Originally Posted by frazod:
There are some sequels I never watched just because I heard such bad things about them that I didn't want my memory of the first film ruined. Alien 3 is an example. I know that the ship crashed, and Newt and Hicks are killed, and that Ripley dies in the end. Well, **** that. In my world, Ripley, Hicks and Newt returned to earth, got a fat settlement from the Company and lived happily ever after.
Ford and Connery riding off into the sunset at the end of Last Crusade works for me, and I don't think I need to have that screwed up. This movie just sounds lame. I really have no desire to see it.
And yes, Temple of Doom sucked balls. I didn't like it when I saw it in the theater and I still don't. That drop from the plane, down the side of the mountain, into the river just kind of set the tone for two hours of pointless dumbassery I'd just as soon have never experienced.
So I guess in my world, when it comes to Indiana Jones, there's just Raiders and Lost Crusade.
Good call on your part. This movie makes Temple look like a masterpiece.
When it becomes possible to have selective memory erasure done like Eternal Sunshine, this movie is going to be the first thing I have taken out... or maybe the second, after the Carl/Herm regime. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud:
The Matrix was on one of the premium channels the other night. I can't believe how ****ing cool that movie was and how the Wachowski Tranny's completely ****ed up that "trilogy".
The original was a masterpiece.
No joke. Should have left well enough alone. Guess you can't really blame them for cashing in while they could. I just think they could have done so much more with that storyline than they did. [Reply]
Originally Posted by beavis:
No joke. Should have left well enough alone. Guess you can't really blame them for cashing in while they could. I just think they could have done so much more with that storyline than they did.
On the bright side, Keanu is 200 mil or so richer for doing the trilogies! [Reply]
Originally Posted by Deberg_1990:
Oh come on...It was a lazy effort overall.
But it wasnt quite that bad.
Ive watched it a few times on DVD with my son, and it does offer some sporadic fun.
It was stunningly awful.
From the incredibly bad CGI to a borderline ridiculous dialog to poor acting performances (Cate Blanchette's baddie was laughable), this was an atrocious effort by all involved. And that's not to mention the ludicrous story.
If those were unknown actors, no one and I mean NO ONE would have ever heard of this movie. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud:
It was stunningly awful.
From the incredibly bad CGI to a borderline ridiculous dialog to poor acting performances (Cate Blanchette's baddie was laughable), this was an atrocious effort by all involved. And that's not to mention the ludicrous story.
If those were unknown actors, no one and I mean NO ONE would have ever heard of this movie.
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud:
It was stunningly awful.
From the incredibly bad CGI to a borderline ridiculous dialog to poor acting performances (Cate Blanchette's baddie was laughable), this was an atrocious effort by all involved. And that's not to mention the ludicrous story.
If those were unknown actors, no one and I mean NO ONE would have ever heard of this movie.
Im probably wanting it to be more than it really is in my mind.
But it was fun to see Indy in action again. [Reply]
