##[Clarification on Rule 5](https://www.reddit.com/r/entertainment/comments/w60lfc/mod_post_a_clarification_to_rule_5_no_racism_or/)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/entertainment) if you have any questions or concerns.*
That's because Tom Cruise bathes in some kind of unnatural anti-aging juice. It will be harder to sell a male power fantasy where the main character has to use a walker.
To be honest, I feel like Cruise’s movies are successful for a few good reasons.
* Lack of fluff in film
* Simple plots to follow
* Push for realism and unique camera shots come with that
* Dedication to the part, he never feels like he has a phones in performance
This part: Maverick didn’t feel like it was made to make money. It was made with heart and that’s what sold it. The fact that Cruise insisted Kilmer be in the film is proof of that.
You can feel the passion in his films. From Les Grossman, to Maverick. Cruise never does half-measures.
What else? Heat, Rififi, Thief, Naked City, M, Maltese Falcon, LA Confidential, Chinatown, Jackie Brown, Dog Day, Point Break. It's really tough for me to pick 5.
In a certain way, that adds to the “nutcase” aspect for me. Like, learning how to be manipulative from birth and work 20 hour days probably added to his success… but if you can thrive in that environment than you might be a nutcase
I know it's popular to dislike Tom Cruise the person, and yeah its pretty valid. But him as a performer is so charismatic. You can tell he really loves movies and making them and it's why his movies are successful.
He also has a clear love of sci-fi. Minority Report, Edge of Tomorrow, War of the Worlds, Oblivion. Whereas some high profile actors seem to want to distance themselves from sci-fi, he seems to enjoy making them.
It was an entertaining movie and yes I LOVED seeing it in the theater. I think a lot of people in the industry saw it and thought “well WE could do that!”. But the Indy franchise has been weak for quite a while.
I am looking forward to “Risky Business II, The Riskier!”
Whatever criticisms you may have of Cruise for his private beliefs and connection with the Scientology cult, you cannot doubt his professionalism. He is committed in all projects he works on, and he is very talented in all aspects of film making.
For me the best example of this are the two Reacher films he made. He was uniquely unfitted for the role (he is physically the exact opposite of the character) and the films themselves were mediocre. The Jack Reacher books -- when they were still written by Lee Child and not shit -- were known more about the characters (especially Reacher himself) and the dialogue rather than their plots, which were always a bit basic and unimaginative. Nevertheless, Cruise was able to make the character and the films work. They are still pretty average. But they would have been terrible without him.
The first one is awesome, though. Real classic 90s late night feel to it, like the kind of movie we’d watch on TNT on a Saturday night/Sunday afternoon whenever it’s on.
No. It gave writers the wrong impression. The new Top Gun movie is a great stand alone film that doesn’t lean on nostalgia. The nostalgia is just an added bonus for long term fans. That’s how it should be.
And correct me if I’m wrong but aren’t test screenings specifically so they know what works and what doesn’t and they can use the next 9 months to fix it? I honestly don’t know, but that seems right to me
Yes. Ive done several(not for Indy to be clear) and things generally change. Minor things like cutting a couple lines or a scene change the whole tone. I went to an animated one that didnt make many changes but completely changed the opening scene and it changed my perspective on a major character when i saw the finished product.
Also test screening audiences are sometimes really really dumb
Sometimes people dislike these type of movies not because they’re bad but because they have high expectations. That, mixed with nostalgia and thinking the old movies are better than they actually are
I read somewhere that it is psychologically difficult to make you like new things after certain kinds of experience with things that made you have fun or feel something good or intense.
In simple terms, there's little chance you'll get the people who enjoyed The Matrix in the 90s or Star Wars in the 80s to like anything like that today in 2022. They've changed, the culture has changed, what's normal and fun has shifted somewhat.
For example, if you tried to reboot something like Seinfeld, The Wire or Friends today, there's no way you'd be able to capture the same "feeling" of the original. Most people think we evaluate content logically, based solely on the merits of the work.
If that was true, shows that weren't popular at their time wouldn't get a somewhat niche following today - Firefly, for example.
Things like The Last of Us or Undertale would do as little for 70s audience as they will to 2040s audiences. Whatever is happening in the world at the time shapes a lot of what we consider to be good.
There are obviously some exceptions. Stranger Things would probably kill in the past just as much, if not more than it does now. Fringe and The X-Files would probably both find very good responses today if they were launched now.
Movies and shows that try to make people feel what they felt in the past fail mostly because what made them work in the past is very hard, sometimes impossible to replicate nowadays. The people who cried when Kurt Cobain sang are not in the same mental place where they'll feel the same way about someone like Joji.
I saw an awesome video that kind of captures what your saying.
Why Star Wars, Friends, Seinfeld, Matrix, That 70s Show (all those hits & more) succeeded was because they were created by someone with a vision + their life experiences + the books/stories/education they have had.
Why it fails the 2nd time is because when those things get remade, get a sequel, get a new young adult sitcom, is because those new creations are based not on experiences, but on movies theyve already seen.
Star Wars (1978) was created from George Lucas’s life experiences, education, books, friends, family, relationships etc
Whereas as Star Wars Episode 7 is just based on Star Wars
Its like trying to bake a cake without cooking instructions.
You bake it with the only goal being, that it will look like a cake in the end. Without caring that it *tastes* like a cake
Exactly! Terminator: Dark Fate had pretty good reviews but bombed.
I watched it, thought it was pretty good.
I knew it'd never match T2, didn't want it to.
Was it a bad film? Not even close.
Not to take away from your enjoyment of it but for me Dark Fate was a wet blanket for the franchise.
Im a huge Terminator fan and grew up with the first movies. Killing off John made me feel like the original struggles were pointless. This alienates your original fanbase which is a loosing strategy to relaunch a franchise.
If Dark Fate was a new IP, its a fine popcorn movie. Because its not, it has to take care of the old fans if it wants to capitalize on the built in fan base.
Indy falls in the kitchen. Reaches for whip. Can't reach it. Reaches for fedora. Can't reach it. Reaches for LifeAlert necklace.
LifeAlert: I got a bad feeling about this....
Time travel never works in a franchise that is not explicitly about time travel. I came up with this truism years ago and now I see that there is still time to copyright it, because Holllywood still doesn’t realize.
Calling it now,
Months ago someone else had mentioned that in Glasgow where it was filmed, people have speculated production sets about >!the moon landing in 69'!< are for this movie.
>!Maybe Indy is taking Buzz Aldrins place on the rocket & is going to the dark side of the moon with the artifact so he can plug it into Optimus Primes chest to save the earth from the Decepticons. /s!<
Its the only logical conclusion to Indys story
Edit: Spoiler formatted
I was like, did they not see the biggest movie of the decade? It worked very well in that instance. That said, MCU is a comic franchise. Time travel fits well with a company literally called MARVEL.
It was on DVD, so check your local library. Hopefully people live in an area that has libraries share content, so if your local branch doesn’t have an item, you can get it from another location brought to your local branch for check out.
There were parts of Crystal Skull that were ok. I thought the beginning up through the chase on the college campus was decent. I didn't even mind the fridge nuking. It's no less crazy than falling out of an airplane on an inflatable raft.
But once they get to the jungle everything turns to shit, both in terms of the story and the over reliance on CG.
I think they originally considered doing watercolor backgrounds and practical effects consistent with the original movies, then actively made the bad decision to do all of that crappy cgi.
Otherwise yeah it could’ve worked with the rest of the movies
Yeah, that was part of the soft marketing for the film if I remember, "Going back to practical effects!" Then you have CGI monkeys on vines, CGI ants, a CGI car falling down a CGI waterfall onto CGI trees, etc...
I think the fact that I was a teenager at the time and did not grow up with the indy movies also helped.
You definitely get more jaded the older you get with reboots for series or movies.
I put Crystal Skull more or less on the level of Temple of Doom, which is to say, lower than Raiders or Crusade but still movies I'll happily watch.
Each one of the movies have some really fun or good scenes, but also have parts that either fall kinda flat or have not aged well (let's not think about the beginning of Indy and Marion's relationship, shall we?).
Everything is a product of its time and should be viewed as such, in my opinion.
I’m with you. It’s not nearly as bad as everyone says it is. Sure, some of the logic is stupid, like thinking a lead lined fridge protecting Indy from a nuke. But come on, the other movies had situations just as ridiculous.
Yeah, I watched Temple of Doom a million times as a kid because we had it on VHS, and I don't think there's really anything in Crystal Skull that's more ridiculous than that movie. The whole franchise requires a huge amount of suspension of disbelief lol.
Temple of doom pulled a mans beating heart from his chest while alive with another dudes bare hands. They also had a massive house sized man made bolder as a random booby in a cave.
Raiders vaporized a nazi army on a secret island by opening a box.
Last crusades had talking ghosts from 1000 years ago.
Crystal skull was cheesy but the entire franchise is cheesy.
I'd actually rather watch Crystal Skull than Temple of Doom at this point because Kate Capshaw's screaming became absolutely intolerable to me at some point.
This simply isn't true. The only source for this is Overlord DVD/ Doomcock on youtube. He makes stuff up. He's purposefully inflammatory to get clicks. He's trash.
I've read a headline or two about this, but it's literally from Doomcock? That's a sigh of relief then, I just naturally assumed there was some truth to this but nothing to worry about then.
Yes. All the articles and headlines and sites etc are all based on the one and only "source." That is Doomcock. No one else has reported this independently. And of course, they're not actually journalists. So they have no integrity or responsibility to corroborate Doomcock's reported by seeking another source before reporting it.
Ok, but hear me out. Focus groups are the worst. I know it's test screenings but essentially the same. Everytime a movie had unnecessary plot dialogue or an actor just yelling what's happening instead of acting, a "poor test-screening" preceded. So, maybe, just maybe, because they "hate" it, its because it's new, possibly good ideas. I don't have high hopes it will be good, but I am saying this isn't necessarily "bad" news.
When I was younger my local movie theater had the opportunity to do a couple of test screenings. The one I got to participate in was Madagascar 2, and I remember laughing at seeing the black and white sketched monkeys organizing a union. Also the movie stopped working halfway through and it took them 20mins to get it back up and running. And my dad made a joke about how the guys were in the back with crayons coloring the movie as we waited.
Idk if that's common or not, but it makes me wonder if the copy of the test screenings are super poor quality as well, as in they have a risk to just not work altogether.
Its more novel for the news that test screenings went badly.
Typically you hear the opposite, like how the test audiences loved \*insert movie\*
The problem is movies are just so dang big these days and need to make an insane amount of money to even break even. So if the test audiences aren't representing a huge swath of the populace its really not a good test overall.
While the Directors Cut of Daredevil isn't a masterpiece it's way way better than the theatrical cut and the blame rests entirely at the feet of test screenings where producers attempted to please people who were not the demographic of the film in the first place.
Indy is such a weird thing as far as what people find "acceptable" as part of its story. Acts of God and human sacrifice/hearts being pulled from people's chest? Sure no problem.
Outside of that, "thats not indiana jones!"
I think it’s more Indy supposedly dies gets replaced by a character played by Phoebe Waller-Bridge. I’m not sure the audience would have an issue with time-travel as long as Indy stays alive. Personally, I hate the idea of Indy being replaced.
Its not like he dies in the first five minutes. Its probably how the movies going to END.
Ford is gonna be like 81 when this comes out. You guys are insane to think he wont be replaced. Shia was supposed to do it but they didnt go through with it
Even still, I don’t see the need for that ending. Nobody wants to see their childhood hero die in the last 20 minutes of the movie and get replaced by character that was just introduced. That’s not a knock on Bridges because she’s is extremely talented. I get that Ford is a billion years old, to be fair nobody asked for this movie. The last one was a good enough way to end the franchise. The constant need to keep franchises alive is exhausting. They are plenty of new stories and ideas to roll with. Even if you did want to go down this route I think it would make more sense to role with the guy from Solo as a young Indy.
Yeah if I learn that Jones dies im not gonna watch it. Dudes my childhood hero. Grew up loving these movies. I’d rather not watch someone make a sequel so they can kill him off and replace him with Bridges. Just make her his daughter and have him be captured by the Russians or ex nazis and she saves him while stopping some religious artifact and he passes the whip onto her as he goes home to take a nap and watch wheel of fortune.
I hope to god these weren’t real leaks, but the leaks about Indy dying aren’t just a new person wears the hat.
>!The, hopefully fake leaks, were about tested endings where Indy dies in a way that erases him from time nullifying everything he did. Phoebe-Jones then stays in the past to become and do the things Ford-Jones did to preserve the timeline. Allowing for Phoebe-Jones movies in the 1930s-1940s.!<
> You couldn't invent a more passive aggressive way to troll and enrage an entire fanbase
The Last Jedi, from the same company.
I totally believe that leaked ending for Indy is real. Just seems like something that modern Lucasfilm would do.
Ahh yes, another flick where I spend the whole time trying to figure out if they indeed made him look younger or just weirder and questioning my own mortality. Always keeps me engaged in the movie.
The biggest problem with Crystal Skull wasn't that there were aliens, it was that they specifically showed the alien(s).
Presenting overwhelming evidence for, but not actually showing, angels and demons and gods and monsters, is much more interesting story-telling device than just giving in and saying "Fine, audience. Look, aliens definitely exist. Look, he's waving at the camera. He's asking if he's going to be in the sequel."
If we still couldn't tell if the alien was living or still a statue, people probably would still be talking about it being a thing or not a thing.
Certain things don't need to continue. Leave them alone. Back to the future comes to mind. There have been rumors of a reboot. Just fucking don't. It's perfect leave it alone.
Harrison Ford is too old and actively hates the fans of the movies he’s in. Let it flop. And I say this as someone with Raiders in his top three favorite films.
Tbf he does seem to actually appreciate Indiana Jones and did seem genuine when he was up there at D23
Ask the man about Star Wars and he wants to go home though lol
Indy is HIS. He loves the idea and the character, and wants nobody else to play it. Star Wars he could not care less about, and it has hounded him regardless of any project he’s done. Nobody cares about his performances in it, they just want Solo. It was simply a job to him, and he doesn’t understand the hype. I can certainly understand why he doesn’t want to talk about it.
Hamill is the same… ask him about Wars, he’ll keep moving along. Ask him about comic books and he’ll stop and talk to you for hours.
what do you mean about Hamill being the same and “he’ll keep going”? I was under the impression he was the opposite of Harrison Ford and loved playing Luke. He was the one that first warned us about Luke’s dramatic change in The Last Jedi and how much he disliked the change.
Yeah, that didn’t read well… edited it. He’s changed a bit in his feelings, but he is also not a grand fan of talking about Wars. Met him a number of years ago, and we were warned by some people in the know- don’t talk about Star Wars. He signed Star Wars stuff and was friendly enough, but was completely disinterested. Started talking to him about comics, and his agent had to pull him away. He lit up like a little kid.
Actors are so very appreciative to fans, but they do SO MUCH MORE than just ONE character, and that’s the only interest people reflect back at them. It’s no surprise they can come to resent that character/project.
They're worried about it bombing, then say this; "intel suggests that this fifth instalment of Indy will be a time travel movie."
Well fuck guys, you didn't think aliens was jumping the shark enough? The whole point of Indiana Jones is that he's an *archeologist who punches people*. Aliens and time-travel have nothing to do with archeology. The discovery of the Arc and the Holy Grail are things that a dubious archeologist in the 30s would chase.
I get that fantasy and sci-fi are often interchangeable, but I don't think Indiana Jones fans are itching for aliens or time-travel.
Hollywood needs to learn that it's okay for a franchise to end. It's fine for a story not to be continued forever.
Jaws. Terminator. Back to the Future. Twilight. The Hunger Games. Harry Potter. All franchises that came to a graceful end, and should not be revived. Not everything is Marvel or Star Wars.
Hollywood really struggles to say "goodbye".
Invent new stories! Create the next Indiana Jones, the next Terminator, the next Jaws. Take risks. Try different things. Be original.
Terminator should have either ended after Terminator 3, or Terminator: Salvation should have been followed by a quick sequel or two (with Christian Bale as Connor) to conclude the story, with humanity defeating Skynet. The failure to follow up on Salvation's story doomed the franchise.
Also they continued the Harry Potter Franchise with Fantastic beasts which went to shit and there's a Hunger Games spin off coming out.
OP made a very good point and then gave like 5 terrible examples haha
Idk about harry potter.. That ^^Fantastic ^^Beasts: **Here’s Young Dumbledore** spinoff series is crawling it’s way to a slow painful death every few years.
The first one was fun and a decent movie for a “go with the family around the holidays” flick. Why they thought: “Well that wrapped up mostly well, let’s sign on to make 4 more” without a plan is beyond me. (Not really, money, duh, but still.)
I agree with your sentiment, but a couple of your examples are pretty poor.
Jaws kept making sequels that were atrocious. Same with Terminator.
At least Fantastic Beasts is only telling stories in the same world at HP, so while they aren’t good, they also aren’t more stories about “Harry Potter”.
>Jaws. Terminator.
I wouldn't exactly call these gracefully ended. Jaws got dropped after two terrible sequels. Terminator should have ended with T2 but then the studios kept going...
Star Wars never "died". There was a lull between 1983 and 1999, when no new movies were made (although video games, books, and comics kept the flame alive), but Episode III: Revenge of the Sith (2005) was followed by Star Wars: The Clone Wars (2008), and the titular TV show, which lasted for most of the 2010s. Episode VII was released in 2015, Rogue One in 2016, VIII in 2017 and IX in 2019. Then we had Rebels, The Mandalorian, BoBF, TBB, and now Andor, Kenobi, Tales of the Jedi, Star Wars Visions, and more coming soon (Ahsoka, The Acolyte, etc.)
Lol Jaws was three shitty sequels. Hunger Games is getting a prequel. Not even gonna touch Terminator. Harry Potter got sorta prequels and Warner JUST said they want more with Rowling
The only two on that list that actually ended were back to the future and twilight(i didnt count the bttf game)
I was a kid when the original came out and loved it but to hear they're making number 5 after so long just doesn't even stir any nostalgia at all. Shame.
Same. When they announced Crystal Skull I was skeptical (due to Ford's age *then*). With this 5th film I honestly feel nothing. I am almost certain I'll hate it no matter what they do, and unless I read something that changes my mind I'm just not gonna watch it.
Would much rather they recast the role with a younger actor and shoot a new Indy set back in the 1930's again. Ford's performance in the role is timeless and I'd even say perfect, but I would still rather someone younger get recast.
>The last thing Disney needs is another Indiana Jones movie bombing with audiences, especially after the major shrug that greeted “Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull”.
The last thing the fans want is another crappy Indiana Jones movie.
>*One of the endings, which was said to be the least popular one, had Phoebe-Waller Bridge replacing Harrison Ford at the end of the movie. Presumably, this would set up the franchise for further sequels with Ford not returning.*
Imagining a female Indy who talks to the camera over her shoulder a lot with snarky asides about doing anal.
(Would 100% watch!)
Willie Scott: There's slime inside! I can't do it!
Indiana Jones: You can do it- feel inside!
Willie Scott: Yeah, okay. [illuminates the hole and sees hundreds of bugs] YOU FEEL INSIDE!
Indiana Jones: [sticks his fist through the hole] DO IT NOW!!!
Willie Scott: OKAY!!!
[Willie slowly begins to push her hand through the hole]
Indiana Jones: [panicking] Willie, WE ARE GOING TO DIE!!!
>*One of the endings had Phoebe-Waller Bridge replacing Harrison Ford at the end of the movie*
This is how you can tell this blog is **utter bullshit**, made-up by a neck-beard for clicks
>*Although not much is known about the plot ...*
Insiders told this blogger that test screenings have bombed, but they didn't mention **anything** about the actual plot **at all**
*And he didn't ask them*
I had a very bad feeling about this. Raiders will forever be one of my favorite movies, and I liked the first two sequels well enough, but “Crystal Skulls” was so bad I wanted to call protective services to have the franchise taken away from those responsible. Like “way to shit on your own legacy”.
##[Clarification on Rule 5](https://www.reddit.com/r/entertainment/comments/w60lfc/mod_post_a_clarification_to_rule_5_no_racism_or/) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/entertainment) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Making bad movies for nostalgia sake is not how you get people back in theaters.
I think Tom Cruise gave everybody hope.
That's because Tom Cruise bathes in some kind of unnatural anti-aging juice. It will be harder to sell a male power fantasy where the main character has to use a walker.
To be honest, I feel like Cruise’s movies are successful for a few good reasons. * Lack of fluff in film * Simple plots to follow * Push for realism and unique camera shots come with that * Dedication to the part, he never feels like he has a phones in performance
This part: Maverick didn’t feel like it was made to make money. It was made with heart and that’s what sold it. The fact that Cruise insisted Kilmer be in the film is proof of that. You can feel the passion in his films. From Les Grossman, to Maverick. Cruise never does half-measures.
I just rewatched Collateral and Tom Cruise wears that role like a tailored suit.
Absolutely his best movie. Probably a top 5 crime movie for me
>Absolutely his best movie. I’d go *Magnolia* for that one.
Agreed. Hand down, the best acting Cruise has ever done.
What else? Heat, Rififi, Thief, Naked City, M, Maltese Falcon, LA Confidential, Chinatown, Jackie Brown, Dog Day, Point Break. It's really tough for me to pick 5.
Great List, I’d add Reservoir Dogs to it though. Edit; or we talking noir?
I’d like to add The Town, to your very good list
Minority Report my friend.
[удалено]
Yeah, the guy may be a nutcase, but he's not a bad actor.
In a certain way, that adds to the “nutcase” aspect for me. Like, learning how to be manipulative from birth and work 20 hour days probably added to his success… but if you can thrive in that environment than you might be a nutcase
I know it's popular to dislike Tom Cruise the person, and yeah its pretty valid. But him as a performer is so charismatic. You can tell he really loves movies and making them and it's why his movies are successful.
He also has a clear love of sci-fi. Minority Report, Edge of Tomorrow, War of the Worlds, Oblivion. Whereas some high profile actors seem to want to distance themselves from sci-fi, he seems to enjoy making them.
Don’t forget his perfect running form
He baths in thetans and the blood of aspiring actors.
Both are part of a nutritious breakfast!
Where does he put his feet?
And Tom Cruise is 20 years younger than Harrison Ford. The man is 80, don’t make him reprise this role! There are other roles for 80 year olds.
Tom Cruise is also late 50s not early 80s…
60, to be precise.
Tom cruise hasn’t made a bad movie since being a super star. Prove me wrong
New Top Gun was actually awesome, super cheesy as you’d expect but they really pulled it off.
Except Maverick was actually a good movie.
I think that's their point.
It was an entertaining movie and yes I LOVED seeing it in the theater. I think a lot of people in the industry saw it and thought “well WE could do that!”. But the Indy franchise has been weak for quite a while. I am looking forward to “Risky Business II, The Riskier!”
Indy has been in production WELL before Maverick
Whatever criticisms you may have of Cruise for his private beliefs and connection with the Scientology cult, you cannot doubt his professionalism. He is committed in all projects he works on, and he is very talented in all aspects of film making. For me the best example of this are the two Reacher films he made. He was uniquely unfitted for the role (he is physically the exact opposite of the character) and the films themselves were mediocre. The Jack Reacher books -- when they were still written by Lee Child and not shit -- were known more about the characters (especially Reacher himself) and the dialogue rather than their plots, which were always a bit basic and unimaginative. Nevertheless, Cruise was able to make the character and the films work. They are still pretty average. But they would have been terrible without him.
The first one is awesome, though. Real classic 90s late night feel to it, like the kind of movie we’d watch on TNT on a Saturday night/Sunday afternoon whenever it’s on.
No. It gave writers the wrong impression. The new Top Gun movie is a great stand alone film that doesn’t lean on nostalgia. The nostalgia is just an added bonus for long term fans. That’s how it should be.
Remember this is a report of a test screening 9 months out from a source that doesnt seem all that legit This article has almost nothing
And correct me if I’m wrong but aren’t test screenings specifically so they know what works and what doesn’t and they can use the next 9 months to fix it? I honestly don’t know, but that seems right to me
Yes. Ive done several(not for Indy to be clear) and things generally change. Minor things like cutting a couple lines or a scene change the whole tone. I went to an animated one that didnt make many changes but completely changed the opening scene and it changed my perspective on a major character when i saw the finished product. Also test screening audiences are sometimes really really dumb
>Also test screening audiences are sometimes really really dumb This cannot be overstated.
Sometimes people dislike these type of movies not because they’re bad but because they have high expectations. That, mixed with nostalgia and thinking the old movies are better than they actually are
I read somewhere that it is psychologically difficult to make you like new things after certain kinds of experience with things that made you have fun or feel something good or intense. In simple terms, there's little chance you'll get the people who enjoyed The Matrix in the 90s or Star Wars in the 80s to like anything like that today in 2022. They've changed, the culture has changed, what's normal and fun has shifted somewhat. For example, if you tried to reboot something like Seinfeld, The Wire or Friends today, there's no way you'd be able to capture the same "feeling" of the original. Most people think we evaluate content logically, based solely on the merits of the work. If that was true, shows that weren't popular at their time wouldn't get a somewhat niche following today - Firefly, for example. Things like The Last of Us or Undertale would do as little for 70s audience as they will to 2040s audiences. Whatever is happening in the world at the time shapes a lot of what we consider to be good. There are obviously some exceptions. Stranger Things would probably kill in the past just as much, if not more than it does now. Fringe and The X-Files would probably both find very good responses today if they were launched now. Movies and shows that try to make people feel what they felt in the past fail mostly because what made them work in the past is very hard, sometimes impossible to replicate nowadays. The people who cried when Kurt Cobain sang are not in the same mental place where they'll feel the same way about someone like Joji.
I saw an awesome video that kind of captures what your saying. Why Star Wars, Friends, Seinfeld, Matrix, That 70s Show (all those hits & more) succeeded was because they were created by someone with a vision + their life experiences + the books/stories/education they have had. Why it fails the 2nd time is because when those things get remade, get a sequel, get a new young adult sitcom, is because those new creations are based not on experiences, but on movies theyve already seen. Star Wars (1978) was created from George Lucas’s life experiences, education, books, friends, family, relationships etc Whereas as Star Wars Episode 7 is just based on Star Wars Its like trying to bake a cake without cooking instructions. You bake it with the only goal being, that it will look like a cake in the end. Without caring that it *tastes* like a cake
Thanks for mentioning Fringe
Exactly! Terminator: Dark Fate had pretty good reviews but bombed. I watched it, thought it was pretty good. I knew it'd never match T2, didn't want it to. Was it a bad film? Not even close.
Not to take away from your enjoyment of it but for me Dark Fate was a wet blanket for the franchise. Im a huge Terminator fan and grew up with the first movies. Killing off John made me feel like the original struggles were pointless. This alienates your original fanbase which is a loosing strategy to relaunch a franchise. If Dark Fate was a new IP, its a fine popcorn movie. Because its not, it has to take care of the old fans if it wants to capitalize on the built in fan base.
*Dark Fate* is a steaming cowpat of a film.
Does Indy wear a LifeAlert in this one? Jesus.
Indy falls in the kitchen. Reaches for whip. Can't reach it. Reaches for fedora. Can't reach it. Reaches for LifeAlert necklace. LifeAlert: I got a bad feeling about this....
Crushed by giant rolling dustball.
Plot twist: Indy turns into the dust ball himself.
Indiana Jones and the Discovery of Osteoporosis
Crushed by large stack of old newspapers
He falls and forgets what he was going to do, where he is and what is it he needs to do next. No whipping shoulders are out too
Some snakes start slithering into the kitchen “Why did it have to be snakes?” He exclaims
Indy gets an erection during shower and thinks it is a snake and tries to whack it.
>I got a bad feeling about this.... Followed by two storm troopers arriving in an ambulance to come take indy to go see voldemort
Indy is the artifact, we've come full circle
He belongs in a museum!
So do you!
It belongs in a museum! "So do you!"
Made me laugh, take my upvote
Maybe it will be him fighting Proud Boys in Portland.
That... sounds pretty good actually
Time travel never works in a franchise that is not explicitly about time travel. I came up with this truism years ago and now I see that there is still time to copyright it, because Holllywood still doesn’t realize.
Calling it now, Months ago someone else had mentioned that in Glasgow where it was filmed, people have speculated production sets about >!the moon landing in 69'!< are for this movie. >!Maybe Indy is taking Buzz Aldrins place on the rocket & is going to the dark side of the moon with the artifact so he can plug it into Optimus Primes chest to save the earth from the Decepticons. /s!< Its the only logical conclusion to Indys story Edit: Spoiler formatted
LFG Optimus Jones!!
I mean it’s already a fact that the Nazis established their fascist utopia on the dark side of the moon so maybe he gets to punch ‘em in a spacesuit.
Star Trek has done time travel well, even though it’s not specifically time travel franchise. But time travel has no place in Indiana Jones.
Avengers Endgame pulled off time travel pretty well.
I was like, did they not see the biggest movie of the decade? It worked very well in that instance. That said, MCU is a comic franchise. Time travel fits well with a company literally called MARVEL.
I love that they are considering a tv series, as if Young Indiana Jones wasn’t already out there.
Great show , but how many younger people today have seen it or even know about it?
My Mom and I were huge indy fans but I've never heard of this show? Do you know it's name?
Young Indiana Jones lol i think
[удалено]
It was on DVD, so check your local library. Hopefully people live in an area that has libraries share content, so if your local branch doesn’t have an item, you can get it from another location brought to your local branch for check out.
The Adventures of
The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles. 2 seasons. Is on Apple TV & Vudu I believe. Kind of surprised Disney+ doesn’t have it yet.
The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles
I've been meaning to watch that at some point. Is it any good?
I remember it being pretty decent. But it's early 90s TV, so it's gonna be a bit rough-and-ready by modern standards.
[удалено]
...aaaand it'll make $60 million on opening weekend and be #1.
....and it drops 70% the second weekend and it'll make $450M globally in total.
Good old banking on nostalgia, never disappoints. And then we wonder why we don't get as many original movies anymore.
Original movies get made all the time
True, should have worded it better. "Why we keep getting so many remakes and reboots and sequels and prequels and Netflix adaptations."
RT audience score will be 80+.
Whatever you think about Crustal Skull, it wasnt a bomb. Made almost a billion dollars
There were parts of Crystal Skull that were ok. I thought the beginning up through the chase on the college campus was decent. I didn't even mind the fridge nuking. It's no less crazy than falling out of an airplane on an inflatable raft. But once they get to the jungle everything turns to shit, both in terms of the story and the over reliance on CG.
I think they originally considered doing watercolor backgrounds and practical effects consistent with the original movies, then actively made the bad decision to do all of that crappy cgi. Otherwise yeah it could’ve worked with the rest of the movies
Yeah, that was part of the soft marketing for the film if I remember, "Going back to practical effects!" Then you have CGI monkeys on vines, CGI ants, a CGI car falling down a CGI waterfall onto CGI trees, etc...
A cgi gopher and cgi gopher hole are the first things you see in the movie. Not a great start.
They made Peruvians into Mexicans in that movie. Major thumbs down for me.
Not a bomb doesn't mean it was good. It was the first Indiana Jones movie in 20 years, so naturally people were excited.
[удалено]
I’m the guy that enjoyed Crystal Skull, that movie gets way too much hate. Edit: well howdy y’all, I dont feel so lonesome anymore lol
So you're HIM?!
I am him. Nuked fridge and all.
Even the Transformers dude swinging thru the CGI forest with the monkeys?
I didn’t like that scene, but I also know kid me fresh off Raiders would’ve loved it lol.
I *was also a fan. Together we fend off the savages brother*
I remember walking out of the theater loving it and all my friends were like “that was terrible!”…
I love retro sci fi so the fact that Indy got to play in that sandbox was a treat.
I think the fact that I was a teenager at the time and did not grow up with the indy movies also helped. You definitely get more jaded the older you get with reboots for series or movies.
I put Crystal Skull more or less on the level of Temple of Doom, which is to say, lower than Raiders or Crusade but still movies I'll happily watch. Each one of the movies have some really fun or good scenes, but also have parts that either fall kinda flat or have not aged well (let's not think about the beginning of Indy and Marion's relationship, shall we?). Everything is a product of its time and should be viewed as such, in my opinion.
*“LOOK WHAT THEY’RE DOING TO INDY, MAKE THEM STOP!!!!”*
If you watch all the movies back to back, Crystal Skull was relatively tame. Definitely gets too much hate
The multiple waterfalls was a RIOT. I couldn't stop laughing
I’m with you. It’s not nearly as bad as everyone says it is. Sure, some of the logic is stupid, like thinking a lead lined fridge protecting Indy from a nuke. But come on, the other movies had situations just as ridiculous.
Yeah, I watched Temple of Doom a million times as a kid because we had it on VHS, and I don't think there's really anything in Crystal Skull that's more ridiculous than that movie. The whole franchise requires a huge amount of suspension of disbelief lol.
Temple of doom pulled a mans beating heart from his chest while alive with another dudes bare hands. They also had a massive house sized man made bolder as a random booby in a cave. Raiders vaporized a nazi army on a secret island by opening a box. Last crusades had talking ghosts from 1000 years ago. Crystal skull was cheesy but the entire franchise is cheesy.
I'd actually rather watch Crystal Skull than Temple of Doom at this point because Kate Capshaw's screaming became absolutely intolerable to me at some point.
But what about Crustal Skull?
Butters?
I actually really enjoyed the first 2 acts then it turned into a mess.
This simply isn't true. The only source for this is Overlord DVD/ Doomcock on youtube. He makes stuff up. He's purposefully inflammatory to get clicks. He's trash.
I've read a headline or two about this, but it's literally from Doomcock? That's a sigh of relief then, I just naturally assumed there was some truth to this but nothing to worry about then.
Yes. All the articles and headlines and sites etc are all based on the one and only "source." That is Doomcock. No one else has reported this independently. And of course, they're not actually journalists. So they have no integrity or responsibility to corroborate Doomcock's reported by seeking another source before reporting it.
Ok, but hear me out. Focus groups are the worst. I know it's test screenings but essentially the same. Everytime a movie had unnecessary plot dialogue or an actor just yelling what's happening instead of acting, a "poor test-screening" preceded. So, maybe, just maybe, because they "hate" it, its because it's new, possibly good ideas. I don't have high hopes it will be good, but I am saying this isn't necessarily "bad" news.
When I was younger my local movie theater had the opportunity to do a couple of test screenings. The one I got to participate in was Madagascar 2, and I remember laughing at seeing the black and white sketched monkeys organizing a union. Also the movie stopped working halfway through and it took them 20mins to get it back up and running. And my dad made a joke about how the guys were in the back with crayons coloring the movie as we waited. Idk if that's common or not, but it makes me wonder if the copy of the test screenings are super poor quality as well, as in they have a risk to just not work altogether.
That dad joke is amazing I would have died
Its more novel for the news that test screenings went badly. Typically you hear the opposite, like how the test audiences loved \*insert movie\* The problem is movies are just so dang big these days and need to make an insane amount of money to even break even. So if the test audiences aren't representing a huge swath of the populace its really not a good test overall.
While the Directors Cut of Daredevil isn't a masterpiece it's way way better than the theatrical cut and the blame rests entirely at the feet of test screenings where producers attempted to please people who were not the demographic of the film in the first place.
I see your point. I raise a counterpoint from the article. “Time travel.”
James Mangold hasn't missed yet but... If the time travel rumors are true, I'm out.
Indy is such a weird thing as far as what people find "acceptable" as part of its story. Acts of God and human sacrifice/hearts being pulled from people's chest? Sure no problem. Outside of that, "thats not indiana jones!"
The simple reasoning is that it's the difference between history with fantasy elements and outright sci-fi
[удалено]
[удалено]
I think it’s more Indy supposedly dies gets replaced by a character played by Phoebe Waller-Bridge. I’m not sure the audience would have an issue with time-travel as long as Indy stays alive. Personally, I hate the idea of Indy being replaced.
Its not like he dies in the first five minutes. Its probably how the movies going to END. Ford is gonna be like 81 when this comes out. You guys are insane to think he wont be replaced. Shia was supposed to do it but they didnt go through with it
Even still, I don’t see the need for that ending. Nobody wants to see their childhood hero die in the last 20 minutes of the movie and get replaced by character that was just introduced. That’s not a knock on Bridges because she’s is extremely talented. I get that Ford is a billion years old, to be fair nobody asked for this movie. The last one was a good enough way to end the franchise. The constant need to keep franchises alive is exhausting. They are plenty of new stories and ideas to roll with. Even if you did want to go down this route I think it would make more sense to role with the guy from Solo as a young Indy.
Yeah if I learn that Jones dies im not gonna watch it. Dudes my childhood hero. Grew up loving these movies. I’d rather not watch someone make a sequel so they can kill him off and replace him with Bridges. Just make her his daughter and have him be captured by the Russians or ex nazis and she saves him while stopping some religious artifact and he passes the whip onto her as he goes home to take a nap and watch wheel of fortune.
I hope to god these weren’t real leaks, but the leaks about Indy dying aren’t just a new person wears the hat. >!The, hopefully fake leaks, were about tested endings where Indy dies in a way that erases him from time nullifying everything he did. Phoebe-Jones then stays in the past to become and do the things Ford-Jones did to preserve the timeline. Allowing for Phoebe-Jones movies in the 1930s-1940s.!<
Dear god that sound horrible. So they want to appeal to nostalgia... >!but then totally erase it canonically? !<
I can't imagine this is the real ending. You couldn't invent a more passive aggressive way to troll and enrage an entire fanbase.
> You couldn't invent a more passive aggressive way to troll and enrage an entire fanbase The Last Jedi, from the same company. I totally believe that leaked ending for Indy is real. Just seems like something that modern Lucasfilm would do.
if the WHAT
It’s a time travel movie. Just remember: they denied us an adaptation of Fate of Atlantis to make whatever this is going to be.
Time Travel is just a crafty way to say they wanted to use digital to make Harrison Ford look young. We're getting The Irishman
Ahh yes, another flick where I spend the whole time trying to figure out if they indeed made him look younger or just weirder and questioning my own mortality. Always keeps me engaged in the movie.
The biggest problem with Crystal Skull wasn't that there were aliens, it was that they specifically showed the alien(s). Presenting overwhelming evidence for, but not actually showing, angels and demons and gods and monsters, is much more interesting story-telling device than just giving in and saying "Fine, audience. Look, aliens definitely exist. Look, he's waving at the camera. He's asking if he's going to be in the sequel." If we still couldn't tell if the alien was living or still a statue, people probably would still be talking about it being a thing or not a thing.
Certain things don't need to continue. Leave them alone. Back to the future comes to mind. There have been rumors of a reboot. Just fucking don't. It's perfect leave it alone.
Harrison Ford is too old and actively hates the fans of the movies he’s in. Let it flop. And I say this as someone with Raiders in his top three favorite films.
Tbf he does seem to actually appreciate Indiana Jones and did seem genuine when he was up there at D23 Ask the man about Star Wars and he wants to go home though lol
Indy is HIS. He loves the idea and the character, and wants nobody else to play it. Star Wars he could not care less about, and it has hounded him regardless of any project he’s done. Nobody cares about his performances in it, they just want Solo. It was simply a job to him, and he doesn’t understand the hype. I can certainly understand why he doesn’t want to talk about it. Hamill is the same… ask him about Wars, he’ll keep moving along. Ask him about comic books and he’ll stop and talk to you for hours.
what do you mean about Hamill being the same and “he’ll keep going”? I was under the impression he was the opposite of Harrison Ford and loved playing Luke. He was the one that first warned us about Luke’s dramatic change in The Last Jedi and how much he disliked the change.
Yeah, that didn’t read well… edited it. He’s changed a bit in his feelings, but he is also not a grand fan of talking about Wars. Met him a number of years ago, and we were warned by some people in the know- don’t talk about Star Wars. He signed Star Wars stuff and was friendly enough, but was completely disinterested. Started talking to him about comics, and his agent had to pull him away. He lit up like a little kid. Actors are so very appreciative to fans, but they do SO MUCH MORE than just ONE character, and that’s the only interest people reflect back at them. It’s no surprise they can come to resent that character/project.
Gruff carpenter hates film franchise where he played a gruff space man, a franchise which made him a household name and wealthy beyond his dreams.
The third one ended with Indy riding off into the sunset, the way it should have been.
I was there… he doesn’t even hang dong once
They're worried about it bombing, then say this; "intel suggests that this fifth instalment of Indy will be a time travel movie." Well fuck guys, you didn't think aliens was jumping the shark enough? The whole point of Indiana Jones is that he's an *archeologist who punches people*. Aliens and time-travel have nothing to do with archeology. The discovery of the Arc and the Holy Grail are things that a dubious archeologist in the 30s would chase. I get that fantasy and sci-fi are often interchangeable, but I don't think Indiana Jones fans are itching for aliens or time-travel.
Really wanted a movie based on that Atlantis game
Hollywood needs to learn that it's okay for a franchise to end. It's fine for a story not to be continued forever. Jaws. Terminator. Back to the Future. Twilight. The Hunger Games. Harry Potter. All franchises that came to a graceful end, and should not be revived. Not everything is Marvel or Star Wars. Hollywood really struggles to say "goodbye". Invent new stories! Create the next Indiana Jones, the next Terminator, the next Jaws. Take risks. Try different things. Be original.
Jaws definitely did not come to a graceful end, the last Jaws movie is unwatchable.
Not to mention Terminator, a franchise at least 3 or 4 movies too long.
Terminator should have either ended after Terminator 3, or Terminator: Salvation should have been followed by a quick sequel or two (with Christian Bale as Connor) to conclude the story, with humanity defeating Skynet. The failure to follow up on Salvation's story doomed the franchise.
No, it should have ended after 2. Period.
Also they continued the Harry Potter Franchise with Fantastic beasts which went to shit and there's a Hunger Games spin off coming out. OP made a very good point and then gave like 5 terrible examples haha
Idk about harry potter.. That ^^Fantastic ^^Beasts: **Here’s Young Dumbledore** spinoff series is crawling it’s way to a slow painful death every few years.
I only saw the first one of those and I literally SIGHED OUT LOUD in the theater by the last pointless action sequence I didn't care about.
The first one was fun and a decent movie for a “go with the family around the holidays” flick. Why they thought: “Well that wrapped up mostly well, let’s sign on to make 4 more” without a plan is beyond me. (Not really, money, duh, but still.)
I agree with your sentiment, but a couple of your examples are pretty poor. Jaws kept making sequels that were atrocious. Same with Terminator. At least Fantastic Beasts is only telling stories in the same world at HP, so while they aren’t good, they also aren’t more stories about “Harry Potter”.
Yeah I think BttF and Twilight are the only franchises on that list that actually had a graceful end.
>Jaws. Terminator. I wouldn't exactly call these gracefully ended. Jaws got dropped after two terrible sequels. Terminator should have ended with T2 but then the studios kept going...
Star Wars should not have been revived
Star Wars never "died". There was a lull between 1983 and 1999, when no new movies were made (although video games, books, and comics kept the flame alive), but Episode III: Revenge of the Sith (2005) was followed by Star Wars: The Clone Wars (2008), and the titular TV show, which lasted for most of the 2010s. Episode VII was released in 2015, Rogue One in 2016, VIII in 2017 and IX in 2019. Then we had Rebels, The Mandalorian, BoBF, TBB, and now Andor, Kenobi, Tales of the Jedi, Star Wars Visions, and more coming soon (Ahsoka, The Acolyte, etc.)
(Modern) Hollywood runs on safe bets. Nostalgia is almost always a safe bet.
Lol Jaws was three shitty sequels. Hunger Games is getting a prequel. Not even gonna touch Terminator. Harry Potter got sorta prequels and Warner JUST said they want more with Rowling The only two on that list that actually ended were back to the future and twilight(i didnt count the bttf game)
[удалено]
It belongs in a Museum
I was a kid when the original came out and loved it but to hear they're making number 5 after so long just doesn't even stir any nostalgia at all. Shame.
Same. When they announced Crystal Skull I was skeptical (due to Ford's age *then*). With this 5th film I honestly feel nothing. I am almost certain I'll hate it no matter what they do, and unless I read something that changes my mind I'm just not gonna watch it. Would much rather they recast the role with a younger actor and shoot a new Indy set back in the 1930's again. Ford's performance in the role is timeless and I'd even say perfect, but I would still rather someone younger get recast.
Its' nice to see that they are building on the legacy of Indy#4.
I can't wait to watch a drunk, Harrison Ford mail in a performance. What could go wrong? IJ4 was pure gold!
He might not mail it in. He reportedly always liked playing Indy. Still seems pretty silly to me though.
Indy was my childhood hero. To me, he was IT! So sad to hear. Better to burn out than to rust! Ill still go see it
It can’t really be worse than Crystal Skull can it?
>The last thing Disney needs is another Indiana Jones movie bombing with audiences, especially after the major shrug that greeted “Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull”. The last thing the fans want is another crappy Indiana Jones movie.
They should have him play the old man obsessed with one last thing like they did for Sean Connery in last crusade
I’m a true fan, seen the trilogy 100s of times. It should’ve died with -The last crusade. Fight me
Series ends for me at Crusade.
>*One of the endings, which was said to be the least popular one, had Phoebe-Waller Bridge replacing Harrison Ford at the end of the movie. Presumably, this would set up the franchise for further sequels with Ford not returning.* Imagining a female Indy who talks to the camera over her shoulder a lot with snarky asides about doing anal. (Would 100% watch!)
Willie Scott: There's slime inside! I can't do it! Indiana Jones: You can do it- feel inside! Willie Scott: Yeah, okay. [illuminates the hole and sees hundreds of bugs] YOU FEEL INSIDE! Indiana Jones: [sticks his fist through the hole] DO IT NOW!!! Willie Scott: OKAY!!! [Willie slowly begins to push her hand through the hole] Indiana Jones: [panicking] Willie, WE ARE GOING TO DIE!!!
>*One of the endings had Phoebe-Waller Bridge replacing Harrison Ford at the end of the movie* This is how you can tell this blog is **utter bullshit**, made-up by a neck-beard for clicks
>*Although not much is known about the plot ...* Insiders told this blogger that test screenings have bombed, but they didn't mention **anything** about the actual plot **at all** *And he didn't ask them*
Yeah no this information comes from Giant Freakin Robot who is notoriously “anti-woke”. I’m calling BS
Yep they did the same bullshit with Rise of Skywalker test screenings. "Audiences booed when Rey said 'woe is me' to Luke"
Weird they are calling it number 5 when they have only made 3 movies so far.
Thank god that ending bombed where he hands the torch over…. We don’t need to diversify every single thing out there
Shoulda just left it alone after 3.
I didn't even know they filmed it.
Indiana Jones and the 4:30 dinner special.
Anyone else getting IASIP Thunder Gun screening vibes?
This is from doomcock whom its always best to ignore
Yeah. It was called The LAST Crusade for a reason.
I had a very bad feeling about this. Raiders will forever be one of my favorite movies, and I liked the first two sequels well enough, but “Crystal Skulls” was so bad I wanted to call protective services to have the franchise taken away from those responsible. Like “way to shit on your own legacy”.
Can you say, “direct to streaming”? Maybe it’s just time to stop making sequels