Slog: News & Arts

RSS icon Comments on Indiana Jones Returns...

1

It's depressing that at least a third of the trailer is there to tell young audiences who Indiana Jones was, back in the previous century

Posted by bummer | February 14, 2008 10:23 AM
2

12 year old self: "YES YES YES YES YES!"
Current self: "YES YES YES YES YES!"

Posted by sirlearnsalot | February 14, 2008 10:25 AM
3

Dude, thank you for posting that!!! I got chills. I don't even care if it ends up being bad, it will still be awesome anyway.

Posted by defman23 | February 14, 2008 10:26 AM
4

I'll see it.

Posted by NapoleonXIV | February 14, 2008 10:26 AM
5

Indiana Jones and the Age of Computer-Generated Graphics

Posted by Coox | February 14, 2008 10:36 AM
6

AND, May 22 is Harrison Ford's 89th birthday!

Posted by Fnarf | February 14, 2008 10:36 AM
7

I'll probably go see it, but that trailer doesn't really do much for me, aside from emphasizing how OLD Harrison Ford is.

Although it's nice to see that ginormous warehouse back - makes me wonder what other "relics" are stashed away in there.

Posted by COMTE | February 14, 2008 10:40 AM
8

even his feet look old! when he hobbles around to pick up his hat... they should have used a leg double on that scene.

if it ends up being a bunch of, "i'm getting to old for this..." jokes, it will be lame. and the cgi is not raising my hopes...

Posted by infrequent | February 14, 2008 10:41 AM
9

Harrison Ford is the best argument I can think of for staying thin and in shape. If you can pull off this stuff at 65 - well...I need to lose some weight.

Looking forward to a butch, little Shia, too.

Posted by Bauhaus | February 14, 2008 10:42 AM
10

I found the trailer's messianic intro cheesy, but the rest of it made me very happy. Nice to see them acknowledge Indy's advancing age humorously.

@5: Spielburg has said that there will be no CGI in Indy IV, to remain consistent with the style of the earlier flicks. All FX are mechanical.

Posted by Ivan Cockrum | February 14, 2008 10:43 AM
11

@5 yeah... that short clip with those four columns coming together looked fake as hell, and that's on the tiny web screen.

"Part time"

Posted by Anon | February 14, 2008 10:59 AM
12

What's up with the crate marked "Roswell, NM?"

Are we going to see Indy fighting aliens?

Posted by oddthumbs | February 14, 2008 11:07 AM
13

I hope I'm half as good looking when I'm 65.

Posted by Reverse Polarity | February 14, 2008 11:28 AM
14

The Hill music video was better.

Posted by poster Girl | February 14, 2008 11:28 AM
15

Shia LaBeouf? Seriously? What a disappointment. But he couldn't ruin Transformers, so hopefully he won't ruin Indiana Jones. He only partially dampened my spirits.

Posted by obamatron | February 14, 2008 11:53 AM
16

@15, "he couldn't ruin Transformers" -- so hilarious, that's like saying "at least he didn't spoil that painful bout of explosive, bloody diarrhea"

Posted by ha ha ha | February 14, 2008 1:12 PM
17

Dear Steven Spielberg,

Please Please Please Please Please Please Please Please don't let George Lucas fuck this up too.

Sincerely,
My Childhood

Posted by gillsans | February 14, 2008 1:31 PM
18

Who gives a fuck if Indiana Jones is old? Anyone who actually thinks that's a problem is not only lame, but ageist. Setting an Indiana Jones movie in the 1950s is a great idea. Yes, the movie might suck, but you know what, it has nothing to do with Harrison Ford's age. I know how the youth worship youth, but come on you chumps! This could be very cool.

Posted by Jay | February 14, 2008 1:46 PM
19

How is he able to retrieve his whip after each swing?

Posted by Paulus | February 14, 2008 2:55 PM
20

WOW CGI!

FUCK YOU, LUCAS

Posted by ALL_CAPS_BECUAZ_I_HATE_WHAT_I_SAW | February 14, 2008 3:11 PM
21

Can't wait can't wait can't wait.

Posted by Explorer | February 14, 2008 3:15 PM
22

20: Yes, because Lucas totally vetoed everything Spielberg wanted. So there's some CGI matte art and some cgi where minatures would have been. Big fucking deal. That doesn't mean there aren't real stunts or vehicles. CGI stunts would be bad; however using CGI for big cliffsides and exploding vehicles isn't really a hell of a lot different than using models and matte paintings.

Posted by Jay | February 14, 2008 4:02 PM
23

Good movies don't have exploding vehicles in them at all.

Posted by Fnarf | February 14, 2008 9:01 PM
24

That's a lovely observation, but completely wrong. Good movies are not judged by such arbitrary standards. A movie is good or it isn't. The genre doesn't matter period. You may want to pretend it does, but any critic worth their salt will tell you you're full of shit.

Posted by Jay | February 14, 2008 10:51 PM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).