HaloMods "Classic" Read-only Archive

If you haven't seen the latest installment to the Indiana Jones series I strongly recommend that you DON'T!

The movie I must admit did have enough action to carry you through to the end but the humor and the acting could have been worked on. During the jungle scene they drive off the cliff and land on a tree and end up unharmed and going over water falls unharmed...not really.


The only defining moments of the movie were the beginning (when they showed the ark from the first movie) and the chase scene other than that the acting was terrible, the evil chick was annoying as hell and that ending...WTF WAS THAT!!!! seriously George Lucas knock it the F off...

The other films were so much better and produced exquisitely. unlike this film it was like they didn't want to do a lot of hands on stuff and figured CGI was 1 billion times better...some times classic is best

Things to look out for by George Lucas,
-The Darth Vader breathing wall
-Lines the old man gives some reference to The Phantom Menace, Attack of the Clones and Revenge of the Sith


The Verdict

If you like it you like it personally too Signs'ish and mediocre acting I give it a

6.7 out of 10


...where is Short Round when you need him...

I didn't like it either. My biggest complain was the ending though.

It was really unrealistic, like when they fell over Niagra falls and were OK.

lol 3 times!

For all those who were wondering about the waterfalls and such:

It's supposed to be corny and unrealistic. It's Indiana Jones for God's sake. I personally loved that spin the movie had. The ending was a little... weird, to say the least, but overall it was an enjoyable movie.

I have yet to see it for myself, but I've heard nothing but good things from various sources. Tons of people think that they approached his age quite nicely and used it as an effective part of the plot.

aliens and spaceships dont belong in indiana jones it was like a bad sci-fi channel movie i give it a 0.5/10

FleetAdmiralBacon wrote:I have yet to see it for myself, but I've heard nothing but good things from various sources. Tons of people think that they approached his age quite nicely and used it as an effective part of the plot.

no way his age was old but surviving a nuclear blast, water falls, running on rafters being dragged by a motor cycle, they tried to make him look like a young indiana...its retarded and if your friends think its good they obviously didnt grow up on the originals and just watched them on tv...this one is so out there i half expected Mulder and Scully to show up at the end.

KOH_Church wrote:if your friends think its good they obviously didnt grow up on the originals and just watched them on tv

Logically, one would be inclined to believe that the latter is more effective than the former. It is reasonable to say that at younger ages, viewers are less likely to be aware of deeper meanings and backstories than older viewers, simply because they are less analytical. Watching them later, therefore, would give one a better understanding of what is being presented. Whether you watch them at a young age and again later or simply watch them later would have little-to-no impact on one's ability to grasp the concept. However, this scenario would imply the aforementioned person is capable of grasping such on their own, which may or may not be true. That is your premise from which to argue, not "growing up on them."

so thats just wtf.

i mean ghosts,aliens bible and the holy grail i wonder if that might make a great sci fi game.
or another HALO i mean halo has aliens,bible refrences and by ghosts it mght mean flood

jackson117 wrote:so thats just wtf.

i mean ghosts,aliens bible and the holy grail i wonder if that might make a great sci fi game.
or another HALO i mean halo has aliens,bible refrences and by ghosts it mght mean flood

What.

Granted the aliens and spaceships were sort of out of place, but your reasons why it's a bad movie are kind of ridiculous.

Honestly, it was an enjoyable movie. It wasn't Raiders, but it was still good. I mean you couldn't honestly think it was going to compare to the originals did you?

jackson117 wrote:so thats just wtf.

i mean ghosts,aliens bible and the holy grail i wonder if that might make a great sci fi game.
or another HALO i mean halo has aliens,bible refrences and by ghosts it mght mean flood

Its just how all the other Indiana Jones went...When I grew up watching them seeing The Last Crusade in theaters and getting hooked they all seemed to follow a unique style of ending. Raiders of the lost Ark-It was a "Communication Device" which Hitler wanted as a weapon. Temple of Doom it was a mad man who Indy had to kill personally, and The Last Crusade it was the Holy Grail they were seeking so Hitler could live for ever.

They all revolved around a central Evil but in this movie that wasn't really present. Sure you might say it was the chick but in whole it was just the Russians and the other guy all during the Cold War. Indy really had no involvement in this movie except that he wanted to save his friend. He didn't know what the skulls did like in the previous movies he had his father and his notes to see what might happen if say A or B happens. Here he was just like "WHERE IS HE!" and then 10 minutes after that say "Lets find the City of Gold"

The styling of this movie does not (except for his whip) follow any of the other 3 movies styling which puts a damper completely on this new installment.

I had to sit in the second row and that was a pain. There should have been more to the ending, but otherwise I liked it (This is the first Indiana Jones movie I've seen).

It was a little too "oogey-boogey" for my liking, but I didn't dislike it, either.

I actually have a friend named Indiana Jones.

I thought it was great. If you compare it to the older movies then yes, it comes up short. But on its own they did a pretty good job.

I liked it. It wasn't as good as the first one, but I liked better than the 2nd one. When the nuke was preparing to go off I was like, "JFC, run Indy!" The reverse blow-dart thing made me laugh too.

Yeah KOH_Church, I'll agree with that.

And I know someone named Harrison Ford

I think Han Solo is to old to be in this movie.

kornkidcrazy wrote:I liked it. It wasn't as good as the first one, but I liked better than the 2nd one. When the nuke was preparing to go off I was like, "JFC, run Indy!" The reverse blow-dart thing made me laugh too.

"Damn. Thought that looked closer."

I liked it, not as good as Raiders, but I liked it.

Also the "omfg, aliens, that's so unrealistic" argument - FUCKING ARK OF THE COVENANT. Don't give me your realism bullshit.

G.I.R. wrote:

kornkidcrazy wrote: Also the "omfg, aliens, that's so unrealistic" argument - *** ARK OF THE COVENANT. Don't give me your realism ***.

The Ark of the Covenant is way more believable than aliens G.I.R. seeing how the bible mentions it and multiple civilizations claim they have the real one which remarkably enough all look relatively the same. There is no real definitive proof that aliens exist in the universe...until the us government releases all the classified information withheld from Roswell I will say all the other jones movies are "plausible"