Basterds, Censorship & an Indiana Jones retrospective...

[MinionZombie]

Rather than post three times, I'll lump it all together in one:

My combined thoughts on Inglourious Basterds:
http://deadshed.blogspot.com/2009/08/inglourious-basterds.html

Back to the discipline issue though - while I was glad to see QT is aware of it, and even addressed it in the aforementioned interview, he really does need to regain more of it.

A rant about censorship - Inglourious Basterd adverts, and E4's butchering of Friends repeats:
http://deadshed.blogspot.com/2009/08/august-2009-flavours-of-month-pt-1.html

Nor can Monica giggle and say "plus everyone's gonna see your thing!" when Joey discusses a potential nude scene he'll have to shoot - nor can we see a handful of frames of a blurry pink-ish faux-foreskin fall between his legs during the closing credits (although this is the best example of censor-crazy editing exhibited in these last few weeks - the cut works well, but still - the cut footage is completely innocuous).


Not on bus shelter adverts they say, and certainly not on television until after 10pm (the watershed is at 9pm) - you can say "fuck" repeatedly on Mock the Week which starts at 9pm, but you can't say "basterds" until after 10pm.

And finally - an epic rant/retrospective of the four Indiana Jones movies, and why I think the harsh criticism of Indy 4 is overdone when you look back over the original movies - Raiders is best, Crusade comes second, Skull comes a respectful third, and Doom comes in at a withering last place.
http://deadshed.blogspot.com/2009/08/august-2009-flavours-of-month-pt-2.html

I really don't understand why people bitch-out Crystal Skull so much - have they seen Temple of Doom lately? As I got the double-disc DVD of Skull recently, I decided to do a retrospective of the movie saga. It's been a number of years now since I've seen the first three, so let's have a gander across the series.

[MoonSylver]

You are 110% correct in the analysis of the Indy series. I saw KotKS for the first time AFTER going back & watching the 1st three & your thoughts mirror mine completely, right down to the order of the series & the reasons why.

[EvilNed]

I understand why people diss the Skull. Because it sucked, there's nothing else to it. But you have to remember, I think the Last Crusade sucks pretty hard too. The Temple of Doom was cool, but Short Round ruined it.

[bassman]

It's nice to see some others that enjoy Skull. People complain that there's too many situations that Indy wouldn't/shouldn't walk away from.:rolleyes: Apparently they haven't paid very close attention to the originals....

[Doc]

Hell, Temple of Doom is my favorite but, even I agree its the worst out of the 3 Indy films I've seen(haven't seen Last Crusade yet). If that makes sense.:confused:

[EvilNed]

It's nice to see some others that enjoy Skull. People complain that there's too many situations that Indy wouldn't/shouldn't walk away from.:rolleyes: Apparently they haven't paid very close attention to the originals....

Stuff like that, I agree, is simply silly criticism. However, the fridge scene was beyond ridiculous and shouldn't have been in there. But I knew about it beforehand, so it didn't bother me when I watched the film. What did bother me was that the script was boring, the "twist" simply... sucked.

Also, I don't get very much pleasure from films where the hero easily managed to kills dozens of evil henchmen. All I wonder when I see scenes like that is "Why the hell should I be afraid of these guys? Or why should anyone? They're worthless shots and they can't do anything right..." And that's exactly what ruined The Last Crusade for me as well.

[bassman]

Stuff like that, I agree, is simply silly criticism. However, the fridge scene was beyond ridiculous and shouldn't have been in there. But I knew about it beforehand, so it didn't bother me when I watched the film. What did bother me was that the script was boring, the "twist" simply... sucked.

I can understand why people hate the fridge, but I loved it. It made me laugh like it was supposed to.



Also, I don't get very much pleasure from films where the hero easily managed to kills dozens of evil henchmen. All I wonder when I see scenes like that is "Why the hell should I be afraid of these guys? Or why should anyone? They're worthless shots and they can't do anything right..." And that's exactly what ruined The Last Crusade for me as well.

I never thought the audience was supposed to be really afraid. It was just a fun ride. That's how I see it, anyway. Indy is a guy in over his head yet somehow miraculously makes it through....

[EvilNed]

If it is a ride, then it should have ups and downs in tension. Not simply being a straight line, like it is when all henchmen simply get mowed down, all the time.

[C5NOTLD]

Here's a Indiana Jones retrospective.

KOTCS continued the Indiana Jones tradition of a film in the Indy series to be nominated or win an Academy Award as did each of the first three films Raiders/Temple of Doom/Last Crusade....

Or wait that's right, KOTCS wasn't nominated and didn't win a Oscar.
It won a Razzie for Worst Prequel,Remake, Rip-off or Sequel Award.
What a nose dive this franchise took.:eek:


Apparently they haven't paid very close attention to the originals....

You're right about not paying attention to the originals because the originals are a different type of film.

Lucas has said the original three were a tribute to the 1930's Republic serials and they decided to change the approach and make KOTCS a tribute to the 1950's B movie.

Quite a difference and Indy doesn't work as a 1950's B movie.

[MinionZombie]

Lucas has said the original three were a tribute to the 1930's Republic serials and they decided to change the approach and make KOTCS a tribute to the 1950's B movie.

Quite a difference and Indy doesn't work as a 1950's B movie.

Couldn't disagree more. Indy 4 is inspired by a lot of 'all things 1950s', but it remains in tribute to those 1930s serials as well. Like Spielberg & Lucas said, they didn't want to re-invent the wheel or change the franchise, they wanted to do just what they had been doing in those other three movies - and seeing them all back-to-back again with the new one on the end, they did exactly what they said they wanted to.

Skull is a fun-ass ride, and the fridge (which I really enjoyed and didn't mind being OTT - because that whole nuclear testing ground scene was fucking awesome), for those that bitched about it, is equal to or less stupid than jumping out of a crashing plane in an inflating dingy, landing on a snow covered mountain, then falling off a cliff into a river and being fine - I was fine with that scene too - because that sort of crazy shit would go on in those 1930s serials.

I think people are being far too selective in their bitching about Skull.

Also, go here to see the Cinemassacre's Top 10 List of the dumbest moments in the Indiana Jones series:
http://www.spike.com/video/cinemassacre-top-10/3197473

...

As for the censorship angle - yet more pathetic examples from E4 last night during episode 8x04 of Friends - you can't say "videotape them having sex" nor can you say "pervert" nor can you say "stick your hands down your pants" - absolutely ridiculous, puritanical, and not to mention wholly inconsistent censorship right there from E4.

And it's not just Friends, they do the exact same to My Name Is Earl - that is butchered in almost every episodes, and sometimes really poorly ... it's like that sketch that MadTV did about a censored version of The Sopranos.

[shootemindehead]

Here's my Amazon review of 'The Last Crusade'

2/5 stars

__________________________________________________ ___________
For some reason, unbeknownst to me, quite a few people (and reviewers) dismissed the excellent "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom" (also reviewed) as the worst sequel in the original 80's Indy series and some said it was just simply a bad film...full stop. They derided the film so much that I wondered if they had actually seen it at all, so unjust was the "outrage" against the episode. Obviously, the fact that "Temple of Doom" was following the truly wonderful "Raiders of the Lost Ark" (the only really great film of the 4) had a negative effect on how some were going to view the first sequel in the series, as no matter how hard Lucas and Spielberg et al tried they couldn't hope to top the incredible impact that "Raiders" had on the public.

But unfortunately, it seems that the producers of the Indy series abandoned their own judgment and bent over backwards in an attempt to eliminate the darker elements of "Temple of Doom" and replace it with lashings of incredibly stupid and inane comedy for the third installment, "Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade".

So vehement were the producers of "Last Crusade" to replace serious content with appalling idiocy, they were willing to litter the movie with slapstick nonsense that destroyed the overall film.

Of course, that doesn't mean that the film is a complete write off in every department. The basic story is OK (but only just) and sees our hero following in his fathers obsessive quest for the famed cup of Christ, or the Holy Grail. The essential plot elements are all there and includes the usual Indy staples of multiple locations, deadly traps and spectacular supernatural McGuffin. Even the Germans were forced back into their nazi uniforms to don their traditional Hollywood caricature as the badguys; Which, in my opinion was a bit tired and un-necessary. There are plenty of bad folk around and their presentation here is far, far inferior than their turn in "Raiders".

Most in the movies favor, and the only reason this film gets an extra star, is the inclusion of Sean Connery as Indy's dad. It's a good plot device to hang the kinda weak central plot onto and Connery's performance as the bungling Old Man of Henry Jones Jr is quite delightful and he has some great lines too..."We named the dog Indiana".

The shared screen time of Ford and Connery generally works well and they pair of them seemed to be having a good time in their roles.

Another mention should go to Irish actress Alison Doody, as the obligatory squeeze (with a twist) and Denholm Elliott who reprises his charming role as Marcus Brody, dean of Indy's college in America. Unfortunately, it was to be for the last time.

Also of note, is a floppy haired River Phoenix as a young Indiana in the movies brilliant opening sequence.

Unfortunately, after the opening is complete, the film starts to go rapidly downhill until it naturally reaches it's ridiculously absurd climax, by which time my suspension of disbelief had had enough and Mr Cynicism had stepped in.

But even the rapidly disintegrating story would have been bearable if Spielberg and Lucas had refrained from carelessly dropping the incredibly unfunny attempts at "humour" through the film. Sure, the two preceding efforts had liberal amounts of humour sprinkled within it's opening and ending credits, but it remained subtle and never interfered with the overall product or the "seriousness" of the piece. In "Raiders" Indy shoots the sword wielding foe with his revolver, instead of fighting him with a sword and in "Temple of Doom" he tries it again, but this time his gun has been missing since the opening sequence. These humourous efforts are fine and funny and what's more they are limited to reality. They don't break down the walls of reality and destroy the suspense or action of a given scene.

Whereas the "humour" in the "Last Crusade" is so heavy handed that it completely ruins a scene. For instance, when Indy breaks his way through a library floor in Venice to get to a secret chamber, the noise he naturally makes breaking the floor is mistaken by a librarian for the noise he makes while he is stamping overdue books. Now, this may be fine in a Monty Python movie, but in a film such as an Indy adventure, it is just stupid. There's no other words for it. It ruins the suspense of the scene.

Likewise the "No Ticket" scene in the Zeppelin and the ridiculous Berlin book burning scene where Indy meets Hitler, coupled with the scene where the BF108 pilot sheers his wings off and continues traveling down a tunnel beside a car containing the Jones boys...go a long way towards tearing apart any suspension of disbelief that's required equipment for watching a film of this sort. It's unbelievably groan making, destroys the suspense and danger and it's difficult to imagine anyone finding it enjoyable.

At it's conclusion "Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade" has long since revealed itself another 'could have been' film. It could have been great, but it's let down terribly by the decision to dilute the overall effect with mind numbing idiocy and it kills any excitement with dreadful foot stamping comedy that even a Will Ferrell movie would scoff at.

__________________________________________________ ___________


As you can probably tell, I'm not a big fan. :D

[bassman]

Crusade is my favorite of the series. The humor is perfect, the relationship between Sr and Jr is perfect, and the action is perfect. It's a very fun ride. The most fun out of them all.:)

[EvilNed]

I remember when I last watched Last Crusade, I turned it off after the umbrella/flock of birds bit. This is a perfect example of how NOT to do a "ride".

Sometimes I agree with Werner Herzog on this issue. "I thought a film was a film, and a ride was a ride."

I'm not saying I don't enjoy action films and dumb shit. But there are limits to just how ridiculously easy the heroes get out of troubles and how incredibly dumb/worthless the villains can be. If the villains are worthless, then they pose no threat and thus, there are no obstacles for the hero to overcome. Simple math. :p