posted
I liked that they hit the 50s-early 60s pulp movie tropes. Atomic weapons, giant ants, commies, greasers and preps. I didn't really like the alien thing, but I think that may have been another nod to the movies of this time period.
I'm still undecided if Cate Blanchett's character's lines about psychically infiltrating the U.S. from inside, converting people over to their way without them even knowing it was intended as a subtle nod to the red scare propoganda of the time or not.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
They weren't aliens, though. They were pan-dimensional beings. Possibly just checking in on the progress of the great Super-Computer, eh?
Posts: 3516 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
While I forgave the fact that the mystical element was aliens this time around, I found that their status as interdimensional beings, instead of just plain extraterrestrials, was a bit much to swallow. Unless "interdimensional" just means that they can jump into hyperspace like Han Solo.
Posts: 1029 | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Enigmatic: So what is the difference between a powerful immortal interdimensional being and a deity in a polytheistic cosmology?
--Enigmatic
You should read Eyes of Silver by Michael Stackpole.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MrSquicky: I'm still undecided if Cate Blanchett's character's lines about psychically infiltrating the U.S. from inside, converting people over to their way without them even knowing it was intended as a subtle nod to the red scare propoganda of the time or not.
It was far from subtle. And yes, it was about the red scare.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
We went to see this last night, but I wish we'd tried speed racer instead. It was like a "Best Of..." TV special or something. There was no cohesion to the story or relationships. The double agent fellow existed solely to drop breadcrumbs. Ox never really seemed important. Ox should have been dropping the breadcrumbs under mind control from the Russian, and leave the MI6 guy out altogether. It mostly made me wish I'd spent the evening playing Tomb Raider -- not that it would have been an option. Too many of the lines were rushed. Re: critters, I thought that was just part of the series. The snake bit in the sand pit was actually one of my favorite parts.
I really wanted to like this movie. Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
quote:Originally posted by MrSquicky: I liked that they hit the 50s-early 60s pulp movie tropes. Atomic weapons, giant ants, commies, greasers and preps. I didn't really like the alien thing, but I think that may have been another nod to the movies of this time period.
I'm still undecided if Cate Blanchett's character's lines about psychically infiltrating the U.S. from inside, converting people over to their way without them even knowing it was intended as a subtle nod to the red scare propoganda of the time or not.
Its a nod towards Red Alert 2: Yuri's Revenge
IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
quote:Originally posted by Glenn Arnold:
quote:I think the whole alien thing was a crazy direction to go and made the film too unbelievable.
When they were in the warehouse I assumed that they were looking for the Ark, and when I discovered that they were looking for aliens I thought it was perfect, given the period of the movie. I saw the "Chariots of the Gods" connection as soon as they mentioned the plains of Nazca. I thought it was kind of neat the way they fit all the pieces together, such as tying the Mayan head deformation together with the big headed aliens, and so forth.
The worst part I thought was how a bunch of heavily accented Russians could run around the United States and actually have enough free reign to chase Indy, whereas all he would have had to do is point a finger at them and shout "Commies!" and the crowd would have taken them out.
I think its hard enough getting a crowd to go after criminals as it is.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Enigmatic: So what is the difference between a powerful immortal interdimensional being and a deity in a polytheistic cosmology?
--Enigmatic
You should read Eyes of Silver by Michael Stackpole.
Mike Stackpole you say? I'm interested. The only other Stackpole book I've read other than the Star Wars books is "Wolf and Raven," which is a Shadowrun book and I love it so.
quote:Its a nod towards Red Alert 2: Yuri's Revenge
Really? I figure it would have been a nod to the pervasive sentiment in American culture that existed during the time frame that the film was set in and was an element in many of the other movies and such that it also referenced as opposed to a relatively recent video game that most of the audience wouldn't be aware of and that had no tie to anything else in the movie. But maybe you know best.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Enigmatic: So what is the difference between a powerful immortal interdimensional being and a deity in a polytheistic cosmology?
--Enigmatic
You should read Eyes of Silver by Michael Stackpole.
Mike Stackpole you say? I'm interested. The only other Stackpole book I've read other than the Star Wars books is "Wolf and Raven," which is a Shadowrun book and I love it so.
What's it about?
As you might guess from the context, inter-dimensional beings and religion. The story is set in a world where magic works and everyone has some degree of magical talent; the twist is that different religions forbid different types of magic as heretical or abominable. So they are constantly at war with each other.
Then there's some very interesting other stuff. But I won't give it away. The interdemensional aspect doesn't come in until late in the story.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Is there a lead male character who's kind of sassy/sarcastic but has a strong moral center that causes him to constantly question the right or wrongness of various situations?
Just curious. Since all or most of his Star Wars books are based around Corran Horn, and Wolf and Raven had a Horn clone, Wolfgang Kies, only he was from the wrong side of the tracks so to speak.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
The central character, at least one of them, is a very moral character, and has spent most of his life tyring to do the right thing, but is now in a situation where what he has been told is right is wrong, and he must follow his own moral code, and yes, he does start out scaldingly sarcastic, although it becomes clear that he was not always so. He is also an older/mentor character. Then there's another central male character, who is younger, who is very sure of himself, who reminds me more of a kind of young Corran, and now that I think of it in the end... Well, I don't want to give it away but suffice to say he's very important to saving the day, so to speak.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ketchupqueen:The story is set in a world where magic works and everyone has some degree of magical talent; the twist is that different religions forbid different types of magic as heretical or abominable. So they are constantly at war with each other.
Then there's some very interesting other stuff. But I won't give it away. The interdemensional aspect doesn't come in until late in the story.
What, Michael Stackpole wrote Alvin Maker??
Posts: 1029 | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Just re-watched Raiders. Everything that Raiders did right, Crystal Skull botched. Pacing, acting, dialogue--they're all great in Raiders and Crusade. Indy's rivals--the creepy German guy, Belloch, the Nazis--simply better rivals than the communists. The new movie was trying very hard to be clever with one-liners and cheesy homages (to the old movies, the 50's, etc). I laughed a few times, but mostly I was rolling my eyes with frustration. With the all the extra money being spent on CGI effects, with "cooler" action sequences that last (even LONGER than before), the new movie was just trying too hard. The story was pitiful, the characters were thin. It followed the previous formula fine--without any of the heart and adventure that made the other films great. It's frustrating because "kids these days" won't be able to tell the difference. My little brother has only seen the new one and he thought it was "awesome". *sigh*
Posts: 1314 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ditto on some of the most horribly implausible moments (fridge flight, vine swinging, waterfalls). Enjoyed the sword fighting, but it did strain credulity a bit more than it needed to.
I didn't really mind the alien thing but...it's not a great fit with the Powerful Artifact theme. These aliens have incredibly advanced powers, but are vulnerable to pre-technological humans making off with a critical component of their anatomy/minds/interdimensional ship? Arg. But it wasn't bad enough to ruin the movie.
I really don't get why Shia LeBeouf [I can't help reading this as "Shia of Beef" even though I know that's wrong] is in so many movies...esp. as a lead character.
I thought it could have used a little more creepy suspense and a little less crazy action. The pace was too frenetic.
I thought the movie was pretty entertaining and would have been a lot better if they'd skipped the main suspension-of-disbelief-killers listed above, and not tried to jam-pack quite so much stuntery into it.
Posts: 4287 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
The story is set in a world where magic works and everyone has some degree of magical talent; the twist is that different religions forbid different types of magic as heretical or abominable. So they are constantly at war with each other.
