Rodafowa wrote:
The Rev Owen wrote:
You're all so wrong it makes my head hurt. Indy 4 is exactly the same quality as 1-3. Exactly. It's brilliantly updated to pastiche the movies and concerns of the fifties in the same way the original films did the thirties, while staying with the same themes of adventure, action, comedy and fringe archaelogy.
That's a bit strong. It's better than any of the other long-delayed sequels (Die Hard Four Point Less ...
Really? I thought DH4 was actually pretty good, even on its own merits - it was a very entertaining action film, with no messing about. Mrs C actually prefers Jurassic Park 3 over 2 for this reason. She likes her action films undiluted with any thinking, and, preferably, much in the way of talking.
Quote:
[Indy 4]had some nice moments (fencing on the backs of the moving cars) and was perfectly acceptable popcorn rubbish, but it felt baggy and overlong and generally lacking in sparkle. I liked it well enough, but have no desire to ever see it again, which I couldn't say about any of the other Indy films (even Temple Of Doom).
The bit on the moving cars was actually a bit poor - the blue/green screening was shockingly obvious. Overall it was enjoyable silliness though, and while I agree with you to an extent, I've rewatched it twice and will do so again - it has enough good stuff in there to merit that. I just tend to stop when they get to the templey thing at the end.
Bloody
aliens for god's sake.