Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the Lost Ark

Richard Howard2> What is wrong with you people? The movie is just straight-up terrible.

I mean, it isn't exactly some high-brow masterpiece, you know. 😉 (® to CNN)

Richard Howard2> It's not because it tries too hard to be retro, or because the characters are flat and basically just part of the scenery, or because it leans into trashiness, or even because it's just a visual scrapbook. It's because there's a massive difference between having a genius, atmospheric opening where the effects and scenes perfectly capture the vibe of old classics—like how they did with Starship Troopers back in '39—to the point where it actually gets the audience hyped

That initial vibe lasted maybe five or ten minutes... honestly, as soon as those giant robots show up, that mood is gone. 😁 (they all can see it, why can't you 😂 ), so I guess your argument is kind of nonsense. When we spend an hour and a half watching nothing but a parade of special effects for the sake of showing them off, with inconsistent sets and messy pacing, it's pretty stupid to try and defend it by pointing at a beginning that was actually decent.

Richard Howard2> ...what ruined a movie that could have been a real treat.

The movie *is* a treat, but like CNN said, it's not for everyone. Some people are going to love it, and others are going to hate it.

Personally, I loved it because I spent ninety minutes laughing my head off, which hasn't happened for me in a theater in a long time, and that's what matters.

Look, to be perfectly honest, I actually enjoyed watching the movie, especially on the big screen.

Generally speaking, this flick is miles ahead of most of the garbage being churned out lately; it’s an atmospheric, thrilling visual journey that modern audiences genuinely need.

And it is precisely because I liked it so much that I feel such bitter resentment that it wasn't executed with the sheer brilliance it displayed at the start!

I have no desire to waste my breath commenting on mediocre, bad movies anymore, but this one had such potential that I felt the urge to just scream, "DAMN IT, WHY DIDN'T THEY FINISH IT PROPERLY!"

So, while my rational mind recognizes the film is flawed, I am still fucking gutted about it.

Adam Wright56, I have to say, the opening sequence of the film was handled with real finesse; they used that parade of special effects quite purposefully to build up the hype and really nail the atmosphere.

But by the midpoint, things take a turn for the worse. It turns into this bizarre hybrid of Jurassic Park and Spy Kids—just a complete breakdown of what were otherwise brilliantly designed individual elements. They simply stop working together, losing that cohesive flavor they had at the start.

Richard Howard2 said:About halfway through, the movie turns into this weird mashup of Jurassic Park and Spy Kids. It’s like all those elements that were actually designed pretty well at the start just lose their cohesion and stop working together entirely.

But hey, that's just how it goes...😁

Look, this isn't trying to be some high-brow, serious cinematic masterpiece, and honestly, that’s what sets it apart from stuff like Van Helsing, where I honestly have no clue what the hell they were even aiming for. 😵

This flick is basically just a big, goofy joke, and it was made—and presented to us—exactly that way. I guess that’s why it actually works; it doesn't pretend to be something it's not.

Richard Howard2 said:...it's not because they're trying to pass off trash...

I wouldn't call it trash, though; I'd call it pure pulp—which, if we're being honest, usually means thin characters, predictable plots, and a whole lot of pure escapism.

Adam Wright56 said:Well, look... the thing is...😁

Look, this isn't a serious film. Not even for a second. It doesn't attempt to be, which is exactly why it actually works—unlike something like Van Helsing, where I honestly have no clue what on earth they were thinking. 😵

This film is an absolute joke. It was made as a joke, and that’s exactly how it’s being served up to the audience. And honestly? That is precisely why it works. It isn't pretending to be anything other than what it is.

Look, I already know that. Honestly, I wasn't exactly expecting anything profound from it. My main issue is just how inconsistent the film was regarding the tone they established right at the start. It shouldn't have been trying to pass itself off as Spy Kids or Jurassic Park. It had its own distinct flair and style, regardless.

The opening sequence was truly something else—a masterclass in audiovisual design that managed to build an atmosphere so immersive it practically pulled you in by the collar. It was striking. But then, halfway through, everything just falls apart. The cohesion vanishes. That sense of mood, that beautiful touch of nostalgia... it all just shatters into pieces. By the end, the wonder is gone, replaced by nothing.

Richard Howard2 said:The whole thing really just comes down to how inconsistent they were with what they promised at the start of the movie. It wasn't supposed to be Spy Kids or Jurassic Park, anyway. The film had its own specific vibe and style.

sorry Jango, but you’re basically claiming you KNOW exactly what the producers and director intended for this movie, and I don't think either of us can actually say that for sure... or at least, I know that much. 😂 😉

Icepick said:sorry Jango, but you’re acting like you actually KNOW what the producers and director intended for this film. I think we both know—well, at least I know—that isn't the case.... 😂 😉

No, I am not claiming that. But it is obvious. Crystal clear.

They started playing one tune and ended up playing an entirely different one.

It is like when you are writing a term paper for a college professor. You start out strong; you write a massive introduction and deep analysis, detailing everything perfectly, hinting at a masterpiece. Then, halfway through, you lose interest or run out of time, so you just scramble to slap together a bunch of adjectives and metaphors to finish the body and conclusion in a single frantic burst... anyone looking from a distance can see it happening.

KHAAAAAAAANNN!!!!!11

I’ve gotta go catch this movie again. Is anyone else planning on seeing it for a second round? 😁

I mean, this movie... it honestly had the potential to be one of the greatest things ever made, maybe even better than Raiders. Just thinking about it.

But, man, I don't know... it feels like he just didn't quite have the touch to direct it with any real style. He’s probably a rookie, I guess, which you can definitely tell. Everything builds up so nicely, too—he actually gets it right up to that edge where you start getting goosebumps, you know? But then, he just kind of stalls out. It’s like he never really had the ideas to actually push you over that ledge.

I guess I've been wondering lately... what would someone with a Spielberg sensibility actually do if they were tasked with making a movie about the Golden Age of Comics? It’s an interesting thought, maybe. Just imagining that specific kind of storytelling applied to those early, larger-than-life hero tropes. I wonder how much of that classic wonder he'd try to squeeze into it. Maybe it wouldn't be just a superhero flick, but something more... I don't know, heartfelt? Just a random thought I had while sitting here.

I guess we might never actually find out... maybe.

Hold on... wait, I think I see Indy in there.😁

quietdriver3 said:I wonder what someone with a Spielbergian sensibility would have done if they had been tasked with making a film based on the Golden Age of Comics...

Well, you can say whatever you want!

quietdriver3 said:This movie had the potential to be the greatest thing in the universe, right up there after Raiders.
Unfortunately, the guy just didn't have the stylistic touch to direct it properly. He’s clearly a novice, if you can even call him that. He managed to drag the tension right up to that edge—the point where you actually start getting goosebumps—but he lacked any real ideas to push you over the brink.

Look, this movie is the very essence of style. It’s directed with such effortless grace that you’d never guess it was a debut. What it lacks? A bit more polish on the script.

What would someone with a Spielbergian sensibility even do if they were tasked with making a film based on the Golden Age of Comics?

He’ll just churn out some pretentious, sterile crap like he always does—ever since he decided he was a "serious director" after Schindler's List. 😛

Karen Diaz32 said:I mean, to me, that movie just feels like the pure essence of style. It’s directed with such an effortless vibe...

Honestly, I feel like any single episode of Dexter or Samurai Jack or even the Powerpuff Girls is probably better directed than this whole movie. *That* is what true style looks like, I guess. It’s kind of a bummer that Gendy and the rest of that crew aren't making movies nowadays...

Karen Diaz32 said:He’d probably just end up making some pretentious, sterile crap, which seems to be his thing ever since he tried to prove himself as a "serious director" with Schindler's List.

🙂

Am I just imagining things, or is everyone else getting left behind here? It looks like everybody’s heading to the movies while I’m just sitting here getting shafted, right? Fine, fine, whatever. 😂

Karen Diaz32 said:Honestly, that movie is basically the definition of style. He directed it with such ease you'd never guess it was his debut. It just needs a bit more work on the script.

Maybe we got a little ahead of ourselves there... I'll admit, the film is visually stunning, right from the opening logo. 😍 It’s got style, I'll give it that—definitely leaning into those Metropolis vibes—but as far as directing goes? Not so much. 😕"Easy" is probably the last word I'd use to describe this. Isn't the whole point of classic storytelling to actually, you know, tell a story? This director seems to be struggling with that basic concept. Watching this felt like a five-day marathon. Honestly, there were moments I thought I’d have to manually fast-forward just to survive. 😁Almost finished with my journal. The script is idiotic, but honestly, the execution is just as bad.

quietdriver3> but unfortunately, the guy just didn't know how to direct it with any real style (he's a rookie, I think, which shows). He managed to drag everything right up to that edge where you get goosebumps watching stuff like this, but he simply lacked the ideas to actually push you over that edge.

I wonder what someone with a Spielbergian sensibility would have done if they had been tasked with making a film based on the Golden Age of Comics...

I guess we'll never know...

I have to admit, I don't really get why some of you (and yeah, I’m looking at you, Jang) seem to think this was supposed to be a serious movie. 😕 Sure, maybe there was an initial idea to make something akin to a "live-action comic book" 😁—if that's even the right way to put it—but clearly, that wasn't feasible. Honestly, I think it would have been a bit silly and overdone anyway 🙄, so they just pivoted toward pure pulp. In fact, they went so far into overkill 😁 that we ended up with GNISS.

Like I said before, this movie never tries to be serious at any point. So, all this talk about poor direction or a lack of a good story feels like telling me water is wet to me. I mean, you only had to look at the posters or the trailer playing on TV to realize they weren't making something like Indiana Jones, for example.

It’s like being surprised that ''Armageddon'' is packed with American propaganda when you already know Michael Bay directed it.

Adam Wright56, just because I mentioned the movie lacks internal consistency doesn't mean I’m demanding it be some heavy-handed drama. You're acting like I'm some kid who can't grasp adult nuance here.

Look, I realize the film isn't "serious." But the core philosophy it established early on? It just evaporated halfway through. The whole vibe was built on atmosphere and nostalgia, yet by the end, all that remained was pure silliness and naivety. I have nothing against being lighthearted or naive, but that specific atmospheric concept—that was lost entirely.

To put it in perspective—it’s like if they filmed a Batman movie that started out being truly Burtonesque, specifically like Batman Returns—dark, grotesque, naive, even a bit funny—but then suddenly pivoted into a Schumacheresque mess like Batman Forever, all bright colors and cheap effects with zero trace of that initial mood left.

Do you see my point? Both the beginning and the end are comic-bookish and silly, but the inconsistency lies in the shift.

Adam Wright56 said:I have to admit, I don't really get where you guys—and maybe Jang too—are coming from with this idea that it actually needed to be a serious movie. 😕 [/B]

well, nobody ever said it had to be some heavy, serious drama 😕

I'm just saying the movie isn't quite as good as it could've been if someone a bit more talented had handled it...

the scenes feel kind of cold, I guess; like, "okay, here come the dinosaurs, but whatever, moving on, oh look, there's a flying fortress, but who cares, let's get back to the plot." It lacks those big "wow" moments, you know? That's what bugs me about it. Honestly, I get chills just imagining what the SS would've done with that scene where they first spot the massive flying ship lost among the clouds 😍. You can just picture a Williamsonian orchestra playing in the background, all that grandeur, maybe some childish sentimentality, a little lens flare in the corner of the screen... just big, sweeping music... 😍

and the script itself isn't bad at all, actually, it's pretty well-written in its own way...

JF > Now you’re treating me like some kid who just doesn't get how the real world works.

Come on, Richard Howard2, stop making up these "attacks" on your iron. 🙄

I mean, maybe it’s just me, but I feel like that whole sense of atmosphere... it's just gone. That specific concept they used to nail? It simply got lost somewhere along the way.
Just to put this in perspective—it’s like watching a Batman movie that starts out with that classic Burtonesque vibe, you know? Like Batman Returns, where everything feels dark, grotesque, and almost naively funny. But then, halfway through, it just pivots into that total Schumacheresque mess like Batman Forever, turning all neon and overstuffed with cheap special effects until there isn't a single trace of the atmosphere they built at the beginning.

Ten... freaking... minutes. Seriously? Ten minutes? I mean, if that was the entire duration of that "vibe" and "atmosphere" you keep raving about, then I guess we have a pretty big problem. 🙄

If someone had just shoved me into a movie theater without telling me anything—not even the title or what the plot was about—I probably wouldn't have known what hit me. I guess I would’ve sat there for maybe ten minutes before realizing the whole thing was just some massive joke. Honestly, at that point, it wouldn't have even mattered to me if the movie featured aliens or dinosaurs, or even some weird "Spy Kids" vibe. It would've been such a total 180 from how those first few minutes started that I probably wouldn't have even cared.

I guess you might feel like bringing up Batman if this were actually a fifty-fifty split, but let’s be real—we’re looking at maybe ten minutes of substance compared to an hour and a half of filler.

Look, I am really sorry if you walked away feeling like I was talking down to you like some little kid... but I promise you, that wasn't my intention. I only did it because, honestly, even a toddler would probably grasp what you just can't seem to wrap your head around.

quietdriver3 > I’m just saying, the movie wouldn't have been nearly as good as it could've been if someone with actual talent had been behind the camera...

I don't know, I can't really get behind that...🙂

I honestly think the movie worked out perfectly exactly because they leaned into the absurdity of it all. If they had tried to make it some "serious" or "high-quality" prestige drama, I don't think it would have landed at all. It just wouldn't have felt right. I guess if they actually wanted to make it the kind of polished masterpiece you’re imagining, they probably would have needed twice as much footage, especially considering how much stuff they already crammed into the runtime.

Let's look at a specific example involving dinosaurs, since everyone seems to keep bringing them up. 😁):

It’s not exactly impossible to toss dinosaurs into a story like that. I mean, you could do it. But the problem is that once you go down that road, you end up dragging a massive pile of extra plot points along with them just to justify why those dinosaurs are even there in the first place. You need all this setup so they feel like they actually belong in the world instead of just being random CGI monsters. And it doesn't stop there, either. It’s the same deal with amphibians, or flying fortresses, or some epic Ark—you start adding one thing, then another, and before you know it, you’re staring at a three-hour bloated mess instead of a tight, ninety-minute movie. It gets exhausting, doesn't it? 😉

And I know exactly what you're thinking here... You weren't even talking about whether the plot actually made sense, you were just obsessing over the vibe of that missing dinosaur scene, weren't you? I guess that's where you're coming from. I'm getting to that point now.

You can't just manufacture a certain vibe out of thin air. To actually build that kind of atmosphere, you have to spend time "setting the stage" first, right? But then you run into the problem where doing that just drags the runtime out, which might end up making the whole movie feel like a slog.

Plus, just imagine if they decided to go overboard and score every single one of those scenes with a full orchestra and Williams conducting in the background. I don't think it would even cross the line into being absurd; it would honestly just be infuriating because there are way too many of them. What makes it worse is that these scenes don't actually serve any real purpose other than trying to dazzle the audience for a split second... and honestly, after seeing five of them in a row, I doubt anyone would even be impressed anymore.

Look, I'm not saying the idea itself is bad. It isn't. But pulling off a concept like this requires a massive amount of nuance and creative breathing room—things this director clearly didn't have at his disposal.

Instead, they just took the easy way out by throwing everything at the wall to see what sticks. It feels more like a collection of cheap "triggers" designed to grab attention rather than actual scenes you'd want to sit back and admire. Of course, that's all assuming the audience doesn't take any of it too seriously or look at it with a critical eye.

Icepick said:I'm not saying it's a bad idea or anything, it isn't really, but I guess pulling off a concept like that takes a certain level of expertise and some room to breathe creatively, which just wasn't really something this director had to work with.

so basically we're all pretty much agreeing that it could have been better... maybe just a little bit... or even just a tiny hair... 😁