Indy 5 on the way?
- Thread starter Billy Ray
- Start date
Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:
Wow. I completely disagree with this post. I highly doubt they gave him an oscar out of sympathy,people just love to say that for some reason. It just sounds stupid.Regardless of what his performancs was people would have said that all because he died. It was an amazing performance by an amazing actor. Unfortunately he had to die before we could have seen what else he could have done which Im sure would have been even better roles. I liked him as an actor way before he played the Joker. Anyway Im down for a new Indy if Lucas takes a back seat. I find that that man annoys me more and more as the yrs go by. Did anyone see him on the Jon Stewart show a while back saying that Jar Jar wasnt all that bad and that people like him or something like that? Ugh.
thenammagazine
Super Freak
Not really. Joker/Ledger fanboys are just highly unrealistic when it comes to things like this and tend to tie their underoos around their hardons and wave them like flags in protest. The fact that you're failing to recognize that come Dark Knight, he'd already had superior roles and had already provided better performances adds weight to this. Did you ever see a Ledger move pre-Dark Knight? Likely not. As for the sympathy Oscar, did Denzel really deserve an Oscar for Training Day? No. It's just that he'd been past up so many times previously, for better roles and considerably better performances, they really didn't have an excuse. Sympathy Oscars do happen and did in the case of Ledger.
tomandshell
Blue Flame of the West/Mod
You just raised my eyebrows.
thenammagazine
Super Freak
I think Heath deserved the Oscar. He would have been ignored due to it being a superhero movie had he not died tragically....but that doesn't mean he wasn't deserving.
That just means the academy voters mostly have their heads up their own *****.
The awards have always been political and often have little to do with the actual acting...hence almost every year nominees are the A-list stars despite the fact many of them are popular due to looks or personal tabloid lives.
That just means the academy voters mostly have their heads up their own *****.
The awards have always been political and often have little to do with the actual acting...hence almost every year nominees are the A-list stars despite the fact many of them are popular due to looks or personal tabloid lives.
thenammagazine
Super Freak
A Mutt only film would fail and probably suck.
Killing Off Indy is just crazy talk!!!! You don't kill your heros!! Talk about a downer! Either make another Indy film with Indy or let the series be. No Mutt thank you. Part of the many problems with KOTCS was Mutt. Why would anyone want to watch a whole film about just him?
As for Heath in TDK. Heath did deserve the Oscar for best supporting actor. I don't care if it was a sympathy vote from the academy. He deserved it. As far as Heath being better in other roles....Eh, I just don't see it. But i am not nor ever was a Heath fan. thought he was great in the Dark Knight. Say what you want about being a better actor in better films. But he made that character his. He made a good film GREAT. Again I don't really care for him and thought "oh No' when thay anounced his casting. Then I saw the film and he won me over.
Had he not died would he still have won??? I don't know. IMO he was the best nominated actor that year and Oscar tends to throw a bone to a big film if it gets nominated in a big chatagory as long as it's not one of the big four (picture, Actor, Actress or director). Whats funny is the snobs at The Academy changed their whole system around to 10 Oscar nominations because they knew they blew it by not having The Dark Knight as one of their best picture nominations and people started calling BS. Slumdog Millionaire, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, Frost/Nixon, Milk, The Reader. Really?? I am not saying that they were not good or even great films but TDK could have taken anyone of those spots.
And who else would have one in best supporting actor that year?
Josh Brolin – Milk
Robert Downey, Jr. – Tropic Thunder
Philip Seymour Hoffman – Doubt
Michael Shannon – Revolutionary Road
None of the above. Heath owned the screen in TDK.
Anyways NO Indy films without Indy!!!!!
Killing Off Indy is just crazy talk!!!! You don't kill your heros!! Talk about a downer! Either make another Indy film with Indy or let the series be. No Mutt thank you. Part of the many problems with KOTCS was Mutt. Why would anyone want to watch a whole film about just him?
As for Heath in TDK. Heath did deserve the Oscar for best supporting actor. I don't care if it was a sympathy vote from the academy. He deserved it. As far as Heath being better in other roles....Eh, I just don't see it. But i am not nor ever was a Heath fan. thought he was great in the Dark Knight. Say what you want about being a better actor in better films. But he made that character his. He made a good film GREAT. Again I don't really care for him and thought "oh No' when thay anounced his casting. Then I saw the film and he won me over.
Had he not died would he still have won??? I don't know. IMO he was the best nominated actor that year and Oscar tends to throw a bone to a big film if it gets nominated in a big chatagory as long as it's not one of the big four (picture, Actor, Actress or director). Whats funny is the snobs at The Academy changed their whole system around to 10 Oscar nominations because they knew they blew it by not having The Dark Knight as one of their best picture nominations and people started calling BS. Slumdog Millionaire, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, Frost/Nixon, Milk, The Reader. Really?? I am not saying that they were not good or even great films but TDK could have taken anyone of those spots.
And who else would have one in best supporting actor that year?
Josh Brolin – Milk
Robert Downey, Jr. – Tropic Thunder
Philip Seymour Hoffman – Doubt
Michael Shannon – Revolutionary Road
None of the above. Heath owned the screen in TDK.
Anyways NO Indy films without Indy!!!!!
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2008
- Messages
- 35,160
- Reaction score
- 2
He got snubbed.
thenammagazine
Super Freak
[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3JgVgI9tF6Y&feature=related"]YouTube - Unseen Tropic Thunder Footage[/ame]
Agent0028
Inebriated
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2005
- Messages
- 10,758
- Reaction score
- 1
I think its best to just let the series go. If there is a 5th I'll go see it, and I hope that it'll be good. If it is as good as KOTCS I'll be happy with it. But really sometimes things aren't meant to go on forever.
If the series were going to continue I would rather see a whole new character. Someone like Mutt taking over would be the best choice for me, but I really didn't care for the Mutt character and wouldn't have much interest seeing a movie with just him.
If the series were going to continue I would rather see a whole new character. Someone like Mutt taking over would be the best choice for me, but I really didn't care for the Mutt character and wouldn't have much interest seeing a movie with just him.
I hope they don't do anymore and just leave it be.
Lucas and speilberg make garbage films now.
They should have left it at crusade.
I mean what is he going to go looking for now.
I love Indy, been a huge fan for as long as I can remember.
But I don't want another Indy.
All of us on here just have to let go and move on.
We've seen the best of Indy and we all know it.
As for them getting a new Indy to carry on ____ that. That's like repainting the Mona lisa.
Or doing the "bond" treatment to Indy ____ that too.
90 percent of the bond movies sucked.
Do we really want that to happen to Indy. ____ no.
My message to george and speilberg is ____ and leave it alone. You made a trilogy of movies that are instant classics. Be happy with that.
Come up with new stories and new characters. If you can't then retire you guys have had your time to shine. Let some new talent come through and with them their new ideas.
There is no reason to keep going with the Indy franchise and kotcs is a good example of why it should be left alone. It wasn't a bad movie it's just no where near as good as the other three films.
Leave Indy be.
Lucas and speilberg make garbage films now.
They should have left it at crusade.
I mean what is he going to go looking for now.
I love Indy, been a huge fan for as long as I can remember.
But I don't want another Indy.
All of us on here just have to let go and move on.
We've seen the best of Indy and we all know it.
As for them getting a new Indy to carry on ____ that. That's like repainting the Mona lisa.
Or doing the "bond" treatment to Indy ____ that too.
90 percent of the bond movies sucked.
Do we really want that to happen to Indy. ____ no.
My message to george and speilberg is ____ and leave it alone. You made a trilogy of movies that are instant classics. Be happy with that.
Come up with new stories and new characters. If you can't then retire you guys have had your time to shine. Let some new talent come through and with them their new ideas.
There is no reason to keep going with the Indy franchise and kotcs is a good example of why it should be left alone. It wasn't a bad movie it's just no where near as good as the other three films.
Leave Indy be.
thenammagazine
Super Freak
90% of this post sucked.
There're 22 Bond movies.
____ everybody, Never Say Never Again counts dammit!
So let's factor that in.
Connery did 7 of them.
Craig's didn't suck either.
He did 2.
Take all that into account.
Your math is off.
I enjoyed KOTCS when I saw it and was excited about the idea of new adventures of old Indy. After having watched the "quadrilogy" in its entirety a number of times now since 2008 I'd probably prefer they just let the series rest.
I don't mind Shia being in 25% of Indy movies, but no more please.
I don't mind Shia being in 25% of Indy movies, but no more please.
I still think people hold THE LAST CRUSADE in too high esteem. IMHO, it's just about as flawed and clunky as KOTCS in many respects. But it does have the Connery/Ford dynamic and nostalgia going for it, though.
RAIDERS will never be touched. It's a perfect Action-Adventure film on every level. TEMPLE OF DOOM doesn't have that pedigree, but it stands as probably the most "honest" film in the series in that it's unashamedly the most pulpy and most like an actual 20's-30's pulp adventure serial, complete with over-the-top villain and annoying damsel in distress.
All that said, I'd still take a weak INDY film over 99% of the stuff Hollywood churns out these days. But I would never accept an INDY film without Ford as the character.
RAIDERS will never be touched. It's a perfect Action-Adventure film on every level. TEMPLE OF DOOM doesn't have that pedigree, but it stands as probably the most "honest" film in the series in that it's unashamedly the most pulpy and most like an actual 20's-30's pulp adventure serial, complete with over-the-top villain and annoying damsel in distress.
All that said, I'd still take a weak INDY film over 99% of the stuff Hollywood churns out these days. But I would never accept an INDY film without Ford as the character.
Deak Starkiller
Super Freak
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2006
- Messages
- 14,297
- Reaction score
- 33
Spoken like a true fanboy Carl.
But I agree to some extent, I feel as if (here comes my fanboy comment) KOTCS can be repaired with editing and slight, and I do mean slight F/X work. There is a solid movie there, it just needs a few minutes trimmed, gophers removed, 2 waterfalls deleted, and one or two branches removed from Mutt's nuts. Oh and make the aliens more of a silouhette.
A true fanboy would defend the film blindly and refuse to see its issues. I don't. Time and again I've said that the movie falls apart after it moves to Peru. There is a lot of head-scratching and unfortunate stuff in there. I just don't think it's a total disaster or one of the worst films ever. And the fridge scene is great (except for the #*@! prairie dogs).
Similar threads
