUSADE. Kate Capshaw may be the doll, but she screams way too much at times for my liking. Plus I must admit, this is great trash...but its still trash.

But this is a rare movie where Spielberg is obviously having a great fun time with the material, almost as much as I did.

Seriously? Can't you test a single thread to see? Maybe a less popular one?

Did someone hack the site or what? It seems strange that random threads would suddenly lock... sorry if this is discussed elsewhere on the site, I'm still trying to figure out what's going on.

Nice Indy review, Ronnie! All three were on SciFi recently, so it automatically became my goal to watch the full trilogy, but that failed just as it did the last time I tried watching them all with my parents about a year ago. Now we've loaned our video copies to a neighbor, so it may never work out. haha

You!! I have ranted several times to various people about how I have this distinct memory from my childhood...I was in our family living room, we were playing Monopoly (a random part of the memory) and watching Indiana Jones, and I recall being absolutely terrified by the scene where the heart is ripped out. Someday I need to revisit that to see how it affects me now, but I remember so well being completely frightened at the time.

I've never been good at giving reviews or even properly judging movies except based on my own entertainment, but I watched two recently with my cousin - The Mist and Fight Club. I heard that Stephen King gave permission for The Mist to be given a different ending, so now I'm curious to read what he originally wrote. I really enjoyed Fight Club...not at all what I expected, and I thought it was really clever.

"Random threads" didn't "suddenly lock." You're right, this isn't the right place to discuss this, but, it's discussed elsewhere and it's not random: ALL the threads in question were very large, and most years in the making. The most popular threads on the site. I don't know what caused it, but I had a hell-filled weekend over it, got'em back, and I'm not about to take any chances because I wanna see how big they can get. What is the big deal, anyway? Size (of threads) doesn't matter - the health of the BB does. If I ever find out the problem, then things may change. But until then, please give me a little slack.

I came here to say something about Doom, not discuss the board. That belongs elsewhere.

It's.

I was planning on watching this before I saw your post, and your post didn't influence it whatsoever since I didn't read past the 2nd paragraph.

I just watched DOOM tonight (also preparing for the latest episode coming out). I thought LOST ARK was great -- just pleasurable and entertaining all around.

But "well made"?? Maybe it's because I'm not a "juvenile boy" any more, but, I thought this was a big piece of crap. Seriously. I know it was 1984, but they did make bluescreen effects look realistic before '84. Hell, Wizard of Oz had better effects in the 30's! And supernatural lifesaving skills were, well, wow! Not a scratch from falling FROM A PLANE?

And, while I love Star Wars and all, this STANK of Lucas all over it, rather than Spielberg. What's that about? Did Lucas bully SPIELBERG??!! Some of the acting sucked in parts, too -- and I know it's a "kid's movie", but please, show some self-respect and talent rather than over-acting comic-booky bullcrap.

I love Lucas... I love Spielberg... but this -- compared to other films, Indy titles or not -- was a bit disappointing to me.

I remember CRUSADE being better, so let's just hope my memory isn't failing me when I watch it, after David is crowned American Idol.

Blah blah, what about that horrible background blue-screen effect of the blimp in LAST CRUSADE?

And speaking of "supernatural lifesaving skills," what about in RAIDERS when Indy easily pushes aside a huge rock block to escape the Well of Souls?

Be fucking consistent.

Was it necessary to quote my entire post just for that?

I said I still need to rewatch CRUSADE, so I'm not about to review it or comment about it after so-many years. Ask me in a few days.

Secondly, good movies like RAIDERS are given some slack. Sucky movies like TEMPLE OF DOOM are given less slack.

I don't know, I haven't seen/read anything about it, but just watching it tonight, I think Lucas thought he was the end-all-be-all and took this away from Spielberg... a shame.

I simply wanted to continue the spam-tradition of the ole thread, which I'll miss. I don't care for Irishman, but he did good by creating that thread.



Will do, though in short my problems with CRUSADE is that in a mix with alot of well-shot sequences (River Phoenix as young Indy, Berlin book burning, Venice boat chase), the 3rd Act and outright plot device is too much of a RAIDERS knock-off for my taste.

Hell, CRUSADE is probably the best shot RAIDERS knock-off ever.

Then the comedy shenanigans in the 2nd half of the picture was just simply annoying.



"Movie Physics" to me can bend reality, or be given slack, if they at least give us a loophole of reason to buy such cheating.

With DOOM and that falling off an airplane, I bought it simply as able to land that lifeboat using gravity, and downslope of a snow-covered mountain, to escape getting flattened like a pancake. Likewise, Indy could escape from the Well of Souls in RAIDERS because those blocks were off-centered, or a pile of low-quality stone that he could push himself to freedom.

All bullshit of course, but compare both with Michael Bay's ARMAGEDDON when a shuttle crashes in an asteroid, and among the ruins, is fire burning wildly...in an air-less vacuum.



Spielberg is the closest thing we have today in a modern day David Selznik, or the biggest Czar of them all in Hollywood...and in 1984 after E.T., the dude could do, and still do, whatever the fuck he wanted.

My point is, Spielberg is one such guy who could tell Lucas NO if he wanted to. For better or for worse, TEMPLE OF DOOM was Lucas/Spielberg's baby. Too bad they retreated to (way too) familiar ground with LAST CRUSADE.

Off topic, but a friend of mine actually proposed to his wife when TEMPLE OF DOOM was on TV, at the scene when the baddie forces Ford to drink the blood.

Congrats to your friend! But too bad they gotta watch that film every year for the next 60-or-so years!

I'm still not gonna discuss CRUSADE before I rewatch it

But I still contend that -- it seemed to me that -- Spielberg didn't do whatever he wanted. Because if he did, I think the film would've been a lot better, rather than a crappy pseudo-Star Wars meets Disney knock-off.

You mean the same Spielberg who on his own has shot some floaters like ALWAYS and THE LOST WORLD?

Yes, the INDY pictures were always a committee project between Spielberg/Lucas/Ford, but the Panda doesn't have the Beard finger-cuffed as you seem to think he is.

Hell, Spielberg outright rejected Lucas' original pitch for INDY IV...the ole "SAUCERMEN OF MARS" concept.

Then again, you might have a point, for unless I'm mistaken, alot of concepts from SOM did end up ultimately in CRYSTAL SKULL...

Don't be surprised if INDY IV does the same thing to you. I've read one review online already and they gave it a 5/10. I'm not saying I'm gonna hate it (I expect to enjoy it) but with all the build up, craziness surrounding the franchise, and the expectations fans have, I wouldn't at all be surprised if it was the SPIDER-MAN 3 of 2008

Let me guess.....you got it from CHUD?

Well, Ford is what, 80? Plus the Even Stevens kid from TRANSFORMERS is in it, right? So it can't be that bad!!

(Waiting for RedRocket's reply... lol)

As long as that Asian kid isn't in IV constantly saying "Doctuh Jones! Doctuh Jones!". I can't wait to see the new movie.

INDIANA JONES AND THE TEMPLE OF DOOM
(Nth Viewing)

Not as much action or humor as in RAIDERS and probably the weakest of the trilogy IMO. Still an enjoyable action flick compared to others.

Ive always enjoy temple of doom,more than the other two. All great films though.

INDIANA JONES AND THE LAST CRUSADE 1/2
(Nth Viewing)

Again, my favorite of the trilogy. They went back to the roots of the original and brought back some of the original cast members. IMO, Alison Doody was the best "Jones girl" (with Karen Allen being a close second). Now, I'm just looking forward to INDIANA JONES AND THE KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL.

THE KILLING OF JOHN LENNON 1/2
(First Viewing)

A very insightful look at the man who murdered John Lennon for fame, Mark David Chapman. This film is told in a very similar fashion to TAXI DRIVER and I believe that also has something to do with my leave of enjoyment from it. However, I do think that they botched the assassination scene. A great film to keep your eye open for.

RESIDENT EVIL
(First Viewing)

I'm not a fan at all of zombie movies but I heard this was good so I'll give it a shot. I am a fan of Mila Jovovich but so far I'm unimpressed with the series.

RESIDENT EVIL: APOCALYPSE 1/2
(First Viewing)

More action and a better monster/villain to fight. Better than the first but still, based soley as an action/horror flick, these two have been pretty forgettable.

RESIDENT EVIL: EXTINCTION
(First Viewing)

Most definitely the best of the trilogy. This film went back to the beginning in some ways and kind of had a MAD MAX feel to it. The action was a lot better (especially when Mila controlled things with her mind). Speaking of which, I thought the pairing of Mila Jovovich and Ali Larter was a nice touch. I've heard they may make a fourth but it's been nothing but rumors.

STREET FIGHTER 1/2
(Second Viewing)

Another video game movie that sucked, shocker. Really the only video game movie that I loved was the original MORTAL KOMBAT. In this, the person who played Sagat was way too short (he should have been taller like in the game). Secondly, I'm glad they included all of the characters but quite a number of them were buried like Zangief, Dhalsim, and Blanka just to name a few. Too campy and not one good action/fight scene in it.

INDIANA JONES AND THE KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL
(First Viewing)

Well, the predication came true. Brace yourselves people, INDIANA JONES IV is not up to par. It is easily IMO the worst of the franchise and this new film unfortunately didn't add to but rather took away 20+ years of great memories with this flop. The only two things I can compliment from this film were Cate Blanchett and Shia LaBeouf. Harrison Ford looked too tired at 65-years-old to be reprising his role as Dr. Jones. I felt he took his job too lightly this time around and wasn't concerned so much about his business. Granted, this movie will make a lot of money at the box office but that still doesn't mean it was great.

Why did you give it three stars if it was such a flop?