James Berardinelli reveiws Indy 4

[JRP82190]

I really hope hes wrong because I'm looking forward to this movie


http://www.reelviews.net/movies/i/indiana_jones4.html

[mookie75]

I'm looking forward to it as well, but it wouldn't surprise me that much if he turns out to be correct. Still, reading his review makes me think that he's a much more critical movie-goer than myself. I suppose that makes sense since he's a critic. :p This is just like the Star Wars prequels: This movie has to live up to what fans have been imagining for the past 19 years. That's a tall order to fill for any franchise.

I still expect the movie to make an obscene amount of money whether it's good or bad though. People will go because it's Indiana Jones, and even after word of mouth starts to spread, they will still go because most won't believe the bad reviews (if there are bad reviews) until they've seen it for themselves.

I'm expecting to enjoy the movie, but I'm also expecting to leave the theater thinking something along the lines of, "It was good, but I like the other movies better."

[Temple Fugate]

As long as it's better than Temple of Doom, I'll consider it a good Indiana Jones movie. Raiders and Crusade are really, really good movies. I never expected them to top them with Indy 4. Although if they did, that would be really nice. :)

[Lord Dalek]

EBERT LIKES IT. (http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080518/REVIEWS/969461084)

Thats all I need to know, who cares if some yahoo from a website nobody cares about thought it was "ok".

[FightingDreamer]

I've read some other negative reviews (mainly at CHUD, a good site, but occasionally too sour for my optimistic personality), but I refuse to let them kill my buzz. Some people are complaining that there are parts that are too silly... uh, what series have they been watching? I wouldn't like the movies so much if they weren't a little silly. And hey, Ebert enjoyed the hell out of it: http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080518/REVIEWS/969461084

EDIT: D'oh! LD got to Ebert before I did, apparently.

[Lord Dalek]

The reveiws are still generally positive (at RT out of 34 counted so far its 25 yay, 9 nay) so I will maintain hope for now.

[Desensitized]

As long as it tops The Last Crusade, that's enough for me.

[FightingDreamer]

As long as it tops The Last Crusade, that's enough for me.

You didn't like Last Crusade? Well, opinions will be opinions, but I rank it second best in the trilogy. It's more fun and joyful than Temple of Doom, and Sean Connery gives one of his best performances, mostly because it's so different from what he usually does. Normally, Connery is the hardcore warrior, but as Henry Jones Sr. he's wonderfully cantankerous and slightly nebbish.

[Peter Paltridge]

EBERT LIKES IT. (http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080518/REVIEWS/969461084)

Thats all I need to know, who cares if some yahoo from a website nobody cares about thought it was "ok".
Yikes, are you serious? Just because a man is well-established doesn't mean he's right. Ebert's said a lot of dumb things.

[Lord Dalek]

Just because a man is well-established doesn't mean he's right.Normally I'd agree but I've consistantly found myself agreeing with Ebert more than most other critics so he gets more cojones in my book.

[Desensitized]

You didn't like Last Crusade? Well, opinions will be opinions, but I rank it second best in the trilogy. It's more fun and joyful than Temple of Doom, and Sean Connery gives one of his best performances, mostly because it's so different from what he usually does. Normally, Connery is the hardcore warrior, but as Henry Jones Sr. he's wonderfully cantankerous and slightly nebbish.I liked it. I just didn't love it.

But yeah, the Connery/Harrison dynamic was really cool and easily the best part of the film.

[HomeMoviesFan]

Holy crap, somebody made a thread about my favorite critic!

I'm VERY disappointed to hear he doesn't like it. There's very few times we've disagreed (mostly with his reviews on animated movies, like Shark Tale and Ratatouille)...so, my hopes are officially down. Hopefully this makes for a pleasantly surprising viewing...

[DarkAngel]

Holy crap, somebody made a thread about my favorite critic!

I'm VERY disappointed to hear he doesn't like it. There's very few times we've disagreed
Same here, HMF. I always look to Berardinelli first when it comes to reviews. Usually, Ebert as well, but I particularly like JB as a reviewer.

What he said about the movie seems to match the vibe I'm getting in general from reading other reviews.

[Hanshotfirst113]

And Glenn Erikson's (http://www.dvdsavant.com/) review is in. He's a pretty cynical fellow at times, but he's very smart and generally pretty fair, and his review seems about in line with everything else that I've read and pretty much expected.

[Icer]

I wont be disappointed if it's better than Temple of Doom, and it looks like thats the case

[GregX]

EBERT LIKES IT. (http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080518/REVIEWS/969461084)

Thats all I need to know, who cares if some yahoo from a website nobody cares about thought it was "ok".

Ah yes, don't like the review? Insult the critic. Real mature.

[JRP82190]

i really want this movie to be good i'm planning on seeing it friday

[HG Revolution]

Of course, The Phantom Menace also got good reviews initially.

Fortunately, even the bad reviews say it's better than that disappointment was.

This is one movie where reviews don't matter at all. It's the type of thing I need to see for myself.

[Movie06]

This is why I don't like critics in general. In fact, no critic is going to discourage me from watching Indy 4.

[HG Revolution]

This is why I don't like critics in general.

If I really want to see a movie, critics probably aren't going to get in the way, but critics are useful for recommending movies I otherwise would be unsure about or hadn't heard of.

[Hanshotfirst113]

This is why I don't like critics in general.

Seeing as, at least in the short term, that's the profession that I hope to enter, thanks a lot.


In fact, no critic is going to discourage me from watching Indy 4.It's not going to stop anyone. It wouldn't matter if the film had 0% at rotten tomatoes, had critics picketing outside of the theaters warning people not to see it, and the ticket sales financed something unsavory. The movie is still going to make mind-boggling amounts of money. I quite frankly can't see anything that will stop this movie from making massive amounts of change.

[Lord Dalek]

The general consensus is that Indy feels a little more creaky this time around and Koepp's dialogue isn't as good as Kasdan's or Jeffery Boam's but its still a blast to watch. Its as fun as it could be and should be and we should enjoy it for that.

ITS FUN. FUN. FUN. IN THE SUN. SUN. SUN.*

*apologies to Howard Goodall

[Hanshotfirst113]

The general consensus is that Indy feels a little more creaky this time around and Koepp's dialogue isn't as good as Kasdan's or Jeffery Boam's but its still a blast to watch. Its as fun as it could be and should be and we should enjoy it for that.

I'm guess that it will neither be the second coming nor the end of cinema as we know it, but something in between.


ITS FUN. FUN. FUN. IN THE SUN. SUN. SUN.*

Now that daddy took the T-Bird away :D.

[Azrael24]

Seeing as, at least in the short term, that's the profession that I hope to enter, thanks a lot.
its ok, i like the critics, i usually agree. and since the reviews are actually not that great im going to see Narnia this weekend instead of Indy

[Lord Dalek]

Ok, Indy has now hit 81% Fresh at RT (up from 71% yesterday). It may drop a bit but I think we're safe.

Also 12% fresher than Narnia :evil:.

[Movie06]

Also 12% fresher than Narnia :evil:.

Oh yeah. :evil:

[TheVileOne]

Just wondering. What do you guys think of critics when they almost universally love a summer popcorn movie like Iron Man or Spider-man 2?

[Elf]

JB dissed Heat, so screw him.

[Joe]

Berardinelli and Ebert are both respectable critics and, as critics do, they don't always agree on the merits of certain films. Reviews off popular films like this are usually more valuable to a reader after they've watched it.

I also haven't been a fan or sites like Rotten Tomatoes in deeming something "Fresh" or "Rotten" based on whether a film rates higher than a 6/10 on several websites. Many of which are quite ameteur compared to the more professional.


no critic is going to discourage me from watching Indy 4.


Still, good or bad, everyone will see it.

He's already one step ahead of you.

It's common knowledge that certain movies are critic-proof, and the Indiana Jones films have always been one of them

[Lord Dalek]

Just wondering. What do you guys think of critics when they almost universally love a summer popcorn movie like Iron Man or Spider-man 2?Then usually I find myself liking them too. And I did like Iron Man although I don't think its as good either you or the ads have made it out to be. Its a upper echelon Marvel flick but its no Spider-man 2.

[TheVileOne]

Dalek, I was more wondering about the critics and more than the movies themselves. Because people seem to embrace the good reviews for a popcorn movie if its universal praise. But if they are bad, sometimes fans will turn their noses up at them.

[Leaping Larry Jojo]

Empirical data is more important than a singular one. I would rather wait until I have all the data from Rotten Tomatoes than a few early reviews, even if it's from a "respected" critic.

[HomeMoviesFan]

Keep in mind, everyone, he's not particularly fond of either Temple of Doom (http://www.reelviews.net/movies/i/indiana_jones2.html) or The Last Crusade (http://www.reelviews.net/movies/i/indiana_jones3.html). But he LOVED Raiders, and it's on his Top 100 list.

It has an 80% on RT, so hopefully this really is the rare exception...

[Leaping Larry Jojo]

Keep in mind, everyone, he's not particularly fond of either Temple of Doom (http://www.reelviews.net/movies/i/indiana_jones2.html) or The Last Crusade (http://www.reelviews.net/movies/i/indiana_jones3.html). But he LOVED Raiders, and it's on his Top 100 list.

It has an 80% on RT, so hopefully this really is the rare exception...

Even so, a critic's knowledge is more important than his opinion. I mean, I respect Ebert a lot, but he liked Garfield. So let's face it, everyone's different, and the best way to measure a movie critically is by survey...which is what makes RT the best site out there for fans wanting empirical data.

[Azrael24]

Ebert liked Garfield?! :eek::o:yawn:

[Leaping Larry Jojo]

Ebert liked Garfield?! :eek::o:yawn:

Yeah. He also liked Tomb Raider.

[Hanshotfirst113]

Yeah. He also liked Tomb Raider.

And The Devil's Rejects and xXx and The Fast and the Furious and Transporter 2 and Batman Begins. Living proof that critics don't just like weird art film, and are perfectly susceptible to genre flicks and mainstream action pictures.

[Nightwing]

Because people seem to embrace the good reviews for a popcorn movie if its universal praise. But if they are bad, sometimes fans will turn their noses up at them.

As long as a person isn't starting a religion over it, and saying only that one particular fan opinion is right and should be followed and unquestioned, then I'm fine with it. We don't all have to go see the same movie. One person often has one particular movie scouting system that dictates the movies he/she will see. It is short-sighted from broader perspectives, but since we're talking about one person's decision to see a movie, they don't really need to think from broader perspectives when it comes to personal preference. And this is a place to voice those opinions to see if anyone agrees.

The review looks solid enough to me, but as earlier posts have said, I'd like to see Indy 4 regardless of anyone or anything, just for the fun of it. Plus I always thought that Crystal Skull stuff was interesting.

[Hanshotfirst113]

Up to 80% at RT, looks like it'll stay around there. Decent buzz.

[HomeMoviesFan]

Well, I sort of agree with Berardinelli. I still think 2 out of 4 is way too harsh, though. Maybe somewhere between 2.5 and 3. Better than Temple of Doom, but man that ending blew chunks. (the climax, not the wedding scene)

I mean, really? A flying saucer?! How the heck did Lucas get Spielberg to put that in there?! Eh, it was okay, near good, but not great...

[Azrael24]

And The Devil's Rejects and xXx and The Fast and the Furious and Transporter 2 and Batman Begins. Living proof that critics don't just like weird art film, and are perfectly susceptible to genre flicks and mainstream action pictures.
well most critics enjoyed batman begins

[Hanshotfirst113]

well most critics enjoyed batman begins

OK, valid point :p.