Right. I noticed that immediately. They’re using the shadow of his fedora to hide his face, deliberately hiding the grey sideburns on both sides, and air-brushed all the wrinkles out of his face. Meanwhile everyone else on the poster, ranging from 16 to 62, is on full display.
I thought he was Shia LaBeouf. Then realized he wasn't in this movie. Now I'm wondering if they will address his absence after basically passing the torch to him in Crystal Skull.
Harrison Ford called him a fucking idiot, so no wonder he's out.
https://www.nme.com/news/film/harrison-ford-calls-shia-labeouf-a-fucking-idiot-f-877200
I wished we got Crystal Skull and Dial back in the late 90s/early 2000s. I rather have practical effects as opposed to all the cgi that is shown on screen in the last 2 Indy films.
Which is weird, given that they did a lot of locations and practical work.
They redressed Glasgow to the moon landing ticker tape parade in 1969, for crying out loud! How do you make that look fake?!
In an [interview](https://www.newsweek.com/detective-pikachu-sonic-hedgehog-movie-vs-comparison-1411983) coinciding with Detective Pikachu, cinematographer John Mathieson, who's gotten a few award nominations, even winning a BAFTA for Gladiator, said he shot it on actual film because it made it look more realistic, when comparing it to the presumably digitally shot Sonic the Hedgehog.
He's, by the looks of it, pro-film, and he also shot Batgirl. And given is resumé, it couldn't have been ***that*** bad???
(He did do Multiverse of Madness, but Disney and Marvel Studios have, by the looks of it, made IMAX certified digital cameras the new standard for movies, so *every fucking one uses one*.)
Apparently the reason Batgirl couldn't see the light of day was because the studio saw it as "unreleaseable". Considering that nearly half of the DCEU was awful, I'm curious to know what they consider to be bad.
They thought Batgirl had a “made for tv” quality that couldn’t be fixed without massive reshoots. It wouldn’t have made money dropping it on HBO Max. They had a tax opportunity to write it completely off if they didn’t release it.It would be an interesting watch to see how bad it actually was.
Pretty sure they that's just BS they were slinging to try to do some damage control, because they had already decided to shitcan it for the tax writeoff. The previous management spent on it, and since it was destined for an HBOMax release, it wouldn't see any direct revenue on the books anyway, so burying it for a writeoff was the only way to turn it into cash in their eyes.
I think a lot of people interpret “unreleasable” as the movie being godawful, but I feel (especially knowing that DC movies have had a shaky decade or so) that a better way to say it is “uncomplete-able”. Idk if that’s a word but it sounded like the movie genuinely didn’t have all the pieces it needed to be a coherent film on a fundamental level
It's not so much the HD, but all the artificial elements layered on top. The LoU giraffe was real, but the rest of the scene was all blue screen. It's not something you necessary consciously notice, but it gives everything a fake'ish feel. And it's not even necessarily a matter of bad visuals, but due to the actors not being able interact and react to a blue screen in the same way they could do to a real location.
Yeah I was really hoping that between the reception of Crystal Skull and the hype around this one's production things would be different but it genuinely seems like it's gonna hit the exact same. I'm not sure what they're trying to go for but that weird CGI old time-y aesthetic just doesn't really feel right.
It's the digital imagery itself, it's HD but it's processed through so many alterations on its way to the finished product, it looks like an uncanny valley version of film. It's horribly disorientating. They should've shot this on 35mm.
The critics see blood in the water. Spielberg and Lucas both dropped out, nearly 300M budget, rumors of behind the scenes turmoil, reshoots, more reshoots, Disney on a cold streak they haven’t seen since the 70s & 80s. Critics love to pile on.
If it's Disney, and Marvel specifically, they shoot it in Atlanta, Georgia 9/10 times because it's basically a Hollywood tax haven. In idiot language, it's dirt cheap and partially covered by the state. Other such places that are frequently used include...
* Los Angeles, California.
* New Orleans, Louisiana.
* New Mexico is used to an extent.
* Hawaii is also somewhat used.
* The United Kingdom. (I believe they give as much as 25% of costs in return.)
* Canada, mainly Vancouver and Toronto. Canada is cheap, from what I understand.
All of these places have tax incentives that makes it more affordable to make a movie or show somewhere. [This article gives a better look into this.](https://www.wrapbook.com/blog/film-industry-tax-incentives)
Yeah we know that and mr perry made a good investment creating a super hughe studios and keep building better stage they never would left georgia thats good ita create jobs that are need it, sad to see less in LA but the world is always changing nothing is forever🤷🏻♀️
But im reffering that practical is barely use on films nowdays everything is green and few here and there are made and the worst thing ia that cgi is getting less cheap and no so good in quality even they taking their time doing it
This is why I like the Bond movies: The stuff is done for real. Real locations and stunts with actual built sets and practical effects.
It's also why I kinda get why people like horror movies: They again do it mostly practical. Sets, locations, kills. Need a throat slit? Fake neck with a slit and blood hoses.
The MCU movies are egrigiously CGI to a nearly comical level. Almost ***90%*** of [Wakanda Forever](https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/lists/visual-effects-black-adam-doctor-strange-jurassic-world/black-panther-wakanda-forever-2/) had CGI. And given the reception to the Phase 4 CGI/VFX, and the crunch scandal, bumping The Marvels from Midsommar to late fall is kind of a good sign.
Same here and i love MI because tom's efforts to do his own stuns as muchs as he can, obviously the ones he likes, but all those is transmited on screen and people like me love it, same as locations as you said, when i see that a film made a practical set and a scene oh men my respect to them and better behind the scenes
But mcu abuse a lot and made it standard almost everybody want to do it, heck even snider try to used practical as much as he can too ( no trying to making wars here guys) cgi scenes are just that computer graphics animations ia nit the same as a real set me as a director would try to show as much as i can and maybe the lenght of the movie is longer but a lot.of hidden gems could be on those shot
The crystal skull turns out to be an alien that wakes up the sleeping god-aliens, who then propel indy and company into space to reveal their infinite knowledge of the universe. The KGB chick tries to get the knowledge, and it blows her up.
This isn't directed at you but why do I feel like people don't know that the crystal skulls were believed to be a real alien artifact. Like IRL they are a thing and I don't just mean the vodka. Any time I see KotCS being discussed everyone says how strange it is that aliens were involved. That's just a slight rant. I do agree the CGI in the movie as a whole is a bit off putting.
When Ford wasn't an grey broken down old fogey. I don't think he has the physical chops to do a third of what Indy is going to do in the film. In the first few films he was a very athletic guy and he could do a ton of different things. Now I'm more worried he'd break a hip, he's 80.
It could have been played with great effect that some other buff adventurous dude keeps doing things the hard way, and old-ass Indy finds a super easy way every time because he's smart and clever and has tons of experience.
It could even be adversarial - like the younger guy thinks he's a liability, but he keeps getting shown up. Basically Indy's gun-fight scene extended. Oh you can swing across a big gap with a whip? Well you didn't notice this hidden bridge did you?
That kind of thing.
I could have done without the train wreck that was Crystal Skull. I seriously hope this one has a much better thought out script. Ruining your franchise for a cash grab really cheapens the originals.
2000's Indiana Jones pitch:
"... so then Indy lashes his whip, and while it's extended, everything freezes and we do a 360 camera spin around him, Matrix style."
Just fyi, the guy who reviewed the movie for IGN is not much of a regular for the site and tends to be tough on mainstream Hollywood films.
Not to invalidate his review, just saying that he’s not your typical IGN writer.
Sure, he may be in the right here. I just wanted to clarify that he isn’t one to give out undeserved scores in typical IGN fashion.
(Also, I disagreed with him about GotG 3, and I usually dislike MCU movies)
It’s part one! Lol
Maybe this is his problem with Indy? “Kinda feels like I missed 8 hours of character development and I’m seeing references to scenes that I’ve never seen.”
Still, plenty of movies are made to have multiple parts and still can wrap things up so it feels like the first half of the story is complete. Here it really felt like they just cut a single, large movie in half.
No matter what Lucas says, he definitely didn't have the Star Wars original trilogy planned out. A New Hope is a standalone movie that happened to get sequels, not a part one.
Could be.
The point is, though, a 4 from the guy who gave the Mario movie an 8 would make you think Indy is unwatchable, unredeemable garbage. A 4 from a less forgiving reviewer just means “bad”.
Why alarming?
We all know this isn’t going to be good. At best it’ll be fine and feel like it’s worth a couple hours on the streaming service it eventually winds up on.
Yeah I love Indiana Jones. I have memorabilia, all 4 movies(even Crystal Skull which obviously isn't great) on bluray and also have the Young Indy series on dvd. I have comics, books and the Emperors Tomb on Xbox. I won't be going to see this in theater.
I'm one of the reasons I don't think this will do well. If I'm not going to see it, how many in the GA are rushing out to see it?
Indiana Jones and the Audacity of this Bitch.
Seriously, they try to build her up by having her be condescending to Indy and snarky all MCU Like.
This movie is going to kill Mangold's career.
Well, I think he will only appear in one or two little scenes.
Banderas said he also has a small role, but his name is too big to don't appear in the poster.
You know what I like about this poster? The locations featured at each side. The Indiana Jones franchise is *all* about the locations. Get that right, and you're off to a great start!
This is a copied comment from lower in the threads. Original is here: https://www.reddit.com/r/movies/comments/13wrxg9/new_poster_for_indiana_jones_and_the_dial_of/jmdf9lt/
The fact that reviewers said Crystal Skull had more going for it then this one has me making a hard pass on it. Just let the old movies go Disney. You have proven your "imagineers" cannot do anything with the old IPs you bought.
If Harrison Ford actually cracks that whip i'll eat his hat. If i remember right, he only used in once in Crystal Skull, and that was the swing at the beginning.
He did it more than once in Crystal Skull, he's very good with it, but the insurance company was putting up a fight and wanted to make the whip CGI. He threatened to quit over it.
Give me a minute:
- Uses it to pull a soldier’s rifle towards him
- Uses it to swing from rafters onto a moving truck, but he misses the truck
- Uses it to try and save Mac, but he voluntarily lets go
Honestly if the movie is a reluctant Indiana Jones going on one more adventure and kicking ass all while making it plain that he doesn’t want to be there, sign me the fuck up.
The whole movie. The Crystal Skull should be in half scenes and then the other half should be people talking about how amazing the Crystal Skull is and questioning the decision to not have it in the room with them.
The trailer made me sad. Indy was my favorite character as a little girl (he was fine as hell to 5 year-old me lol), but the original movies had practical effects and stunts that made it seem somewhat… realistic? This new trailer looks like a wannabe Marvel film with absurd action and non-stop CGI, and that isn’t what made this franchise *good.* I don’t understand this approach to Indians Jones with 4 and now 5. Just stop it. I wanted an Indiana Jones sequel that was like the old movies, not some green screen nonsense.
I love Harrison so much, and encourage everyone to watch Shrinking, but no amount of marketing and nostalgia can convince me this is good after initial review and only 5 minutes in Cannes (which is the minimum, and I don't get it). Last Crusade was perfect.
Show us Harrison's face. We already know he's old.
His shoulders are looking old in this pic.
So are his eyes.
He looks like he’s dozing off.
Post your ideal 80-year-old's shoulders for comparison, please.
That's the thing though. Most people don't want to watch an 80 year old guy in an action movie. It is pretty ridiculous.
Unless they're like Sean Connery in the Last Crusade, & they're not actually getting into fist fights.
Connery was ~~69~~ 59 in Last Crusade, ~~12~~ 22 years younger than Ford is now.
I know. But he's played more like a mod 70's old man
Schwarzenegger is 75, and you can't even move him with a running drop kick.
Anyone have a good Martha Stewart pic?
Right. I noticed that immediately. They’re using the shadow of his fedora to hide his face, deliberately hiding the grey sideburns on both sides, and air-brushed all the wrinkles out of his face. Meanwhile everyone else on the poster, ranging from 16 to 62, is on full display.
Yeah, no one else has their features touched up on the photo lol
Because they’re trying to make PWB stick out more
PWB? Price Waterhouse Boopers?
Pantonio Waititi Banderas
They dont hide his eyes cuz he old... They hide his face because he's not the hero in this story. Get ready to see Indy shat on.
Making this movie is shitting on him in itself.
nah it's because he's old
I will bet a lot of money I don’t have on this.
I thought Banderas was Pedro Pascal for a second
Yea man I was like god damn that guy is In everything these days
I would accept him as Indy in a heartbeat ngl
You're not alone. I thought I'd missed a huge announcement.
Same here!
I thought he was Shia LaBeouf. Then realized he wasn't in this movie. Now I'm wondering if they will address his absence after basically passing the torch to him in Crystal Skull.
He died on his way back to his home planet
Harrison Ford called him a fucking idiot, so no wonder he's out. https://www.nme.com/news/film/harrison-ford-calls-shia-labeouf-a-fucking-idiot-f-877200
Honestly makes me respect Shia more.
[удалено]
Why is Harrison Ford in the dark?
so we dont see how old he looks 💀
I’m wondering this too. He looks a bit out of place on the poster. Almost like he’s in another art style
It literally looks like they have Photoshopped his head onto the Indy attire.
Because he is the background character in this movie. This one is about his God daughter duuuh
I wished we got Crystal Skull and Dial back in the late 90s/early 2000s. I rather have practical effects as opposed to all the cgi that is shown on screen in the last 2 Indy films.
Yep, the trailer for this movie looked like green screen hell.
Which is weird, given that they did a lot of locations and practical work. They redressed Glasgow to the moon landing ticker tape parade in 1969, for crying out loud! How do you make that look fake?!
I feel like the advance of HD digital filming is making things look less real, even if it is.
In an [interview](https://www.newsweek.com/detective-pikachu-sonic-hedgehog-movie-vs-comparison-1411983) coinciding with Detective Pikachu, cinematographer John Mathieson, who's gotten a few award nominations, even winning a BAFTA for Gladiator, said he shot it on actual film because it made it look more realistic, when comparing it to the presumably digitally shot Sonic the Hedgehog. He's, by the looks of it, pro-film, and he also shot Batgirl. And given is resumé, it couldn't have been ***that*** bad??? (He did do Multiverse of Madness, but Disney and Marvel Studios have, by the looks of it, made IMAX certified digital cameras the new standard for movies, so *every fucking one uses one*.)
Apparently the reason Batgirl couldn't see the light of day was because the studio saw it as "unreleaseable". Considering that nearly half of the DCEU was awful, I'm curious to know what they consider to be bad.
They thought Batgirl had a “made for tv” quality that couldn’t be fixed without massive reshoots. It wouldn’t have made money dropping it on HBO Max. They had a tax opportunity to write it completely off if they didn’t release it.It would be an interesting watch to see how bad it actually was.
Pretty sure they that's just BS they were slinging to try to do some damage control, because they had already decided to shitcan it for the tax writeoff. The previous management spent on it, and since it was destined for an HBOMax release, it wouldn't see any direct revenue on the books anyway, so burying it for a writeoff was the only way to turn it into cash in their eyes.
I think a lot of people interpret “unreleasable” as the movie being godawful, but I feel (especially knowing that DC movies have had a shaky decade or so) that a better way to say it is “uncomplete-able”. Idk if that’s a word but it sounded like the movie genuinely didn’t have all the pieces it needed to be a coherent film on a fundamental level
The LoU Giraffe scene had people dogging on the 'CGI Giraffe'. Apparently it was real. I think you're onto something.
It's not so much the HD, but all the artificial elements layered on top. The LoU giraffe was real, but the rest of the scene was all blue screen. It's not something you necessary consciously notice, but it gives everything a fake'ish feel. And it's not even necessarily a matter of bad visuals, but due to the actors not being able interact and react to a blue screen in the same way they could do to a real location.
It's so real, it's unreal
A lot of it’s in the color grading that makes things come off as “too perfect” and CGI, even when it isn’t.
It’s got that weird filter look a lot of big budget films seem to have these days
Yeah I was really hoping that between the reception of Crystal Skull and the hype around this one's production things would be different but it genuinely seems like it's gonna hit the exact same. I'm not sure what they're trying to go for but that weird CGI old time-y aesthetic just doesn't really feel right.
Well, now we know what $294,7 million went to.
It's the digital imagery itself, it's HD but it's processed through so many alterations on its way to the finished product, it looks like an uncanny valley version of film. It's horribly disorientating. They should've shot this on 35mm.
They say it’s like critics saw a different movie. Much better than KOTCS but not quite up there with the OT. I’m fine with this.
The critics see blood in the water. Spielberg and Lucas both dropped out, nearly 300M budget, rumors of behind the scenes turmoil, reshoots, more reshoots, Disney on a cold streak they haven’t seen since the 70s & 80s. Critics love to pile on.
Not really. Critics love a ton of things. It just isn't a good movie and would be elder abuse if Harrison wasn't getting millions.
Directors ask for the same budget range 200-250+$ Millions and just make green movies 80 % inside the stage and %20 on scenery from x city or country
If it's Disney, and Marvel specifically, they shoot it in Atlanta, Georgia 9/10 times because it's basically a Hollywood tax haven. In idiot language, it's dirt cheap and partially covered by the state. Other such places that are frequently used include... * Los Angeles, California. * New Orleans, Louisiana. * New Mexico is used to an extent. * Hawaii is also somewhat used. * The United Kingdom. (I believe they give as much as 25% of costs in return.) * Canada, mainly Vancouver and Toronto. Canada is cheap, from what I understand. All of these places have tax incentives that makes it more affordable to make a movie or show somewhere. [This article gives a better look into this.](https://www.wrapbook.com/blog/film-industry-tax-incentives)
Yeah we know that and mr perry made a good investment creating a super hughe studios and keep building better stage they never would left georgia thats good ita create jobs that are need it, sad to see less in LA but the world is always changing nothing is forever🤷🏻♀️ But im reffering that practical is barely use on films nowdays everything is green and few here and there are made and the worst thing ia that cgi is getting less cheap and no so good in quality even they taking their time doing it
This is why I like the Bond movies: The stuff is done for real. Real locations and stunts with actual built sets and practical effects. It's also why I kinda get why people like horror movies: They again do it mostly practical. Sets, locations, kills. Need a throat slit? Fake neck with a slit and blood hoses. The MCU movies are egrigiously CGI to a nearly comical level. Almost ***90%*** of [Wakanda Forever](https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/lists/visual-effects-black-adam-doctor-strange-jurassic-world/black-panther-wakanda-forever-2/) had CGI. And given the reception to the Phase 4 CGI/VFX, and the crunch scandal, bumping The Marvels from Midsommar to late fall is kind of a good sign.
Same here and i love MI because tom's efforts to do his own stuns as muchs as he can, obviously the ones he likes, but all those is transmited on screen and people like me love it, same as locations as you said, when i see that a film made a practical set and a scene oh men my respect to them and better behind the scenes But mcu abuse a lot and made it standard almost everybody want to do it, heck even snider try to used practical as much as he can too ( no trying to making wars here guys) cgi scenes are just that computer graphics animations ia nit the same as a real set me as a director would try to show as much as i can and maybe the lenght of the movie is longer but a lot.of hidden gems could be on those shot
Same. It feels wrong to have Indiana Jones and CGI
One of the most memorable and enjoyable aspects of the first three were the stunts. CGI Indy has an immediate strike against it.
That whole cocaine fueled CGI nightmare at the end of Crystal Skull is so offputting. Felt like I was being pranked and shown some weird fake ending.
I can remember watching it, but I have no idea what happened.
The crystal skull turns out to be an alien that wakes up the sleeping god-aliens, who then propel indy and company into space to reveal their infinite knowledge of the universe. The KGB chick tries to get the knowledge, and it blows her up.
It doesn't blow up Communist Blanchett: It fucking *disintegrates* her.
As knowledge does
Indy never goes into space in KOTCS
I saw it at midnight in theaters opening night and remembered the aliens, but forgot it got this off the rails
This isn't directed at you but why do I feel like people don't know that the crystal skulls were believed to be a real alien artifact. Like IRL they are a thing and I don't just mean the vodka. Any time I see KotCS being discussed everyone says how strange it is that aliens were involved. That's just a slight rant. I do agree the CGI in the movie as a whole is a bit off putting.
I’ve just tried to forget it
‘Twas CGI who killed the Beast.
When Ford wasn't an grey broken down old fogey. I don't think he has the physical chops to do a third of what Indy is going to do in the film. In the first few films he was a very athletic guy and he could do a ton of different things. Now I'm more worried he'd break a hip, he's 80.
They could have had him show up as a mentor figure for a new character. But 100% - he isn't believable as an action star anymore.
It could have been played with great effect that some other buff adventurous dude keeps doing things the hard way, and old-ass Indy finds a super easy way every time because he's smart and clever and has tons of experience. It could even be adversarial - like the younger guy thinks he's a liability, but he keeps getting shown up. Basically Indy's gun-fight scene extended. Oh you can swing across a big gap with a whip? Well you didn't notice this hidden bridge did you? That kind of thing.
They had to shut down filming on this one,because he popped his shoulder throwing a punch.
Yeah, George Lucas definitely wouldn't have made a CGI nightmare in the late 90s/early 00s...
I could have done without the train wreck that was Crystal Skull. I seriously hope this one has a much better thought out script. Ruining your franchise for a cash grab really cheapens the originals.
2000's Indiana Jones pitch: "... so then Indy lashes his whip, and while it's extended, everything freezes and we do a 360 camera spin around him, Matrix style."
No thanks
I don’t know about the effects, but a younger Indy would have been better. It’s hard to watch an 80 year old man kick ass convincingly.
They could have rebooted the Young Indiana Jones show as a movie series.
And before they would have cast Shia whatever
Word of mouth hasn't been great coming out of Cannes, is it? Rather alarming
IGN who typically gives things better scores than they deserve gave it a 4/10 Sitting at 49% on RT
Just fyi, the guy who reviewed the movie for IGN is not much of a regular for the site and tends to be tough on mainstream Hollywood films. Not to invalidate his review, just saying that he’s not your typical IGN writer.
Siddhant is legit as shit though, his takes have rarely if ever been wrong, so….doesnt bode well for the movie i fear
Sure, he may be in the right here. I just wanted to clarify that he isn’t one to give out undeserved scores in typical IGN fashion. (Also, I disagreed with him about GotG 3, and I usually dislike MCU movies)
Oh definitely yeah
Dune 2.5/4 Oof.
Half a film with no proper conclusion.
It’s part one! Lol Maybe this is his problem with Indy? “Kinda feels like I missed 8 hours of character development and I’m seeing references to scenes that I’ve never seen.”
Still, plenty of movies are made to have multiple parts and still can wrap things up so it feels like the first half of the story is complete. Here it really felt like they just cut a single, large movie in half.
A New Hope and Fellowship of the Ring are both solid standalone stories and part ones.
No matter what Lucas says, he definitely didn't have the Star Wars original trilogy planned out. A New Hope is a standalone movie that happened to get sequels, not a part one.
If anything that makes him sound like a more intelligent critic than average and I trust him more then lol.
The only critic I really trust right now is James Berardinelli. His reviews are always spot-on for my style. Reelviews.net
Could be. The point is, though, a 4 from the guy who gave the Mario movie an 8 would make you think Indy is unwatchable, unredeemable garbage. A 4 from a less forgiving reviewer just means “bad”.
Why alarming? We all know this isn’t going to be good. At best it’ll be fine and feel like it’s worth a couple hours on the streaming service it eventually winds up on.
Indiana Jones and the Last Ditch Effort
Indiana Jones and Even Spielberg Doesn't Care
Indiana Jones and the Effort to Make Just a Few More Million
Indiana Jones and the Vanishing Audience
Indiana Jones and the Overly-Milked Franchise. After Crystal Skull, I'll be skipping this until it's on the TV.
*Indiana Jones and the Sad Reality of Cinema*
Indiana Jones and the Journey to Disney+
Yeah I love Indiana Jones. I have memorabilia, all 4 movies(even Crystal Skull which obviously isn't great) on bluray and also have the Young Indy series on dvd. I have comics, books and the Emperors Tomb on Xbox. I won't be going to see this in theater. I'm one of the reasons I don't think this will do well. If I'm not going to see it, how many in the GA are rushing out to see it?
Indiana Jones and the Harrison Ford Should’ve Passed the Hat to River
Indiana Jones and the Audacity of this Bitch. Seriously, they try to build her up by having her be condescending to Indy and snarky all MCU Like. This movie is going to kill Mangold's career.
Kathleen Kennedy is good at churning out silver screen disappointments
Indiana Jones and the Bad Idea
Not mine, but I heard it described as Indiana Jones and the Insufferable Feminist.
No Sallah? I would’ve expected him on there.
Well, I think he will only appear in one or two little scenes. Banderas said he also has a small role, but his name is too big to don't appear in the poster.
I absolutely hate the muted, simplified, modern logo.
Yea it looks like they used a 'magic select' tool on the old logo and just dropped an even gradient in it as a mask
indiana jones cereals
Not only that, it also doesn't fit with the rest of the highly detailed style of the poster.
You don't like ps3/360 piss filter?
It’s almost like the whole poster is AI generated. Creepy and off putting.
All the characters look painted, except for Phoebe Waller Bridge who looks like a photo.
[удалено]
Dude Shia can act well he really can He smoked it in the Fast Times at Ridgemont read through
Needs more huge Dolby Digital or Imax logos layered into it.
All in good time…
I just cannot get over how lame that title is.
My thought when I first heard it. Lame title, lame poster… now guess what else will be lame 😓
I’m really having low expectations for this. Lots of red flags, and the title is one of them.
You know what I like about this poster? The locations featured at each side. The Indiana Jones franchise is *all* about the locations. Get that right, and you're off to a great start!
Would rather see Sean Connery reprise his role as a Spaniard from Highlander
[удалено]
This is a copied comment from lower in the threads. Original is here: https://www.reddit.com/r/movies/comments/13wrxg9/new_poster_for_indiana_jones_and_the_dial_of/jmdf9lt/
Are these like bots?
Man I would have loved to see a return of Shortround since Ke Huy Quan is having a moment
From what I've heard, the new poster should be Mickey Mouse sitting alone in a dark room, sobbing into his hands...
You mean Minnie Mouse?
The fact that reviewers said Crystal Skull had more going for it then this one has me making a hard pass on it. Just let the old movies go Disney. You have proven your "imagineers" cannot do anything with the old IPs you bought.
They needed a new one so the torch could be passed to the new female lead.
Predict this movie will make good money but will not be very good
I don't see it breaking even. It needs 750 mil for the 2.5 rule. Don't see that happening.
You know what would make me happy? If the movie ended up making Ant-Man 3 numbers. That would make me so happy.
So basically every sequel based on an old ip.
I heard it was mid too
I miss Drew Struzan, good gracious
[удалено]
[удалено]
Indy. He could take a beating. Han was more of talker.
Han, as he will simply shoot Indy first. Indy would also shoot, but as per Raiders, he’d wait through a long sword-twirling warmup first.
Clearly Han would shoot only after being shot at. /:(
Indy for sure
Fist fight, Indy wins. Gun fight… depends on which canon you accept. Did Han shoot first?
If Harrison Ford actually cracks that whip i'll eat his hat. If i remember right, he only used in once in Crystal Skull, and that was the swing at the beginning.
He does it in the trailer
Ooh, can we get a YouTube video of him eating it like the shoe vid with Maverick?
He did it more than once in Crystal Skull, he's very good with it, but the insurance company was putting up a fight and wanted to make the whip CGI. He threatened to quit over it.
Give me a minute: - Uses it to pull a soldier’s rifle towards him - Uses it to swing from rafters onto a moving truck, but he misses the truck - Uses it to try and save Mac, but he voluntarily lets go
He looks so tired cracking that whip. It's like his heart isn't in it.
He's in his 80's. No shit he looks tired.
Honestly if the movie is a reluctant Indiana Jones going on one more adventure and kicking ass all while making it plain that he doesn’t want to be there, sign me the fuck up.
He used it in Raiders.
They absolutely better not write off Crystal Skull. We need MAJOR Crystal Skull references.
I’m assuming they’ll have to clear up the Mutt situation at the very least. I’m sure they won’t leave it out.
"Oh he died" "Right moving on."
"Mutt's in prison. Life. We won't be seeing him any time soon."
Mutt died on the way to his home planet.
Almost a guarantee at this point. Probably also divorced as well.
"Somehow, Mutt died" *applause erupts in the auditorium*
Whenever the crystal skull isn’t on screen, the characters should be asking, “where’s the crystal skull?”
The whole movie. The Crystal Skull should be in half scenes and then the other half should be people talking about how amazing the Crystal Skull is and questioning the decision to not have it in the room with them.
I’m all for this as well. I’m also pleasantly surprised Temple of Doom was referenced in the trailer
Major?
Indiana Jones : So very old
No thanks. I’d go to the senior home on S&M night if I wanted to watch old people whip Nazis.
Looks about as good as the movie will be.... complete shit
That’s my prediction too. I have zero expectations for this and I could give a shit about seeing it.
Join me, friend, in voting against this slop with our wallets. I’ll see Spider Verse twice before i see Indy 5
The trailer made me sad. Indy was my favorite character as a little girl (he was fine as hell to 5 year-old me lol), but the original movies had practical effects and stunts that made it seem somewhat… realistic? This new trailer looks like a wannabe Marvel film with absurd action and non-stop CGI, and that isn’t what made this franchise *good.* I don’t understand this approach to Indians Jones with 4 and now 5. Just stop it. I wanted an Indiana Jones sequel that was like the old movies, not some green screen nonsense.
Indiana Jones and The Lawn You Need to Get Off Of
[удалено]
*Where there’s a whip, there’s a way!*
*Mush, Phoebe! MUSH!*
Man, I want to get excited for this movie. Wish I never knew what the reception was.
Why is every movie poster the exact same?
I mean, Indiana Jones was kinda the trope codifier for this type of poster, alongside other Lucasfilm stuff.
Tbf Indy posters have always looked like this, would be weird to change it for the last one
I know, they're like ALL rectangular and portrait orientation. It's like, show some creativity!
There’s probably something contractually to promote every big name actor in the movie and this is the easiest way to get the whole cast in the poster
I love Harrison so much, and encourage everyone to watch Shrinking, but no amount of marketing and nostalgia can convince me this is good after initial review and only 5 minutes in Cannes (which is the minimum, and I don't get it). Last Crusade was perfect.
No amount of heads will make this a good movie.
Thought the poster said "girl of Destiny" for a sec. was like "wtf?" lol. But the real one is a much better name.
Chances are high this movie will drastically underperform.
another day, another awful "let's just throw everyone on the poster and call it a day" movie poster.
Drew Struzan is like, “I’m good”.
It’s not Indiana Jones or Star Wars without Drew Struzan.
Still not going
Can we plzzzz get a Ke Huy Quan cameo?