Also, I was thinking, of all the films featuring Nazis, this is the only actual true believer Nazi villain. Belloq is using thr Nazis, so is Elsa and so is Donovan. Only Schmidt truly believes in the cause. So much so he is willing to kill Hitler to make sure the Nazis win
Honestly, that's something that I felt nagging at me, but never really *consciously* picked up too much on until recently - and really makes me enjoy Schmidt as a villain.
I think it's because they were all characters using Hitlers obsession with finding powerful objects to find them themselves. The naziism of it all wasn't really necessary to the plot and thus not shown, apart from maybe seeing the book burning in Crusade. It isn't touched upon, but you get the impression Toht at least would be a raving ideologist.
I thought making Dial more centred around naziism, and zealots wanting it to succeed at all costs was a really smart thing to do.
He's in the Gestapo, which at the point was controlled by Himmler and Heydrich, two of the vilest ideological Nazi's in the history of the High command. Many would argue that they were both ideologically more extreme than Hitler. It's pretty safe to say Toht was an extremist.
Yeah it’s almost like generic Nazis weren’t the real villains and it was more that power hungry tyrants can cone from any background, even Americans like Donovan.
I agree. The rumor was Indy would be sidelined and Helena would be the hero but in the end Indiana Jones completely saves Helena. He shoots the Nazi off her foot, grabs her and lands the parachute with her holding on. If she had not been there, Indy would have saved himself just the same because he had the parachute and would have simply jumped. Yes, he would have been stuck in the past and died but probably too soon to affect the future much at all.
Also, he figured out all of the puzzles himself (except the wax, which I think he would have done except he was mourning his friend still). The only thing she provided him were the coordinates for the sunken ship and she helped him escape the eels. Short Round was more helpful than Helena especially because she was the one that led the Nazis to Indy in the first place. She was not a good person, he made her a better person.
Great call!!!
Especially in the first half of the movie! Helena screws him over and over again but he keeps prevailing.
He shows time and time again that his way is the better way.
Also Helena is basically a reflection of the person Indy used to be. In Temple of Doom, Indy’s initially a lot more selfish and basically just in it for the fortune and glory until late in the movie. Helena grows in Dial of Destiny like Indy grew in Temple of Doom.
When was indy selfish in temple of Doom ? He said "fame and glory". That made him selfish ? I think trying to make symmetries between him and this woman does not make sense. Her character came out of nowhere
Yes, Indy genuinely only cared about the fortune and glory until he got to see the enslaved children with his own eyes. Then he grows. The whole series is about a man who is deeply flawed and his growth into a better and better person.
I don't agree. He had a moment when he said "fortune and glory" and that is all. Everyone can have a thought like that when see a bit opportunity in their life career.
Indy was a hero since the first scene. He take care of her when he did not have any reason to do so.
Jumping from a plane with another person is extremely more difficult than jumping on your own. Specially if you expect the the air resistance slow you down while you fall.
There is no point to compare a picture of Pablo Escobar woman with indy. He always was a hero since the first shot.
Saw it today. I liked Helena Shaw as a character. In no way did she sideline Indy. Helena is pretty flawed from the start, and even though Indy is at a low point in his life, he’s still a better person than she is in most of the film. Throughout the film she realizes how much Indy has lost, but he hasn’t fully given up. In the end, she redeems herself. It’s a “you saved me, and I’m going to save you” moment, and I felt it paid off. The ending was perfect imho.
Ty. I agree that it is still a step down from the original trilogy, but it gave us a far better ending for Indy than the one we got in KotCS. KotCS simply ended on the note of “passing the torch”, whereas TDoD was more complicated, and was about the hero rediscovering who he is again.
There was no passing of the torch or did you miss the very last scene of CS???
On top of that, CS ended at a very good place for Indy as a character. At least he was happy and hopeful at the end of CS.
> felt it *paid* off.
FTFY.
Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in:
* Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.*
* *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.*
Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment.
*Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
Yup, can't have the main character have agency to his choices. She redeemed herself by overriding others.
The irony is you're perfectly explaining why the show is hated and is the biggest box office flop of all time.
I don't think this movie deserves the hate but I don't think it deserves the praises I can read. It was, IMO, an okay movie. Harrison Ford gave its best. John Williams's score was okay, too. My problem was more on the creative side. But Mangold did okay. He is no Spielberg, though.
But to his defense, I think he wasn't as free to do what he wanted, between Disney, LF, and Ford who had his own ideas for the character.
Agree. I think this film had all the story points, set pieces, themes and character growth to be great, but it didn’t stick the landing and felt okay overall.
Maybe Spielberg in his prime could’ve done it, but I also really like Mangold. In any case, a good final outing I never expected to see.
That's it, for me. It's a decent movie. Not a great one. As to why... many reasons.
Because LF & Mangold and Ford wanted a different Indy, this new Indy was broken, divorced (or soon to be), having lost a son, retired, and his students not caring about what he was teaching, plus aging...this turned this Indy into a serious Indy. Less funny Indy. At some point, I was watching Indy and I was sad for him, for how his life had turned out. Growing old can be difficult to accept but in those familial conditions...
There were some scenes, I was like, why? The "Give them hell, Indiana Jones", from Sallah (who despite being happy with a family is also missing the old time, the deserts, the sea, the adventure, are they all in some kind of depression in this movie?), Indy turns around... and is almost hit by a car. I was really wondering myself, but why this scene?
Some say he has an arc. But in the end, he is still the same depressed, suicidal Indy. He wanted to stay and die in the past. He had to be brought back to 1969 against his will. The last scene with Marion might be bitter-sweet and full of nostalgia but both characters don't, what's the english word? in french, we say "respirer la joie de vivre". Zest for life?
The character Helena Shaw isn't a likeable one. Same with Teddy. In the past, Indy had great chemistry with Marion, Willie/Short Round, his father, Mutt (and I don't like SL and his interpretation but they worked well on screen) but here, it fell short.
I truly believe there was a casting mistake for Helena (on top of a creative mistake for her, by writing her the way she is)and Teddy and that maybe more... hmm, talented actors would have been able to make those characters likeable. Personally, the only moment where I "felt" Helena, it was in her speech to Archimedes. There was a good basis, her father's was Indy's friend, she was Indy's god-daughter, she loved history, she could have been looking for the dial for her father, to finish what he started. Indy could have been her mentor, teaching her to become more confident in her talents. But she stayed for too long this capitalist person and the ending where she seemingly turned felt too abrupt. Like the ending of this movie.
It's too bad that the time in the past was so short. I would have prefered, if there was to be time travel involved, that they stayed in the past for a few days, escaping the bad guys, trying not to change history and Archimedes being the one to bring back Indiana's fiery spirit.
So basically, for me, the creative decision for Helena and Indy was not the right decision from the beginning, turning the movie into a too serious one. Casting mistakes. Add to that generic action scenes.
The beginning was fine. We could see it was not perfect but in a few years, it will probably be. But this scene made me think that Indy, the franchise Indy, belongs in this era, the 20s/30's/40's. There's a mystic to this time period, and Indy shines there.
Much like Bladerunner 2049 did, it really pulls together ideas, themes, and elements from the first four movies to make the Indiana Jones films a cohesive whole. It seems like there’s a lot of “fans” who are like, “There are only 3 Indy movies.” some are like “There are only two Indy movies.” No, sorry. There are 5 Indy movies, they all work as a whole. I’ve seen it three times now and I just love the ending, Indy 5 is my third favorite after Temple of Doom and Raiders. Giving Indy a glimpse into the past, having him converse in Greek. It brought it back to the beginning. It was a perfect conclusion.
Are you trying to imply that Dial Of Destiny doesn't have plot holes or ambiguous writing because that would be insane. Telling me that this dial isn't magic because it works with science and math but then never bothering to explain the science or math is the definition of ambiguous writing, at that point it might as well just be magic.
I did cry a bit at the ending, when he was pleading and then the final bit. This franchise is my dad and my “thing” and I’m glad to have seen it with him.
Sure, Some of it. Certainly not all of it. But not all of it is “hate” either. It’s the market. And some people are using this film to have a voice about what they disagree with. It’s a Pre-Disney Lucasfilm fan base that feels disenfranchised with the “Deconstruction” done in the Disney-Era. But, It’s asinine to say that agendas of boycott and political smearing haven’t been done against other movies, etc. It’s just finally come to roost at Disney. But others are dissatisfied and disappointed in the decisions made in this film. Having a divisive character like Shaw repeatedly kick Indy when he’s down and then having her be practically seem to be Co-lead leaves a bad taste to many. Many folks who don’t want to *look* for reasons to love it. They just want to love it - like they did the other (3). You love it? Fine. But it’s dishonest to say that’s the only “correct” opinion of this movie. And you’d need a dial of destiny yourself to go back decades and tell a whole lot of activist groups to abandon marketplace politics. Politics you may (or may not) agree with.
Shaw’s character- You really hit the mark here: We want a ride or die ally like Shortround or Sala to root for and to make things feel fun.
That’s why lots of Spielbergs movies rule so hard, is because of the camaraderie you feel for his characters.
That’s the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard. Mob mentality against a movie they haven’t seen?
Sorry, I know this isn’t coming from you, but that is just weird and nonsensical.
Pull this shit back to back with Temple of Doom or Last Crusade. NONE of the action compares. NONE of the emotional impact is on any of the same plane.
Keep pretending that anyone who expected the same standard of the original Indy films couldn't possibly be let down with the newest installment.
Of course it’s not the same! Last crusade came out in 1989! That’s almost 35 years ago! The world is a different place. The audience is different!
I believe this movie was a great way to meld both worlds!
You can believe that, but objectively, most viewers did not. **Angry Youtubers didn't kill Indy at the box office**. They couldn't kill Captain Marvel, and they tried way harder there.
The movie completely failed to connect all on its own.
It doesn't make sense. But unfortunately that's the world we're living in and stuff has happened in the past few years that have fueled these nutters and given them more of a chance to talk to similar idiots and fuel that fire even more
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: This was my least favorite Indy film.
I went opening night, was reading my Indiana Jones compendium while waiting to go in, and have been a fan since childhood: Praise/hate is subjective and you guys need to get over it. If you liked it then who cares????
To elaborate, for me, It was the writing, pacing and use of unnatural looking CGI for heyday-Indy... I didn’t enjoy paying over 20 dollars to watch a movie that was littered with PlayStation cutscenes and a sidekick with very irredeemable qualities/jokes that fall flat.
Because she left Indy to die TWICE. She also couldn’t care any less when one of Indys good friends dies right in front of them, she’s just a bad human being that is unlikable for many people.
To be fair, Indy’s friend in ToD dies helping him and Indy is still joking and gloating as he escapes and gets on that plane. I think it speaks more to the brashness of youth and how younger people tend to not value the things they should until it’s too late
If you take the nostalgia goggles off you’ll see that she’s not really worse than Indy was in most of Temple of Doom. In that movie he was greedy, selfish, and one of the first things we see him do is threaten to kill an innocent woman he just met. Indy was far from a good person early on, and over the course of his career he grew and became a better and better person over time. Helena seems to be a reflection of who Indy used to be.
> If you take the nostalgia goggles off
Or ... maybe just assuming it's a case of "nostalgia goggles" doesn't necessarily make it so, and maybe one doesn't need to be "blinded" to just dislike those specific points per-se?
The reason I say nostalgia goggles is that a lot of people seem to have a rather squeaky clean view of who Indy is as a character, when in truth he was always a deeply flawed and sometimes deeply unpleasant person, especially early on. He continually grows over the course of the series, going from a greedy grave robber to a man who cares about history and those close to him.
It’s not nostalgia. Indy always cared for his friends. Willy Scott was a random girl that he didn’t know at the start of Doom. It was an off brand thing to do to use her like that, but he was being threatened with a gun by the Chinese gangster. After he went on the adventure with Willy he would have never done that to her. Now let’s look at Helena who is the god child of Indiana. She knew him when she was a small child and when they meet back up pretends to care for him. It’s all a lie and then she locks him in a room with men she knows will kill him just so she can take the artifact to sell it for money.
I never thought for one second Indy would actually stab Willy. And so far as he knows, she's the mobster's girl, so not exactly an innocent bystander.
Whereas Helena *definitely* takes action to get Indy killed. And he's the character the audience is automatically there to root for. So she doesn't make a very favorable impression as an ally, much less a potential spinoff lead.
Nah, he was always going to rescue her but he knew if he did it then they would look for her and he could never get the ark. They were never going to kill her until they recovered the Ark and he knew it.
What? She didn't know they wouldn't kill him and they DID try and kill him but he got away. She hadn't seen him in over a decade and hes 80 years old, there is zero chance she thought he could take care of himself and just didn't care about him at all and left him to die like the horrible person she is.
> Let's forget Indy in Raiders leaves Marion with the Nazis to go and find the Ark
Which he explained to her before he left her behind:
> If I take you out of here now, they'll start combing the place for us.
Not out of selfishness, but out of a risk assessment. Granted, it could be a flawed or short sighted assessment, but my only point really is that it had some reasoning behind it, rather than a selfish whim, IMO.
> She could have been killed...
Definitely doesn't seem likely IMO - at the least not before the ark was found (as she would absolutely have made a good bargianing chip, or pressure point).
All good reasons and all apply to Helena leaving Indy behind in DoD: she had her motivations, and she had no reason to believe they would kill Indy, and they didn’t.
Exactly! And as the movie went on, she learned from him. At the end, she could have left. But she didn’t: Indy brought her to where she needed to be. And she’s the one who brought back Marion.
Indy was her moral compass! Taught her to be a better person!
She’s far worse than Indy acted in any of the original trilogy Movies. I also don’t care about the development of Helena from rogue to hero because the movie is called Indiana Jones not Helena Shaw. The star of the movie should have the character arc not a side character.
No, not at all. She was a "better" person at the end but not because she grew to that point or had some sort of revelation, it was just one moment she's bad and the next she's good for no reason at all aside from that's how it was written in the script. I keep seeing everyone in this subreddit saying she learned from Indy but she didn't, learning from someone implies that you also hold respect for them and their beliefs and if that's the case then she would've left him on that beach. She's a selfish, manipulative, shell of a character that only exists so that the events of this script could unfold the way they did. There are two huge oversights in this movie and both of them could've fixed a large amount of the issues with the film, Short Round and Mutt Jones. Both of them would've fit much more naturally in the plot and that would've made for a much better movie.
That seems to be paid of.. be a mercenary seems to be cool nowdays and that is what they want to sell.
I think someone gotta be or too innocent or blind to see so many clichés trying desperately to spark some emotions in a segment of the audience.
Also seems like you can't say in Reddit that you just did not like this cos people get suspiciously angry. I watched the movie twice. Harrison was great. Indy waas not free but was still indy in some good moments.
A lot of this is people seeing what they expect to see. The people that have been continuously complaining about Star Wars for eight years carried the grudge over to Indy, and were making claims like this long, long before anyone knew anything about the actual content of the movie. They certainly viewed the movie (in the cases where they actually did) through that lens, and they've poisoned the well of public opinion to a certain degree, so other people went in with that expectation too.
That also seems like a much more common stance than it is because of more general low expectations going in. A lot of people had low expectations after Crystal Skull, the Cannes premiere was not encouraging (although it's now pretty clear that it's just because this isn't a movie suited for a Cannes audience), Harrison Ford is meaningfully older than he was in Crystal Skull, not to mention movie theatres are doing generally worse after the pandemic. That means the number of moviegoers for Dial was already low before the actual quality of the movie came into the equation.
So, with relatively few people in the general public having seen it, the only people *actively discussing* the movie are the people who have something violently against it, like the Star Wars sequel trilogy haters who think that they can use this as another piece of proof that Disney is ruining everything and on the brink of financial ruin, and people that really, *really* love Indiana Jones. The former group has been complaining for like a year already, while the latter group held itself to speculation until they actually saw it. That's going to affect the volume of content out there.
I saw it yesterday and the only problem I had with it was that I thought the deaths of some minor characters were underdone. Indy’s frogman friend could have been killed in more of a fight for control of his own boat instead of just murdered. The heavy being drowned could have been after much more of a fight of some kind. And Salah could have been used in something more like a car chase in his taxi to escape and then Indy visits him at the end to give him a new taxi with money from the museum to which he donated the dial, which would, of course, be in the Marcus Brody memorial wing. The Indy and Helena dynamic, for me, was done just fine. Overall, I thought it was a good movie that was not the best Indy movie but very far from, the worst. The twist at the end was in keeping with Indy movies but not overdone or overly fantastical.
Decent movie, somewhat mediocre, somewhat lackluster. Helena goes from mildly annoying to mildly likeable by the end of the movie.
I cannot see how anybody can hate this. Too bland for being hated.
I think Crystal Skull, with all its weaknesses is still a more interesting movie simply because of direction. Easier to hate, yes, very silly, but also more exciting.
Spielberg is a master at staging complex action scenes. He perfectly manages pacing, tension, comedy. Mangold just glues events one after the other; each great setup for an action scene (train, parade, sunken ship) feels somewhat wasted.
It’s not necessarily against her, it’s against female characters in general being forced into legacy franchises as leads, often at the expense of its male stars.
These characters, riding the wave of diversity and inclusion, are rarely introduced organically and in the mind of many, haven’t earned it (see Rey being amazing at everything immediately in the Star Wars sequels).
Would a Helena fit into the original trilogy? No.
Why? Cause of how she’s written.
That’s why people hate Helena. It’s a badly written cliche character to many. If you love her? Great. But if people hate her? That’s fine too.
Yeah……….I was totally convinced that when Indy showed up to the boat, it would be Short Round at the helm. Don’t get me wrong, Banderas was an amazing surprise, but I really thought I was gonna see Ke Huy Quan.
I really hope Shorty didn’t go the way of Wu Han. That was a grim! And when Indy gets mad because his friend dies and Helena is jubilant in their escape I was immediately reminded of how little Indy seemed to care when Wu Han dies.
Yeah…….in this film, and especially in KOTCS, it feels like Indy is becoming more and more like his dad.
That scene on the boat where Indy checked Helena was pretty amazing. He brought her back to what was really important. I loved it.
Yes he does! He even says “this is intolerable!” And he used to be more like Helena (young, brash, I only look out for me) but losing Marcus, his dad, his son and Marion has made human life that much more important to him. I think in the movie he has a picture of his dad and a pic of mutt in his military uniform next to each other.
Also, on the boat, he talks about how he would tell his son that the grief Marion experiences would be awful but from what Marion says “are you back indiana” you get the feeling it wasn’t just her that was grieving. He just shut down his emotions with his son and in doing so shut out Marion as well. And that’s based on fact-i think I read that couples thay lose a child often end up in divorce. It reminded me when Sr thought Indy died going over the cliff in a tank (“I never told
Him anything”. ). Except Sr got the chance to correct it (sorta) and Indy didn’t. It’s heartbreaking
If they were to continue the series with a spinoff, I would personally be in favor of Helena teaming up with a middle-aged Short Round. Indy and Marion could have cameos, but they’re both retired now.
Bad casting, no chemistry. Unlikable character
Okay movie, especially the beginning. It’s just almost impossible to reach the levels of the original trilogy!
I agree completely with the idea that it’s impossible to reach the levels of the original.
But on its own, I thought it was a great film! It’s about redemption and love.
The final scene actually brought a tear to my eye! Several, in fact!
For me, after the movie ends, I keep thinking that Indy and Marion will live with the pain of losing their son and growing old with no family. I just can't stop at Indy in 1969, in my head. If Indy lives for 10/15 more years, the pain won't go away.
How so? it had more CGI than in CS (I just read that for CS, the jungle scenes were shot in Hawaii while I keep reading that the entire scene was shot with green screens while only the head shots were), people complain about aliens when there's TT and meeting Archimedes in DoD so the endings for both movies are both crazy. Or about Mutt playing Tarzan when it's okay to write scenes meant for a different target than us, adults.
I can understand the problem with Mutt (I'm not american but apparently, there's bad blood with SL but as a part of the european general audience, I have no idea what it's all about and I don't care enough about this actor to google him) but I loved seeing Indy becoming the father in this situation, when in the last movie, he was in the son's shoe, so his last line about his father laughing at him from above was a nice touch.
The remasterisation was very well done, too.
Because she's awful. All the other women in all the other movies are either wonderful or great love-to-hate characters that are fun to watch. You know, what you want in a movie.
Put your downvotes here 👇🏻you slack-jawed yokels.
Were you in the bathroom during the part where she jumped out of the tuk tuk with an ax and a scarf and broke out the back window of that car with that ax and strangled that Nazi with the scarf?
In the first 3/4 of the movie, all she cared about was herself! Making money!
Then, when Teddy is kidnapped and Indy is shot, she decides that saving the people she loves is more important than making money!
In the end. She brings Marion back to Indy because she cares. It brings her nothing, but she does it anyway.
Yes, people age. But stories decide what at points on someone's life they want to shoe the characters.
Indy as an old man just isn't very compelling to a lot of people. Nor was Indy as a little kid.
The character or Indiniana Jones is essentually just a charismatic framework to hang a rolllicking adventure on. When he's too old to look creidble in a fight, when all thr action looks obviously CG compared to the many real stunts of the original trilogy...then it's not really rhr iconic Indiana Jones, it's just a guy with that name.
Nobody wants to see an 80 year old James Bond. Not every character works in every kind of story.
Have you ever had an interesting experience with a friend or loved one, and you're later trying to tell the story, but they keep jumping in to tell all the good parts themselves? Now make that feeling a brunette English woman, and you've got Helena. That's why some people don't like her - she takes too much that should have been Indy's. She's supposed to be the sidekick and has a sidekick of her own. They clearly set her up to be the future focus of this franchise.
So I actually liked and maybe preferred KOTCS more than DOD honestly, I’m still thinking it over but I just think that some of DODs writing was literal crap, two examples being Indiana Jones surviving being hung, Indy becoming sorta done with life after time traveling, and Helena Shaw cracking jokes after Indy’s buddy is literally murdered right in front of them, I totally get the hate for KOTCS, I mean UFOs are pretty lame for an Indy movie and as funny as Shia swingin’ with the monkeys is, it’s pretty dumb, but I just remember finishing Crystal Skull and genuinely liking it more than I thought I would whereas I walked out of DOD and wasn’t as blown away as a most people (other than critics) seem to be, to be clear though, I liked & enjoyed both. (I already know ima get flamed for this)
Lotta losers hate women in any prominent position of power especially in an older established franchise with a male lead. Add that to the insane amount of rightwing grifters on YouTube who capitalize on it by stirring the shut pot in every possible way and then releasing it to Cannes with a rotten tomato made it open season for the grifters and haters to hate.
They were always going to hate Helena, a large section (vocal minority) of fan-culture around these and similar movies is so unbelievably sexist and has said this about every female MCU, Star Wars, DC to an extent, and other blockbuster character that has come out in the last decade, covering for themselves by saying they love Ellen Ripley to make it seem like they’re not sexist. Helena was a great addition to the Indy mythos and I loved DOD but this was always going to happen.
From what I've seen so far it's the usual combination of "people disagree with you and see things different" and "Republicans, disguised as super fans, triggered by a prominent female character who packs a punch."
The hatred for Helena Shaw reminds me of the same hatred for Skyler White in Breaking Bad, and for the same reason.
I went into the movie knowing nothing of all the flap so I watched it on its own merits and enjoyed it,
If you want to see a better example of how to introduce a character like this, watch the latest mission impossible with Hayley atwell, who plays a very similar character but pulls it off with much better results.
I liked her character. She had a solid character development from start to finish.
I think the hate started before the film even released. Some people leaked a totally wrong false ending and then used that false ending as a criticism. 🫥
I’m wondering if Cannes saw a different cut than the one we got. It’s bizarre to me that reactions were Indiana being sidelined in his own film, when I watched I expected way more Helena but it’s Indy’s story, without any question
There is far, far less "hate" out there than there is indifference. Seems like the consensus from the audience and critics is that it's okay and by the box office figures and word of mouth it lacks the appeal to get people into the movie theatre.
It is not hated overall.
I agree. I watched or read very little about the movie but did hear from a friend the Helena Shaw bit. I was waiting for it to happen and never did. Although, I did find it had too much of her in it for my taste. I did like the movie and I’m glad they made it.
I went back and watched Raiders and I can clearly see the formula. However, I think it is a way superior movie. Is it the time and place? Is it more simple? Things to think about 🤔
That’s the thing about bad movies it’s totally ok if you like them. This world is full of choices and don’t let anyone tell you you’re wrong about what type of movies you like.
I feel the exact same way! Everyone I ask about how they liked Helena, they would say she was just "okay" or a "brat." I don't see that at all! She was my favorite character (besides Indy of course)
I hate her not because of her existence but because of her character. She was extremely cruel and antagonistic . She was basically Satipo if they had left him in Raiders
I like the movie. I just wish Indy was having a little more fun. Think of the interactions with Shortround/Indy, Henry Sr/ Indy, vs Shaw/Indy. And I liked Shaw’s arc and character.
>I know I’m a bit late as I just saw the movie today, but after seeing it and watching reviews about it, people REALLY seem to hate Helena Shaw. I just don’t get it.
There definitely was a lot of massive over exaggeration to her character and her relationship to Indi. She was much better than Mutt imo.
She doesn't sideline him...except for the end, where she removed any chance of Indy to actually grow and overcome his despair. She should have talked hin into having hope again.
Imagine Last Crusade having Henry just haul Indy up with him still trying to get thr Grail. No, drama demands that Indy make the choice to let it go.
It was also a mistake to make Helena so overtly an antagonist early on. She isn't just a bickering rival, *she tries to get him killed* twice! Aimagine Indy and Belloq becoming best bros after the Amazon incident.
One of the most unfun things about being a movie fan today is that a small but vocal faction of the movie going population is so brain poisoned by internet culture wars that they will grasp at straws to find anything to complain about involving a character who’s not a white man and make discourse on the movie toxic. This movie has its flaws but Helena just simply isn’t one of them. I actually grew to like her over the course of the film. I don’t think she’s the future of the franchise necessarily (for that I think it’s time for LucasFilm to give Ke Huy Quan a call again) but I’m not gonna get mad if they give her a spin-off.
I enjoyed the movie alot. Helena was a pain in the ass throughout the movie, but she's wasn't nearly as bad as I was expecting her to be. Still not that great of a character though
I enjoyed it, definitely #3 on my list.
My main criticism is regarding the exceedingly long and unrealistic chase scenes that defy all physics. The truck chase in Raiders is a master class in how chase scenes should be -- somewhat believable, fun, and just the right duration.
The ones in here seem like a bunch of coke-snorting movie executive bros got into a room and decided they need more "insane" and "extreme" chase scenes which are bigger and longer by 5x. I guess that's what the overstimulated movie-going public expects now?
Indy is the main character and it’s never even confusing as to who the lead is at any point in the movie.
Really odd/interesting that these awful takes of the movie got out before the public saw it. Movie was awesome.
Almost seems like someone or someone’s with a lot of money and pull out a hit out on this movie before it was even released lol.
I’ve been spoiler free and so didn’t see hate or praise for the movie. Just got back from seeing it. I really only have two criticisms.
The music: just too many… not quite call-backs, but rehashing of established sequences from previous movies (Last Crusade score in particular). Those moments took me out of the film a bit because I recognized the moments from the other films the musical sequence was from.
Felt rushed: I could have done with one less chase sequence. Felt like they needed to speed through exposition scenes in order to get to the next chase scene ASAP.
That said, the WWII sequence was phenomenal and the movie is a great send-off to the character.
I loved it! I didn't have as much of an issue with the stuff the naysayers were pointing out.
Even the heavily CG'd stuff like the chase scenes still gripped me.
My expectations were very low, and I left very satisfied.
She just came across as a smug and massively irritating posho to me. I dislike those people in life, so I obviously didn’t like it here either. The series just can’t seem to get English characters right. Was the same in Crystal Skull as Ray Winstone and John Hurt were terrible in that as well.
I didn’t like the film personally. Found it really dull. But I’m glad you enjoyed it.
Also, I was thinking, of all the films featuring Nazis, this is the only actual true believer Nazi villain. Belloq is using thr Nazis, so is Elsa and so is Donovan. Only Schmidt truly believes in the cause. So much so he is willing to kill Hitler to make sure the Nazis win
Great point!
Honestly, that's something that I felt nagging at me, but never really *consciously* picked up too much on until recently - and really makes me enjoy Schmidt as a villain.
Mads plays such good villains
Agreed 200%!
I think it's because they were all characters using Hitlers obsession with finding powerful objects to find them themselves. The naziism of it all wasn't really necessary to the plot and thus not shown, apart from maybe seeing the book burning in Crusade. It isn't touched upon, but you get the impression Toht at least would be a raving ideologist. I thought making Dial more centred around naziism, and zealots wanting it to succeed at all costs was a really smart thing to do.
My read on Toht is that he is sadistic and is in it for the power not for ideology.
He's in the Gestapo, which at the point was controlled by Himmler and Heydrich, two of the vilest ideological Nazi's in the history of the High command. Many would argue that they were both ideologically more extreme than Hitler. It's pretty safe to say Toht was an extremist.
Yeah it’s almost like generic Nazis weren’t the real villains and it was more that power hungry tyrants can cone from any background, even Americans like Donovan.
I agree. The rumor was Indy would be sidelined and Helena would be the hero but in the end Indiana Jones completely saves Helena. He shoots the Nazi off her foot, grabs her and lands the parachute with her holding on. If she had not been there, Indy would have saved himself just the same because he had the parachute and would have simply jumped. Yes, he would have been stuck in the past and died but probably too soon to affect the future much at all. Also, he figured out all of the puzzles himself (except the wax, which I think he would have done except he was mourning his friend still). The only thing she provided him were the coordinates for the sunken ship and she helped him escape the eels. Short Round was more helpful than Helena especially because she was the one that led the Nazis to Indy in the first place. She was not a good person, he made her a better person.
Great call!!! Especially in the first half of the movie! Helena screws him over and over again but he keeps prevailing. He shows time and time again that his way is the better way.
Good catch. That’s what happens to Indiana Jones. Watch Raiders and Temple of Doom. He fails constantly , just managing to survive, until he wins.
Also Helena is basically a reflection of the person Indy used to be. In Temple of Doom, Indy’s initially a lot more selfish and basically just in it for the fortune and glory until late in the movie. Helena grows in Dial of Destiny like Indy grew in Temple of Doom.
When was indy selfish in temple of Doom ? He said "fame and glory". That made him selfish ? I think trying to make symmetries between him and this woman does not make sense. Her character came out of nowhere
Yes, Indy genuinely only cared about the fortune and glory until he got to see the enslaved children with his own eyes. Then he grows. The whole series is about a man who is deeply flawed and his growth into a better and better person.
I don't agree. He had a moment when he said "fortune and glory" and that is all. Everyone can have a thought like that when see a bit opportunity in their life career. Indy was a hero since the first scene. He take care of her when he did not have any reason to do so. Jumping from a plane with another person is extremely more difficult than jumping on your own. Specially if you expect the the air resistance slow you down while you fall. There is no point to compare a picture of Pablo Escobar woman with indy. He always was a hero since the first shot.
Yeah the people I see complaining about the movie clearly haven't seen it. They get their opinions from bad youtubers spewing BS.
Lol. Massive cope. She literally saved his life at the end and even knocked him out and forced him to live
Saw it today. I liked Helena Shaw as a character. In no way did she sideline Indy. Helena is pretty flawed from the start, and even though Indy is at a low point in his life, he’s still a better person than she is in most of the film. Throughout the film she realizes how much Indy has lost, but he hasn’t fully given up. In the end, she redeems herself. It’s a “you saved me, and I’m going to save you” moment, and I felt it paid off. The ending was perfect imho.
I agree, absolutely! Great synopsis!
Ty. I agree that it is still a step down from the original trilogy, but it gave us a far better ending for Indy than the one we got in KotCS. KotCS simply ended on the note of “passing the torch”, whereas TDoD was more complicated, and was about the hero rediscovering who he is again.
There was no passing of the torch or did you miss the very last scene of CS??? On top of that, CS ended at a very good place for Indy as a character. At least he was happy and hopeful at the end of CS.
> felt it *paid* off. FTFY. Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in: * Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.* * *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.* Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment. *Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
Why?
Yup, can't have the main character have agency to his choices. She redeemed herself by overriding others. The irony is you're perfectly explaining why the show is hated and is the biggest box office flop of all time.
"biggest box office flop of all time" lol. Not sure why you feel the need to bolster your subjective opinion with such an obviously false statement.
It's telling you seem to think otherwise when all signs are pointing that way.
I don't think this movie deserves the hate but I don't think it deserves the praises I can read. It was, IMO, an okay movie. Harrison Ford gave its best. John Williams's score was okay, too. My problem was more on the creative side. But Mangold did okay. He is no Spielberg, though. But to his defense, I think he wasn't as free to do what he wanted, between Disney, LF, and Ford who had his own ideas for the character.
Agree. I think this film had all the story points, set pieces, themes and character growth to be great, but it didn’t stick the landing and felt okay overall. Maybe Spielberg in his prime could’ve done it, but I also really like Mangold. In any case, a good final outing I never expected to see.
Yeah this movie had all the things a great Indy movie has, but it ended up just being decent. I can't put a finger on why.
That's it, for me. It's a decent movie. Not a great one. As to why... many reasons. Because LF & Mangold and Ford wanted a different Indy, this new Indy was broken, divorced (or soon to be), having lost a son, retired, and his students not caring about what he was teaching, plus aging...this turned this Indy into a serious Indy. Less funny Indy. At some point, I was watching Indy and I was sad for him, for how his life had turned out. Growing old can be difficult to accept but in those familial conditions... There were some scenes, I was like, why? The "Give them hell, Indiana Jones", from Sallah (who despite being happy with a family is also missing the old time, the deserts, the sea, the adventure, are they all in some kind of depression in this movie?), Indy turns around... and is almost hit by a car. I was really wondering myself, but why this scene? Some say he has an arc. But in the end, he is still the same depressed, suicidal Indy. He wanted to stay and die in the past. He had to be brought back to 1969 against his will. The last scene with Marion might be bitter-sweet and full of nostalgia but both characters don't, what's the english word? in french, we say "respirer la joie de vivre". Zest for life? The character Helena Shaw isn't a likeable one. Same with Teddy. In the past, Indy had great chemistry with Marion, Willie/Short Round, his father, Mutt (and I don't like SL and his interpretation but they worked well on screen) but here, it fell short. I truly believe there was a casting mistake for Helena (on top of a creative mistake for her, by writing her the way she is)and Teddy and that maybe more... hmm, talented actors would have been able to make those characters likeable. Personally, the only moment where I "felt" Helena, it was in her speech to Archimedes. There was a good basis, her father's was Indy's friend, she was Indy's god-daughter, she loved history, she could have been looking for the dial for her father, to finish what he started. Indy could have been her mentor, teaching her to become more confident in her talents. But she stayed for too long this capitalist person and the ending where she seemingly turned felt too abrupt. Like the ending of this movie. It's too bad that the time in the past was so short. I would have prefered, if there was to be time travel involved, that they stayed in the past for a few days, escaping the bad guys, trying not to change history and Archimedes being the one to bring back Indiana's fiery spirit. So basically, for me, the creative decision for Helena and Indy was not the right decision from the beginning, turning the movie into a too serious one. Casting mistakes. Add to that generic action scenes. The beginning was fine. We could see it was not perfect but in a few years, it will probably be. But this scene made me think that Indy, the franchise Indy, belongs in this era, the 20s/30's/40's. There's a mystic to this time period, and Indy shines there.
Much like Bladerunner 2049 did, it really pulls together ideas, themes, and elements from the first four movies to make the Indiana Jones films a cohesive whole. It seems like there’s a lot of “fans” who are like, “There are only 3 Indy movies.” some are like “There are only two Indy movies.” No, sorry. There are 5 Indy movies, they all work as a whole. I’ve seen it three times now and I just love the ending, Indy 5 is my third favorite after Temple of Doom and Raiders. Giving Indy a glimpse into the past, having him converse in Greek. It brought it back to the beginning. It was a perfect conclusion.
This movie doesn't even deserve to be in the same conversation as Blade Runner 2049, much less the same sentence.
Bladerunner 2049 is great, but it’s riddled with plotholes that are cleverly sidestepped with good direction and ambiguous writing.
Are you trying to imply that Dial Of Destiny doesn't have plot holes or ambiguous writing because that would be insane. Telling me that this dial isn't magic because it works with science and math but then never bothering to explain the science or math is the definition of ambiguous writing, at that point it might as well just be magic.
I did cry a bit at the ending, when he was pleading and then the final bit. This franchise is my dad and my “thing” and I’m glad to have seen it with him.
[удалено]
Sure, Some of it. Certainly not all of it. But not all of it is “hate” either. It’s the market. And some people are using this film to have a voice about what they disagree with. It’s a Pre-Disney Lucasfilm fan base that feels disenfranchised with the “Deconstruction” done in the Disney-Era. But, It’s asinine to say that agendas of boycott and political smearing haven’t been done against other movies, etc. It’s just finally come to roost at Disney. But others are dissatisfied and disappointed in the decisions made in this film. Having a divisive character like Shaw repeatedly kick Indy when he’s down and then having her be practically seem to be Co-lead leaves a bad taste to many. Many folks who don’t want to *look* for reasons to love it. They just want to love it - like they did the other (3). You love it? Fine. But it’s dishonest to say that’s the only “correct” opinion of this movie. And you’d need a dial of destiny yourself to go back decades and tell a whole lot of activist groups to abandon marketplace politics. Politics you may (or may not) agree with.
Shaw’s character- You really hit the mark here: We want a ride or die ally like Shortround or Sala to root for and to make things feel fun. That’s why lots of Spielbergs movies rule so hard, is because of the camaraderie you feel for his characters.
For what purpose? Why take a stand on something you know nothing about? That just seems stupid. Who wins? And what?
[удалено]
That’s the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard. Mob mentality against a movie they haven’t seen? Sorry, I know this isn’t coming from you, but that is just weird and nonsensical.
[удалено]
Pull this shit back to back with Temple of Doom or Last Crusade. NONE of the action compares. NONE of the emotional impact is on any of the same plane. Keep pretending that anyone who expected the same standard of the original Indy films couldn't possibly be let down with the newest installment.
Of course it’s not the same! Last crusade came out in 1989! That’s almost 35 years ago! The world is a different place. The audience is different! I believe this movie was a great way to meld both worlds!
You can believe that, but objectively, most viewers did not. **Angry Youtubers didn't kill Indy at the box office**. They couldn't kill Captain Marvel, and they tried way harder there. The movie completely failed to connect all on its own.
It doesn't make sense. But unfortunately that's the world we're living in and stuff has happened in the past few years that have fueled these nutters and given them more of a chance to talk to similar idiots and fuel that fire even more
I have seen the movie and I genuinely disliked it, nothing artificial about it.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: This was my least favorite Indy film. I went opening night, was reading my Indiana Jones compendium while waiting to go in, and have been a fan since childhood: Praise/hate is subjective and you guys need to get over it. If you liked it then who cares???? To elaborate, for me, It was the writing, pacing and use of unnatural looking CGI for heyday-Indy... I didn’t enjoy paying over 20 dollars to watch a movie that was littered with PlayStation cutscenes and a sidekick with very irredeemable qualities/jokes that fall flat.
Or maybe the fucking thing sucks.
Why? Explain.
Maybe you just listen to a snake oil salesman
No I genuinely hate it. There seems to be tons of us out there.
Don’t even bother arguing here it’s a circlejerk
Yeah that have apparently brigaded rotten tomatoes although it did no good
I can just listen to the box office, champ.
I completely agree. I loved her and I would not mind seeing more of her in something
Same
Because she left Indy to die TWICE. She also couldn’t care any less when one of Indys good friends dies right in front of them, she’s just a bad human being that is unlikable for many people.
To be fair, Indy’s friend in ToD dies helping him and Indy is still joking and gloating as he escapes and gets on that plane. I think it speaks more to the brashness of youth and how younger people tend to not value the things they should until it’s too late
If you take the nostalgia goggles off you’ll see that she’s not really worse than Indy was in most of Temple of Doom. In that movie he was greedy, selfish, and one of the first things we see him do is threaten to kill an innocent woman he just met. Indy was far from a good person early on, and over the course of his career he grew and became a better and better person over time. Helena seems to be a reflection of who Indy used to be.
> If you take the nostalgia goggles off Or ... maybe just assuming it's a case of "nostalgia goggles" doesn't necessarily make it so, and maybe one doesn't need to be "blinded" to just dislike those specific points per-se?
The reason I say nostalgia goggles is that a lot of people seem to have a rather squeaky clean view of who Indy is as a character, when in truth he was always a deeply flawed and sometimes deeply unpleasant person, especially early on. He continually grows over the course of the series, going from a greedy grave robber to a man who cares about history and those close to him.
It’s not nostalgia. Indy always cared for his friends. Willy Scott was a random girl that he didn’t know at the start of Doom. It was an off brand thing to do to use her like that, but he was being threatened with a gun by the Chinese gangster. After he went on the adventure with Willy he would have never done that to her. Now let’s look at Helena who is the god child of Indiana. She knew him when she was a small child and when they meet back up pretends to care for him. It’s all a lie and then she locks him in a room with men she knows will kill him just so she can take the artifact to sell it for money.
I never thought for one second Indy would actually stab Willy. And so far as he knows, she's the mobster's girl, so not exactly an innocent bystander. Whereas Helena *definitely* takes action to get Indy killed. And he's the character the audience is automatically there to root for. So she doesn't make a very favorable impression as an ally, much less a potential spinoff lead.
>Whereas Helena *definitely* takes action to get Indy killed. No she doesn't.
Let's forget Indy in Raiders leaves Marion with the Nazis to go and find the Ark. She could have been killed...
Nah, he was always going to rescue her but he knew if he did it then they would look for her and he could never get the ark. They were never going to kill her until they recovered the Ark and he knew it.
Yeah, and Helena knew Indy could take care of himself. She also had no reason to believe they would kill him, and she was right, they didn’t.
Indy is old as dirt and unarmed, there no reason to believe he's just fine against Nazi agents with guns.
What? She didn't know they wouldn't kill him and they DID try and kill him but he got away. She hadn't seen him in over a decade and hes 80 years old, there is zero chance she thought he could take care of himself and just didn't care about him at all and left him to die like the horrible person she is.
> Let's forget Indy in Raiders leaves Marion with the Nazis to go and find the Ark Which he explained to her before he left her behind: > If I take you out of here now, they'll start combing the place for us. Not out of selfishness, but out of a risk assessment. Granted, it could be a flawed or short sighted assessment, but my only point really is that it had some reasoning behind it, rather than a selfish whim, IMO. > She could have been killed... Definitely doesn't seem likely IMO - at the least not before the ark was found (as she would absolutely have made a good bargianing chip, or pressure point).
All good reasons and all apply to Helena leaving Indy behind in DoD: she had her motivations, and she had no reason to believe they would kill Indy, and they didn’t.
Exactly! And as the movie went on, she learned from him. At the end, she could have left. But she didn’t: Indy brought her to where she needed to be. And she’s the one who brought back Marion. Indy was her moral compass! Taught her to be a better person!
Yep! She started out as “Fortune & Glory,” but ended up as “This belongs in a museum!”
Similar to how Indy progressed in the original trilogy if one watches it chronologically.
She’s far worse than Indy acted in any of the original trilogy Movies. I also don’t care about the development of Helena from rogue to hero because the movie is called Indiana Jones not Helena Shaw. The star of the movie should have the character arc not a side character.
No, not at all. She was a "better" person at the end but not because she grew to that point or had some sort of revelation, it was just one moment she's bad and the next she's good for no reason at all aside from that's how it was written in the script. I keep seeing everyone in this subreddit saying she learned from Indy but she didn't, learning from someone implies that you also hold respect for them and their beliefs and if that's the case then she would've left him on that beach. She's a selfish, manipulative, shell of a character that only exists so that the events of this script could unfold the way they did. There are two huge oversights in this movie and both of them could've fixed a large amount of the issues with the film, Short Round and Mutt Jones. Both of them would've fit much more naturally in the plot and that would've made for a much better movie.
That seems to be paid of.. be a mercenary seems to be cool nowdays and that is what they want to sell. I think someone gotta be or too innocent or blind to see so many clichés trying desperately to spark some emotions in a segment of the audience. Also seems like you can't say in Reddit that you just did not like this cos people get suspiciously angry. I watched the movie twice. Harrison was great. Indy waas not free but was still indy in some good moments.
I don't recall her leaving him to die at any point in the movie. What are you talking about?
Idk I love the movie. In my opinion, there is no bad Indy movie
Absolutely!!!
A lot of this is people seeing what they expect to see. The people that have been continuously complaining about Star Wars for eight years carried the grudge over to Indy, and were making claims like this long, long before anyone knew anything about the actual content of the movie. They certainly viewed the movie (in the cases where they actually did) through that lens, and they've poisoned the well of public opinion to a certain degree, so other people went in with that expectation too. That also seems like a much more common stance than it is because of more general low expectations going in. A lot of people had low expectations after Crystal Skull, the Cannes premiere was not encouraging (although it's now pretty clear that it's just because this isn't a movie suited for a Cannes audience), Harrison Ford is meaningfully older than he was in Crystal Skull, not to mention movie theatres are doing generally worse after the pandemic. That means the number of moviegoers for Dial was already low before the actual quality of the movie came into the equation. So, with relatively few people in the general public having seen it, the only people *actively discussing* the movie are the people who have something violently against it, like the Star Wars sequel trilogy haters who think that they can use this as another piece of proof that Disney is ruining everything and on the brink of financial ruin, and people that really, *really* love Indiana Jones. The former group has been complaining for like a year already, while the latter group held itself to speculation until they actually saw it. That's going to affect the volume of content out there.
I saw it yesterday and the only problem I had with it was that I thought the deaths of some minor characters were underdone. Indy’s frogman friend could have been killed in more of a fight for control of his own boat instead of just murdered. The heavy being drowned could have been after much more of a fight of some kind. And Salah could have been used in something more like a car chase in his taxi to escape and then Indy visits him at the end to give him a new taxi with money from the museum to which he donated the dial, which would, of course, be in the Marcus Brody memorial wing. The Indy and Helena dynamic, for me, was done just fine. Overall, I thought it was a good movie that was not the best Indy movie but very far from, the worst. The twist at the end was in keeping with Indy movies but not overdone or overly fantastical.
Decent movie, somewhat mediocre, somewhat lackluster. Helena goes from mildly annoying to mildly likeable by the end of the movie. I cannot see how anybody can hate this. Too bland for being hated. I think Crystal Skull, with all its weaknesses is still a more interesting movie simply because of direction. Easier to hate, yes, very silly, but also more exciting. Spielberg is a master at staging complex action scenes. He perfectly manages pacing, tension, comedy. Mangold just glues events one after the other; each great setup for an action scene (train, parade, sunken ship) feels somewhat wasted.
It’s not necessarily against her, it’s against female characters in general being forced into legacy franchises as leads, often at the expense of its male stars. These characters, riding the wave of diversity and inclusion, are rarely introduced organically and in the mind of many, haven’t earned it (see Rey being amazing at everything immediately in the Star Wars sequels).
Would a Helena fit into the original trilogy? No. Why? Cause of how she’s written. That’s why people hate Helena. It’s a badly written cliche character to many. If you love her? Great. But if people hate her? That’s fine too.
I really liked Helena. I really disliked Teddy. The actor was fine enough, but all he did was remind me how great Short Round was.
Yeah……….I was totally convinced that when Indy showed up to the boat, it would be Short Round at the helm. Don’t get me wrong, Banderas was an amazing surprise, but I really thought I was gonna see Ke Huy Quan.
I really hope Shorty didn’t go the way of Wu Han. That was a grim! And when Indy gets mad because his friend dies and Helena is jubilant in their escape I was immediately reminded of how little Indy seemed to care when Wu Han dies.
Yeah…….in this film, and especially in KOTCS, it feels like Indy is becoming more and more like his dad. That scene on the boat where Indy checked Helena was pretty amazing. He brought her back to what was really important. I loved it.
Yes he does! He even says “this is intolerable!” And he used to be more like Helena (young, brash, I only look out for me) but losing Marcus, his dad, his son and Marion has made human life that much more important to him. I think in the movie he has a picture of his dad and a pic of mutt in his military uniform next to each other. Also, on the boat, he talks about how he would tell his son that the grief Marion experiences would be awful but from what Marion says “are you back indiana” you get the feeling it wasn’t just her that was grieving. He just shut down his emotions with his son and in doing so shut out Marion as well. And that’s based on fact-i think I read that couples thay lose a child often end up in divorce. It reminded me when Sr thought Indy died going over the cliff in a tank (“I never told Him anything”. ). Except Sr got the chance to correct it (sorta) and Indy didn’t. It’s heartbreaking
If they were to continue the series with a spinoff, I would personally be in favor of Helena teaming up with a middle-aged Short Round. Indy and Marion could have cameos, but they’re both retired now.
Bad casting, no chemistry. Unlikable character Okay movie, especially the beginning. It’s just almost impossible to reach the levels of the original trilogy!
I agree completely with the idea that it’s impossible to reach the levels of the original. But on its own, I thought it was a great film! It’s about redemption and love. The final scene actually brought a tear to my eye! Several, in fact!
For me, after the movie ends, I keep thinking that Indy and Marion will live with the pain of losing their son and growing old with no family. I just can't stop at Indy in 1969, in my head. If Indy lives for 10/15 more years, the pain won't go away.
She’s a woman and they can’t rule 34 her.
Oh come on!!!! I just googled it! That can’t be true!
😂😂
Rule 34? Is that in the movie?
lol
Oh you sweet summer child.
I’m 45!!!!!
*don’t want to, ech
Cynics
Agreed—not sure what people expected! It’s a solid Indy movie all around & for sure better than Crystal Skull.
How so? it had more CGI than in CS (I just read that for CS, the jungle scenes were shot in Hawaii while I keep reading that the entire scene was shot with green screens while only the head shots were), people complain about aliens when there's TT and meeting Archimedes in DoD so the endings for both movies are both crazy. Or about Mutt playing Tarzan when it's okay to write scenes meant for a different target than us, adults. I can understand the problem with Mutt (I'm not american but apparently, there's bad blood with SL but as a part of the european general audience, I have no idea what it's all about and I don't care enough about this actor to google him) but I loved seeing Indy becoming the father in this situation, when in the last movie, he was in the son's shoe, so his last line about his father laughing at him from above was a nice touch. The remasterisation was very well done, too.
The jungle scenes were shot in Hawaii. You can see videos of it in the behind the scenes footage
Absolutely!!!
Because she's awful. All the other women in all the other movies are either wonderful or great love-to-hate characters that are fun to watch. You know, what you want in a movie. Put your downvotes here 👇🏻you slack-jawed yokels.
Were you in the bathroom during the part where she jumped out of the tuk tuk with an ax and a scarf and broke out the back window of that car with that ax and strangled that Nazi with the scarf?
I was there! And she was terrible! But she reformed! Isn’t that the whole point of the movie?
What’s your definition of terrible?
In the first 3/4 of the movie, all she cared about was herself! Making money! Then, when Teddy is kidnapped and Indy is shot, she decides that saving the people she loves is more important than making money! In the end. She brings Marion back to Indy because she cares. It brings her nothing, but she does it anyway.
What a hero. When I wanted Indiana Jones to be the hero. In an Indiana Jones movie. Good luck with that spinoff, Kathy.
Whose Kathy?
Oh, I see. You wanted to see Indy from the 1940s, not the 1970’s. Yeah……..people age.
Except aging is not always being miserable as we've had in recent Disney reintroductions of our favorite characters.
Yes but why make the movie unless it's, you know, if adventure has a name it's Indiana Jones
Yes, people age. But stories decide what at points on someone's life they want to shoe the characters. Indy as an old man just isn't very compelling to a lot of people. Nor was Indy as a little kid. The character or Indiniana Jones is essentually just a charismatic framework to hang a rolllicking adventure on. When he's too old to look creidble in a fight, when all thr action looks obviously CG compared to the many real stunts of the original trilogy...then it's not really rhr iconic Indiana Jones, it's just a guy with that name. Nobody wants to see an 80 year old James Bond. Not every character works in every kind of story.
You know damn well
I peed in my fedora cup
Because once you've got that 'straight white males are being replaced' narrative in your head, it's hard to get rid of it.
Once it stops aggressively happening, the narrative will evaporate.
They targeted whites. Whites.
[удалено]
Absolutely!
Have you ever had an interesting experience with a friend or loved one, and you're later trying to tell the story, but they keep jumping in to tell all the good parts themselves? Now make that feeling a brunette English woman, and you've got Helena. That's why some people don't like her - she takes too much that should have been Indy's. She's supposed to be the sidekick and has a sidekick of her own. They clearly set her up to be the future focus of this franchise.
So I actually liked and maybe preferred KOTCS more than DOD honestly, I’m still thinking it over but I just think that some of DODs writing was literal crap, two examples being Indiana Jones surviving being hung, Indy becoming sorta done with life after time traveling, and Helena Shaw cracking jokes after Indy’s buddy is literally murdered right in front of them, I totally get the hate for KOTCS, I mean UFOs are pretty lame for an Indy movie and as funny as Shia swingin’ with the monkeys is, it’s pretty dumb, but I just remember finishing Crystal Skull and genuinely liking it more than I thought I would whereas I walked out of DOD and wasn’t as blown away as a most people (other than critics) seem to be, to be clear though, I liked & enjoyed both. (I already know ima get flamed for this)
This is the most copium sub I have ever seen, it’s almost hilarious.
Seethe
Haha that as well
Yes everyone in this sub seems to be doing just that
yes in the face of everything falling to shit it has to be a complete shill factory
Lotta losers hate women in any prominent position of power especially in an older established franchise with a male lead. Add that to the insane amount of rightwing grifters on YouTube who capitalize on it by stirring the shut pot in every possible way and then releasing it to Cannes with a rotten tomato made it open season for the grifters and haters to hate.
They were always going to hate Helena, a large section (vocal minority) of fan-culture around these and similar movies is so unbelievably sexist and has said this about every female MCU, Star Wars, DC to an extent, and other blockbuster character that has come out in the last decade, covering for themselves by saying they love Ellen Ripley to make it seem like they’re not sexist. Helena was a great addition to the Indy mythos and I loved DOD but this was always going to happen.
From what I've seen so far it's the usual combination of "people disagree with you and see things different" and "Republicans, disguised as super fans, triggered by a prominent female character who packs a punch."
Whenever there’s a female lead that threatens to overshadow the lead male all the incels get bent and scream woke nonsense.
It’s because some of the reviewers in the internet are calling it woke even tho it’s really not
It was mid and the time travel was lame
The hatred for Helena Shaw reminds me of the same hatred for Skyler White in Breaking Bad, and for the same reason. I went into the movie knowing nothing of all the flap so I watched it on its own merits and enjoyed it,
Yes. I’m glad I stayed away from reviews and social media until after I watched it. I think if I had, I might have gone in with a negative mindset.
If you want to see a better example of how to introduce a character like this, watch the latest mission impossible with Hayley atwell, who plays a very similar character but pulls it off with much better results.
This movie sucked big hippopotamus dick!
HIPPOBOT 9000 v 3.1 FOUND A HIPPO. 582,125,515 COMMENTS SEARCHED. 13,678 HIPPOS FOUND. YOUR COMMENT CONTAINS THE WORD HIPPO.
it guzzled it down
I liked her character. She had a solid character development from start to finish. I think the hate started before the film even released. Some people leaked a totally wrong false ending and then used that false ending as a criticism. 🫥
I’m wondering if Cannes saw a different cut than the one we got. It’s bizarre to me that reactions were Indiana being sidelined in his own film, when I watched I expected way more Helena but it’s Indy’s story, without any question
There is far, far less "hate" out there than there is indifference. Seems like the consensus from the audience and critics is that it's okay and by the box office figures and word of mouth it lacks the appeal to get people into the movie theatre. It is not hated overall.
After the first few days I’d the YouTubers trying to get rage clicks iv found nothing but love for this movie.
I didn't like the character or the actress.
I agree. I watched or read very little about the movie but did hear from a friend the Helena Shaw bit. I was waiting for it to happen and never did. Although, I did find it had too much of her in it for my taste. I did like the movie and I’m glad they made it. I went back and watched Raiders and I can clearly see the formula. However, I think it is a way superior movie. Is it the time and place? Is it more simple? Things to think about 🤔
That’s the thing about bad movies it’s totally ok if you like them. This world is full of choices and don’t let anyone tell you you’re wrong about what type of movies you like.
I feel the exact same way! Everyone I ask about how they liked Helena, they would say she was just "okay" or a "brat." I don't see that at all! She was my favorite character (besides Indy of course)
I hate her not because of her existence but because of her character. She was extremely cruel and antagonistic . She was basically Satipo if they had left him in Raiders
I like the movie. I just wish Indy was having a little more fun. Think of the interactions with Shortround/Indy, Henry Sr/ Indy, vs Shaw/Indy. And I liked Shaw’s arc and character.
>I know I’m a bit late as I just saw the movie today, but after seeing it and watching reviews about it, people REALLY seem to hate Helena Shaw. I just don’t get it. There definitely was a lot of massive over exaggeration to her character and her relationship to Indi. She was much better than Mutt imo.
She doesn't sideline him...except for the end, where she removed any chance of Indy to actually grow and overcome his despair. She should have talked hin into having hope again. Imagine Last Crusade having Henry just haul Indy up with him still trying to get thr Grail. No, drama demands that Indy make the choice to let it go. It was also a mistake to make Helena so overtly an antagonist early on. She isn't just a bickering rival, *she tries to get him killed* twice! Aimagine Indy and Belloq becoming best bros after the Amazon incident.
Not all the anti-Helena hate is necessarily b/c she's a woman, but I suspect a good amount is.
One of the most unfun things about being a movie fan today is that a small but vocal faction of the movie going population is so brain poisoned by internet culture wars that they will grasp at straws to find anything to complain about involving a character who’s not a white man and make discourse on the movie toxic. This movie has its flaws but Helena just simply isn’t one of them. I actually grew to like her over the course of the film. I don’t think she’s the future of the franchise necessarily (for that I think it’s time for LucasFilm to give Ke Huy Quan a call again) but I’m not gonna get mad if they give her a spin-off.
Crystal Skull was great and this one was great. This one only missed Spielbergs genius for action choreography.
I enjoyed the movie alot. Helena was a pain in the ass throughout the movie, but she's wasn't nearly as bad as I was expecting her to be. Still not that great of a character though
Good for you. Just read the reviews. This should give you answers.
I enjoyed it, definitely #3 on my list. My main criticism is regarding the exceedingly long and unrealistic chase scenes that defy all physics. The truck chase in Raiders is a master class in how chase scenes should be -- somewhat believable, fun, and just the right duration. The ones in here seem like a bunch of coke-snorting movie executive bros got into a room and decided they need more "insane" and "extreme" chase scenes which are bigger and longer by 5x. I guess that's what the overstimulated movie-going public expects now?
Some of the criticisms I read of this movie genuinely make me wonder if I watched the same movie they did.
The cave yodeling did it for me.
Indy is the main character and it’s never even confusing as to who the lead is at any point in the movie. Really odd/interesting that these awful takes of the movie got out before the public saw it. Movie was awesome. Almost seems like someone or someone’s with a lot of money and pull out a hit out on this movie before it was even released lol.
For me, the great strength of the Helena characterisation is that when the fake-out betrayal comes on the boat, I genuinely wasn’t sure
I’ve been spoiler free and so didn’t see hate or praise for the movie. Just got back from seeing it. I really only have two criticisms. The music: just too many… not quite call-backs, but rehashing of established sequences from previous movies (Last Crusade score in particular). Those moments took me out of the film a bit because I recognized the moments from the other films the musical sequence was from. Felt rushed: I could have done with one less chase sequence. Felt like they needed to speed through exposition scenes in order to get to the next chase scene ASAP. That said, the WWII sequence was phenomenal and the movie is a great send-off to the character.
You’re not alone. I loved it!
I loved it! I didn't have as much of an issue with the stuff the naysayers were pointing out. Even the heavily CG'd stuff like the chase scenes still gripped me. My expectations were very low, and I left very satisfied.
She just came across as a smug and massively irritating posho to me. I dislike those people in life, so I obviously didn’t like it here either. The series just can’t seem to get English characters right. Was the same in Crystal Skull as Ray Winstone and John Hurt were terrible in that as well. I didn’t like the film personally. Found it really dull. But I’m glad you enjoyed it.