|
Post by Pavan on Jun 29, 2023 18:05:14 GMT
An adventure film is only as good as its set pieces and the McGuffin. I think 'The Dial' in the Dial of Destiny is not a worthy enough plot device for a final Indiana Jones film. Expected a much more significant artefact that somehow ties Indy's character and with a brilliant finish before he puts his hat away. Even with the Dial the film takes a lot of time before getting into its details and how it ties the hero and the villain. The conflict is easily resolved. Its like a tv's worth of plot that somehow ended up as an Indiana Jones story. That said its nowhere near bad as some critics pained it to be and in fact I've enjoyed most of it thanks to Ford who still oozes enough roguish charm, Phoebe Waller-Bridge's lively portrayal of Helena and a couple of good set pieces. I think Mangold did a decent job as a director, but he and his team should've come up with a much more exciting adventure that's worthy of Indy's legacy.
Not the memorable farewell i was expecting for one of cinema's iconic heroes but a decent time at the cinemas- 7/10
|
|
|
Post by Ryan_MYeah on Jun 30, 2023 7:08:17 GMT
It’s not as bad as Temple of Doom… but it’s also worse than Crystal Skull.
I was really grappling with my thoughts on this one walking out, where I went “I think I liked this movie?” Which is always a bad sign for me. Because it’s really just mediocre. Ford’s having a good time, Waller-Bridge is an engaging double act, Mikkelson makes a deliciously entertaining villain, the action scenes are thrilling (The one in Tangiers was my favorite), and you have no idea how happy I am to still hear John Williams in a multiplex.
But… the movie is bloated. I just don’t think Mangold’s flow suits Indy, especially in the style. Namely there’s way too much CGI (Crystal Skull was subtle compared to this), and the amount of rear-projected Volume set ups were distracting. The two and a half hour runtime is also an issue, as the extended length means it loses the snappiness of earlier films, as it keeps piling more and more characters on.
As for the final twist, it is interesting, and would have for an intriguing final note had it gone the way it was gearing towards, but that ending just feels like a shrug. A sweet shrug, but hardly the sweeping, ride off into the sunset finale that Indiana already had over thirty years ago. It’s basically a shrug itself, with a 5/10.
How I rank the series: 1. Raiders of the Lost Ark - 10/10 2. The Last Crusade - 9.5/10 3. Kingdom of the Crystal Skull - 6/10 4. Dial of Destiny - 5/10 5. Temple of Doom - 4/10
|
|
|
Post by The_Cake_of_Roth on Jun 30, 2023 10:51:54 GMT
It’s not as bad as Temple of Doom… but it’s also worse than Crystal Skull. I thought I had read that Mangold avoided the volume...
|
|
|
Post by The_Cake_of_Roth on Jun 30, 2023 11:04:05 GMT
Okay, first things first. Yes, it’s better than Kingdom of the Crystal Skull... significantly. Is it as good as the others? Well no, of course not... but it doesn’t have to be. While I’ve probably been this film’s biggest cheerleader on this board ever since Mangold was announced to direct, I was still nervous going into it because of the mixed reviews, but the moment the film ended, I was hugely relieved to say that I actually liked it... especially after the single most crushingly disappointing theater experience of my life that was Crystal Skull 15 years ago. Dial of Destiny isn’t going to end up in my top 10 films of the year or anything... but as someone who considers Raiders of the Lost Ark among their top 10 favorite films of all time (but who was born after the release of the original trilogy), I can’t tell you how good it felt to see a new Indiana Jones movie in a theater and actually be satisfied for the first time. The common criticism that this just plays like an Indiana Jones greatest hits collection feels like a massive overstatement to me considering there’s plenty here that we haven’t seen in an Indiana Jones movie before... there may be some familiar elements here, but they’re recontextualized in a way that feels fresh (like Mikkelsen’s Nazi villain, for instance). While there are some nods to the older films, they never felt like cheap nostalgia-bait or overdone and were mostly well-integrated to me. As an action film, it pulls off an impressive balancing act of featuring fun set pieces that still involve Ford in a way that’s designed around his age. We’re never asked to forget his age like in Crystal Skull, yet the film still manages to provide plenty of excitement with its set pieces. The film also just looks so much better than Crystal Skull overall – no Kaminski diffusion and backlighting, and while there is some noticeable CGI, I thought it was a marked improvement in the VFX department on the whole. The de-aging at the beginning will probably be divisive... it was jarring to me at first, but mostly because of the disconnect between his face and his voice. It was distracting hearing the sound of old Harrison Ford’s gravelly voice coming out of a younger face, so I preferred it when he wasn’t speaking. Some shots look better than others, but I got used to it as the film went on (it helps that the scenes on the train are dark, so you’re not looking at his face in clear daylight). As for the performances... God bless Harrison Ford, who is a national treasure. Phoebe Waller-Bridge is very likable and funny, playing a character that’s sort of like a female Han Solo, or at least a “fortune and glory” driven female version of Indy circa Temple of Doom. Her father, played by Toby Jones, is basically a Marcus Brody stand-in, and part of me wishes they had somehow made her Brody’s daughter instead. Mikkelsen is delightful and might be my second favorite Indiana Jones villain after Belloq (always thought Julian Glover’s Donovan was a bit bland, and Mola Ram is maybe more memorable but underwritten). His relationship with the U.S. government is a great set-up, and added an intriguing political and moral dimension to the proceedings. Also loved the inclusion of Boyd Holbrook’s neo-Nazi henchman. I disagree that, as a McGuffin, the “Dial” itself is not a worthy enough plot device or a significant enough artifact that ties into Indy's character. The movie is about how Indy at this point in his life sort of exists out of time, and no longer fits into the world that has changed around him. The end of the film is rather poignant and elegiac in the way Indy is tempted to literally stay in the past via the Dial and become part of history because he believes there’s nothing left for him in the present. I honestly can’t think of a more appropriate artifact to have serve as the film’s McGuffin. With that said though, one of the big things I was worried about going into the film was how the time travel element was going to be handled, but it strangely worked for me, as wild as the third act is. I read people comparing it to the aliens in Crystal Skull, which scared me a bit, but somehow this was easier to swallow. Also, I can’t fathom how any Indiana Jones fan could shrug at the very last scene of this movie, which I thought was pretty perfect (I actually teared up). Some random notes: - Just want to take a moment and appreciate the fact that we have a new John Williams score for an Indiana Jones movie in the year of our Lord 2023. - Scenes of Indy teaching college classes will never not be entertaining to me. I would seriously watch a whole movie of almost-retired Dr. Jones bemoaning lazy students who don’t do the reading and having to “spoon feed” them the material because I relate to it so hard. - I have no idea why Antonio Banderas is in this... - Honestly, the biggest thing that bothered me about this movie is that there’s no Paramount mountain logo transition at the beginning. Fuck you, Disney. TL;DR – It’s good, haters can suck itIf Raiders is the classic, perfect one, Temple of Doom is the weird, outlandish one, Last Crusade is the funny, heartwarming one, and Crystal Skull is just the bad one, then Dial of Destiny I think is destined to be the underrated one. My ranking: 1. Raiders of the Lost Ark - 10/10 2. The Last Crusade - 8.5/10 3. Temple of Doom - 7.5/10 4. Dial of Destiny - 7/10 5. Kingdom of the Crystal Skull - 5/10
|
|
|
Post by Ryan_MYeah on Jun 30, 2023 13:58:23 GMT
I thought I had read that Mangold avoided the volume... I don’t know what it was, but during high speed chases, when it goes from real vehicles moving through the streets, to what is obviously Ford and co. plopped in front of a digital background (even for slower scenes on a boat), it’s very distracting. At $300 million, it just feels like corner cutting.
|
|
|
Post by Pavan on Jun 30, 2023 14:13:27 GMT
I disagree that, as a McGuffin, the “Dial” itself is not a worthy enough plot device or a significant enough artifact that ties into Indy's character. The movie is about how Indy at this point in his life sort of exists out of time, and no longer fits into the world that has changed around him. The end of the film is rather poignant and elegiac in the way Indy is tempted to literally stay in the past via the Dial and become part of history because he believes there’s nothing left for him in the present. I honestly can’t think of a more appropriate artifact to have serve as the film’s McGuffin. With that said though, one of the big things I was worried about going into the film was how the time travel element was going to be handled, but it strangely worked for me, as wild as the third act is. I read people comparing it to the aliens in Crystal Skull, which scared me a bit, but somehow this was easier to swallow. Also, I can’t fathom how any Indiana Jones fan could shrug at the very last scene of this movie, which I thought was pretty perfect (I actually teared up). I said that its not worthy of a final film. If this was some random adventure of Indy i wouldn't mind. Its just this is not the grand and brilliant finish i expect the character to have.
|
|
|
Post by countjohn on Jul 1, 2023 3:22:42 GMT
Agree with a lot of people saying this isn't as aggressively and unpleasantly bad as Temple of Doom, but it's not as good as even Crystal Skull, which I thought was more or less fine outside of the presence of Shia LaDouche and some dodgy CG.
A lot of that is just that everything here is so bland, none of the set pices go anywhere for me aside from the opening, and while Mads does his usual sleazy Eurotrash villain routine and Helena is spunky and hot they don't really feel like anything other than cardboard cutouts in the background. It could have gotten away with being generic if it had that "feel" of a classic Indiana Jones film, but it doesn't outside of the opening, largely due to the absence of Spielberg giving it the magic tough I would say. Crystal Skull still had the "feel" to me which is why I'm a lot more forgiving of its faults.
The dial could have been an interesting choice given the obvious metaphor for Indy trying to fight the clock but I just don't think it's utilized in any meaningful way. For a split second when Mads was talking about the Mediterranean I thought they were going to go back to the end of Raiders which would have been so meta I could have appreciated it, on top of just the bookends angle. Having him stay would have also been a balsy move and more interesting than what we got.
It's amazing what we can do with mocap these days though and it's always nice to hear a new John Williams score.
|
|
|
Post by The_Cake_of_Roth on Jul 1, 2023 5:28:24 GMT
I thought I had read that Mangold avoided the volume... I don’t know what it was, but during high speed chases, when it goes from real vehicles moving through the streets, to what is obviously Ford and co. plopped in front of a digital background (even for slower scenes on a boat), it’s very distracting. At $300 million, it just feels like corner cutting. I guess since those chase scenes are edited so quickly, I felt like I wasn’t really given time to dwell on the background, so it didn’t really bother me. And during the times I did notice it (like on the boat) it didn’t feel that much different to me than in Last Crusade when it cuts back and forth from an exterior shot of a real plane in the sky to closeups of Ford and Connery very obviously not actually flying a plane in the sky.
|
|
|
Post by The_Cake_of_Roth on Jul 1, 2023 5:30:40 GMT
I disagree that, as a McGuffin, the “Dial” itself is not a worthy enough plot device or a significant enough artifact that ties into Indy's character. The movie is about how Indy at this point in his life sort of exists out of time, and no longer fits into the world that has changed around him. The end of the film is rather poignant and elegiac in the way Indy is tempted to literally stay in the past via the Dial and become part of history because he believes there’s nothing left for him in the present. I honestly can’t think of a more appropriate artifact to have serve as the film’s McGuffin. With that said though, one of the big things I was worried about going into the film was how the time travel element was going to be handled, but it strangely worked for me, as wild as the third act is. I read people comparing it to the aliens in Crystal Skull, which scared me a bit, but somehow this was easier to swallow. Also, I can’t fathom how any Indiana Jones fan could shrug at the very last scene of this movie, which I thought was pretty perfect (I actually teared up). I said that its not worthy of a final film. If this was some random adventure of Indy i wouldn't mind. Its just this is not the grand and brilliant finish i expect the character to have. But I’m saying that the Dial only really makes sense as a McGuffin for a final film, and wouldn’t feel appropriate for just some random adventure of Indy since it’s thematically tied to his relationship with time, his age, and how he feels about his place in the modern world.
|
|
|
Post by Pavan on Jul 1, 2023 6:35:02 GMT
I said that its not worthy of a final film. If this was some random adventure of Indy i wouldn't mind. Its just this is not the grand and brilliant finish i expect the character to have. But I’m saying that the Dial only really makes sense as a McGuffin for a final film, and wouldn’t feel appropriate for just some random adventure of Indy since it’s thematically tied to his relationship with time, his age, and how he feels about his place in the modern world. The theme of time sure works but i found the dial itself is not that interesting. A bland artefact to me. Didn't make for an exciting adventure.
|
|
|
Post by The_Cake_of_Roth on Jul 2, 2023 8:37:29 GMT
One thing I thought was interesting about the ending was how you can read Indy’s exchange with Marion as revealing a previously hidden truth behind their separation. Earlier in the film, Indy tells Helena that Mutt was killed in Vietnam, and Indy was helpless to console Marion in her grief, leading to them splitting up. But in the final scene, when Marion says to Indy something like “I heard you were back. Well, are you back?” I thought it was a very curious line of dialogue that might suggest that Indy was actually the one who was inconsolable in his grief and became a different person to Marion, leading to their separation. Just thought that was a nice little bit of emotional shading they gave to Indy’s character at the end.
|
|
|
Post by finniussnrub on Jul 2, 2023 12:42:09 GMT
Regarding Mutt Wouldn't he have been a bit old to be in the rebellious teenager stage of his life, to have joined Vietnam in at least his late twenties? It implied that his death just happened recently as well, so maybe even 30?
|
|
|
Post by Ryan_MYeah on Jul 2, 2023 19:21:20 GMT
I don’t know what it was, but during high speed chases, when it goes from real vehicles moving through the streets, to what is obviously Ford and co. plopped in front of a digital background (even for slower scenes on a boat), it’s very distracting. At $300 million, it just feels like corner cutting. I guess since those chase scenes are edited so quickly, I felt like I wasn’t really given time to dwell on the background, so it didn’t really bother me. And during the times I did notice it (like on the boat) it didn’t feel that much different to me than in Last Crusade when it cuts back and forth from an exterior shot of a real plane in the sky to closeups of Ford and Connery very obviously not actually flying a plane in the sky. I feel like I’d care less about small hiccups like that if I cared more about the story, and I do… but I also don’t. So basically, all I really have to pull me in are the stunts, so it sticks out even more. And the action’s fun, especially the practical stuff in the Tuk Tuk chase. It’s zippy and it’s propulsive, but I’m still grappling whether my enjoyment for the action is because it’s that good, vs how pumped up I am by John Williams’ score that I think the action’s better than it is.
|
|
|
Post by mikediastavrone96 on Jul 3, 2023 3:03:38 GMT
Harrison Ford is as charming as always, Phoebe Waller-Bridge brings a nice spunky energy to the proceedings, Mads Mikkelsen was born to play the villain to every iconic character, and John Williams is a god among men. Mangold, one of the better studio filmmakers around, does a fine job but it's hard to step into the shoes of Steven Spielberg and neither the pacing nor the staging, particularly for some of the action scenes, are up to classic Indy standards.
The script all but undoes Crystal Skull, necessary for the purposes of this movie since that film tied up every little thing it could and this one needs loose ends to go off but unnecessary in the grand scheme that this whole film is unnecessary as anything more than another adventure with our hero. The attempts at bridging the gap and providing the character with anything more than another adventure do not really work. But the adventure itself does, with the dial itself serving as a worthy MacGuffin that proposes interesting themes on Indy himself being a relic out of time (which the film unfortunately never develops) and offering plenty of fun globe-trotting.
The CGI, which this film relies on more than I wish it had, is pretty spotty. De-aged Ford looks great in some static shots, less so in movement and especially less so when the angle of any nearby lighting source changes. His voice for that early flashback sequence is also an issue, but an acceptable one given the likely alternative with Disney would've been to digitally create the voice (because God forbid they just hire a soundalike). That opening sequence provides some of the best thrills of the movie, even as the overt artificial look of it prevents it from reaching the heights of something like the car chase in Raiders.
Speaking of the artificial look, it seems a lot of the VFX budget went into environmental things like replacing the sky, adding in smoke effects, raining confetti on a parade, etc. And I don't know what happened there, but it looks really off. Little of it feels integrated with the lighting, leading to some disconnects between foreground and background, and it just baffles me the idea they couldn't get themselves close to the image they wanted on set. Given the wizardry that Spielberg and cinematography Douglas Slocombe (I personally feel they shouldn't have made any Indys without him) employed on the original trilogy to achieve their tactile aesthetic, it's a bit of a disappointment. Soundstage scenes look pretty good, though, and more fitting of Slocombe's look than Kaminski's attempt to integrate his own style into that of Indy's.
All in all, I'm glad it doesn't suck, but Indiana Jones as he was ended with The Last Crusade.
|
|
|
Post by The_Cake_of_Roth on Jul 3, 2023 6:46:23 GMT
His voice for that early flashback sequence is also an issue, but an acceptable one given the likely alternative with Disney would've been to digitally create the voice (because God forbid they just hire a soundalike). I’d really love to know what they were thinking here, because I figured the easiest solution to alter Ford's voice would be to throw on some audio filters just to change it a bit... which should actually be simpler than doing what they did for his face...
|
|
|
Post by Ryan_MYeah on Jul 4, 2023 3:34:00 GMT
So it’s grown in my esteem, and I actually consider it on equal footing with Crystal Skull.
|
|
|
Post by The_Cake_of_Roth on Jul 4, 2023 9:35:19 GMT
So it’s grown in my esteem, and I actually consider it on equal footing with Crystal Skull. To be fair, none of the other films have particularly fleshed out henchmen. Even in Raiders, you’ve got Toht and Dietrich, who don’t really register as anything more than just creepy and menacing. And while I agree that the Pat Roach-like henchman is discarded in a disappointing way, I don’t think giving him a fight scene with Ford would have worked considering Ford’s age... it just wouldn’t have been believable and would have looked ridiculous. When you say it has untapped potential, do you mean that you would have liked there to have been more time travel featured throughout the film? I liked that it was saved as a kind of a third-act swerve, plus I don’t see it as any different from the way we only see the power of the Ark at the very end of Raiders, or how we don’t see what the Grail can do until the end of Last Crusade, etc. I also disagree that it doesn't feel like a treasure Indy would risk going after. There are several factors contributing to his pursuit of it: 1. The fact that Helena is being chased by some bad people after taking it and is clearly in danger; 2. He had promised to destroy it for his old friend who lost his mind over it, and the possibility of it falling into the hands of Nazis feels very wrong; 3. He’s accused of murder, and tracking down it and Helena will somehow prove his innocence (?); and 4. Deep down, he might think the stories about it could be true, so the possibility of it ending up in the wrong hands raises the stakes even more...
|
|
|
Post by The_Cake_of_Roth on Jul 5, 2023 11:54:24 GMT
Because I love John Williams’ music for these films, I’ve been having fun doing a personal project of tracking all the instances where Indiana Jones’ musical theme appears in a slowed-down form throughout the series... and it’s interesting how Dial of Destiny makes use of slow versions of Indy’s theme compared to the other films.
Basically, in the original trilogy, slow statements of Indy’s theme specifically highlight crucial moments in his moral development. But once his ethos becomes refined with not much more opportunity for further growth at the end of Last Crusade, the significance of the slow theme shifts (starting in Crystal Skull) from signaling internal character transformation to representing external change in Indy’s life around him, and him having to cope with it (Marcus and his father’s deaths, for instance).
In Dial of Destiny, the slow version of Indy’s theme seems like a continuation of how it’s used in Crystal Skull – in the "Give 'em hell, Indy" scene, Sallah speaks nostalgically of past adventures and how he misses that time of his life, and Indy says something like “those days have come and gone.” There’s a melancholic quality to the theme there that certainly feels appropriate given how the film is largely about how Indy is now a man out of time, and no longer fits into the world that has changed around him. Here it is in the video below:
I just love this little musical moment so much. Such an efficient way of passing through three moods within four odd measures: melancholic, vulnerable, then heroic.
|
|
|
Post by Ryan_MYeah on Jul 5, 2023 23:44:54 GMT
The_Cake_of_Roth I will admit that villains, and henchmen, are some of the least-dimensional parts of an Indy movie (Elsa’s the only one who feels genuinely, thematically compelling), but what makes them for me is the charisma of their actors playing them, or at least they have some unique visual flair. Maybe it’s my preference for camp over realism in an Indy movie (more taste than a fundamental flaw), but I just felt like Holbrook was so reined in and meh, and ironically his turn in Logan had more of that personality I would have liked to see (I’m not saying he had to rehash Logan, but still, I feel like he gets slightly sidelined). And I don’t know. I give Ford’s age one thing, but Indy has always shown himself to be resilient, so maybe have a clever reversal where he beats the henchmen not by brawn, but by pure ingenuity. I don’t know. I was just put off by that. As for the Antikythera itself, it’s not the reasons Indy chased it, or the lack of time travel itself that got me. As you said, I prefer when the power of the relic is reserved for the end. Makes it so much more mysterious, and makes its eventual explosive backfiring all the more satisfying. That Syracuse reveal is bonkers, and I love how the movie just rolls with it, but I feel like the endgame with Indy’s choice to nearly stay didn’t entirely translate. I know Indy is stuck in the past, and that sequence makes for good metaphor for that trait (where he has the chance to live in that past), but for this to be an obsession of his, I think Indy seems indifferent to it until 1969. Maybe it’s his grief driving him to it, but I felt like the temptation could have been there more for him.
That said, the way it gets brushed off with Helena punching him, it’s cute, it made me laugh, but it kind of undermined that internal debate for Indy a little.
|
|
|
Post by The_Cake_of_Roth on Jul 6, 2023 5:20:52 GMT
As for the Antikythera itself, it’s not the reasons Indy chased it, or the lack of time travel itself that got me. As you said, I prefer when the power of the relic is reserved for the end. Makes it so much more mysterious, and makes its eventual explosive backfiring all the more satisfying. That Syracuse reveal is bonkers, and I love how the movie just rolls with it, but I feel like the endgame with Indy’s choice to nearly stay didn’t entirely translate. I know Indy is stuck in the past, and that sequence makes for good metaphor for that trait (where he has the chance to live in that past), but for this to be an obsession of his, I think Indy seems indifferent to it until 1969. Maybe it’s his grief driving him to it, but I felt like the temptation could have been there more for him.
Well I wouldn’t say the artifact itself and its potential power is meant to be an obsession of his. It was his friend’s obsession, and Indy (as is always the case) transforms from skeptic into believer over the course of the film. Part of what I like about that third act is the way Indy’s temptation to stay in the past comes across as something he suddenly realizes he wants. I don’t think it’s supposed to be this long-term desire of his, but rather an idea that comes to him as a result of his long-gestating sense of incongruity with the modern world and grief that leaves him feeling like there’s nothing left for him in the present. To me, that sudden realization of his desire to stay actually makes it more poignant because it sneaks up on him (and on us, as an audience), and to me makes a lot of emotional sense – people don’t always know what they want (or what they think they want) until they encounter it directly, and often they don’t realize how misguided that desire is, so someone has to help them see that.
|
|
|
Post by Pittsnogle_Goggins on Jul 10, 2023 18:29:36 GMT
Big pile of meh. Some decent sequences but more utterly forgettable than anything. And nothing about PWB’s character or performance worked for me.
Still better than Crystal Skull though.
3>1>>>2>>>>>5>>4
|
|
|
Post by The_Cake_of_Roth on Jul 24, 2023 5:02:46 GMT
Saw this for a second time today (instead of Oppenheimer or Barbie lol) because my mother-in-law was in town this weekend and wanted to see it. Held up pretty well on rewatch, though the fact that the second half of the movie is somewhat lighter in terms of action than the first half did stand out to me more on this viewing... didn’t negatively impact the movie for me though, and it manages to still be entertaining even with Indy basically just tied up and incapacitated for the whole third act. And even on rewatch, the 2.5-hour runtime really flew by for me.
|
|
|
Post by Ryan_MYeah on Jul 24, 2023 5:53:43 GMT
Saw this for a second time today (instead of Oppenheimer or Barbie lol) because my mother-in-law was in town this weekend and wanted to see it. Held up pretty well on rewatch, though the fact that the second half of the movie is somewhat lighter in terms of action than the first half did stand out to me more on this viewing... didn’t negatively impact the movie for me though, and it manages to still be entertaining even with Indy basically just tied up and incapacitated for the whole third act. And even on rewatch, the 2.5-hour runtime really flew by for me. I’ve gotten warmer on it, but the one thing that almost kills it for me is when they get to Greece. I’m still iffy when they turn into Thunderball (and waste a perfectly good Banderas), and I think it gets a bit draggy, but I still feel like it sticks the landing *just* enough. Gun to my head, I *might* like it better than Crystal Skull, but I appreciate that movie’s brevity more.
|
|
|
Post by JangoB on Aug 30, 2023 15:45:49 GMT
Things go awry right from the get-go when the Paramount logo doesn't transform into a mountain. Look, I've been sceptical about this movie ever since its announcement but at the same time I was - and always am - absolutely open to having a great cinematic experience. All right, so no Spielberg this time (why even do Indiana Jones without him?), that's a biggie but hey, gimme an exciting adventure and I won't mind. At least not too much. The giant problem with this movie is that Mangold doesn't seem to understand what an Indiana Jones movie is or if he does understand it, he tries to veer it into such a misguided "new" direction that it seems like he doesn't understand it. All of the four previous Indy movies have carved a very specific niche for themselves among all the other franchises - a niche that I flat-out adore. They're not about themes, they're not about character development, they're not about any of those standard ingredients that you "ought to" have in your movie. They're about pure entertainment. Their goal has always been to thrill and excite the ever-loving heck out of you - to pay tribute to adventure serials of old via state-of-the-art cinematic ballet in which action and comedy grow out of each other like flowers sprouting from bountiful land. These movies have always known what kind of movies they were and when (the unfairly maligned) Kingdom of the Crystal Skull was described by some critics as "more of the same"... they kinda nailed it. And that was the point. When you sat down to watch an Indiana Jones movie, corn kernels started popping inside your heart because that was the world you were entering. A world of absolute adventure, a world of the greatest interaction of camera and movement you could find, a world brimming with energy and humor, a world free of all those strings that turned other entertainments into entertainments with "meaning". And how unfortunate it is that the fifth and final movie of this series felt the need to step out of that world. Things start off fairly well with that extended 1944 CG setpiece (and the sheer amount of CG in the film makes KOTCS look practical by comparison) but even there you immediately observe that the action doesn't have an iota of Spielberg's invention and fluidity. Not to mention that the de-aged face of Harrison Ford is distracting even in the good shots simply because you can't help but keep looking at it and subconsciously searching for the seams. But the opening at least provides us with some sense of adventure we've come to expect from an Indiana Jones film. You can tell that it's not an authentic one but as a replica it's acceptable. And then we transition to 1969 and the cookie begins crumbling. I'm not sure why Mangold clicked on the "dour" option when he chose the tone for his Indiana Jones but that's where we find ourselves as soon as he reintroduces the character in a new age. It's almost as if he's declaring the Spielberg portion of the movie to be over and that we're in Mangold territory now. His Indiana Jones is a downbeat old man without that signature spark in his eyes, not to mention a man who is going through a divorce and has got a dead son Not only does this undo the cheesy but cheerful ending of KOTCS but it effectively flips the bird to the entire fourth installment which tried its best to provide Indy with a happily ever after. I don't know exactly who was asking for an Indiana Jones film about trauma and disillusionment with life but now that we've got it... no, thanks. At one point Indy asks Helena: "Why would you go searching for a thing that drove your father crazy?" Indiana Jones asking someone why they would be searching for an artefact. What the hell is this? Mangold doubles down on the dourness in another area too which left me, for lack of a better word, somewhat uncomfortable in a "what on earth is this doing here?" kind of way. The Indy movies have certainly had their share of violence but what they've never dabbled in was coldblooded murder. Sure, baddies got eliminated in many a way and on a few extremely rare occasions innocents would get it too but it was always presented in a very heightened cinematic manner (like the heart being ripped out in Temple of Doom). Dial of Destiny has at least four instances of average, normal people being straight up motherfucking killed on screen which just brought the overall down feeling of the movie even down...er. One could make a case of this being Mangold's reflection of the genre landscape of the time the movie takes place in (more serious conspiracy thrillers, more realistic violence) similar to how sci-fi B-movies were woven into the DNA of KOTCS... but I think that'd be a stretch. It really doesn't help that Mangold treats those moments with the same matter-of-fact/not-gonna-do-anything-cinematic-about-it approach he adopts for everything else in the movie. I can't tell you how wrong it felt when not one but two of Indy's college colleagues got shot by Mikkelsen's henchmen but what rubbed even more salt in the wound was the death of Banderas's character (why Banderas was in the movie at all is another question). A few minutes after his demise Helena and that forgettable moustache kid are laughing about something and Indy, in full depression mode, goes "My friend just got murdered!" The mood is immediately brought down, not just for the characters but for the audience as well. We sit there with a bad taste in our mouths and wonder: is this really an Indiana Jones movie we're watching? Where's the spirit of adventure, where's the genre-aware sense of fun, where's THE JOY? Is this really what we've come to - a joyless Indiana Jones movie? This is why the thing shouldn't have been made in the first place. Another problem is the tedium of it all - aside from the opening, Mangold doesn't really try to mimic the propulsive energy of Spielberg's directing and Michael Kahn's editing. Unfortunately he doesn't offer a good substitute for it either, settling for a strangely laborious pace. There is action in the picture but the most generous word I can find for the way it's staged is competent. The severe lack of comedy is also felt, and felt deeply. If you've seen an Indiana Jones movie, you know that comedy is one of the franchise's staples. One could argue that Raiders was somewhat serious compared to the other three but starting with Temple of Doom humor became part and parcel of the series and was smartly used not only in tandem with the action but in all the other scenes as well, particularly improving and enrichening the exposition ones. Pretty much all of that is bid farewell to here. Two pointed examples: 1) the exposition scene with Indy and Helena in the bar after his college retirement party is just that - an exposition scene. They sit across each other and talk in your standard two-shots without anything interesting happening. Compare that with the exposition scene in KOTCS between Indy and Mutt in a diner - we're given all the necessary information but Spielberg is careful to infuse that scene with little comedic bits (Mutt dumping his comb into someone's drink, Mutt stealing a beer from the tray and Indy putting it back) which both keeps us entertained and gives us a glimpse into the two characters and their dynamic. 2) the scene in which Indy and Helena steal a newlyweds' car to go somewhere. You just know that in the previous Indy movies this little bit would've been put to ripe comedic use. Here they just... steal it with the crowd going "Hey! No! Stop!" No gags, no jokes, no interaction of the action with the circumstance. Just a flat doing of what's supposed to be done. I haven't seen either Kate & Leopold or Knight and Day so maybe I'm missing something eye-opening but Mangold simply strikes me as a director without a sense of humor or at least without much of it. Which in theory is fine. But we're talking Indiana goddamn Jones here. I do have to say that things pick up again once we crawl through the main portion of the movie. When it turns into a Paul W.S. Anderson joint in its final act... I didn't mind. What's happening is quite bonkers but at least there's a feeling of creativity to it. Although I wish they allowed Indy to do even more time hopping so that he'd get to see other big historical events too before going back to his mothball life. But the fact that they kept an Archimedes throughline during the whole story is fine too. Gotta say, as infamous as the nuking the fridge or the airplane boat jumping moments are, to me the most ridiculous image in an Indiana Jones film is now the skeleton of Archimedes with a wristwatch They neatly explain it towards the end but seeing it when it appeared without any context made me chuckle in exactly that kind of way. The very final bit was pleasantly sentimental and ended the film on a decent note. But all in all I found the project misguided and kind of ill-conceived. Maybe some people will see its approach as refreshing but to me it chose new directions in all the wrong ways. I've seen the other Indy movies multiple times but I can't possibly imagine sitting through this one again for the very simple reason of it providing barely any joy whatsoever. The original trilogy is the finest form of cinematic escapism there is, the fourth movie is an imperfect but very entertaining adventure which thoroughly understands the assignment and this... is an attempt to break Indiana Jones out of his serial trappings and bring him into some sort of reality. An attempt which begs a question which is apparently not as simple as it looks: why would you want to do that?
|
|
|
Post by Ryan_MYeah on Aug 31, 2023 17:13:49 GMT
JangoB What about the maestro?
|
|