Current Mood: 
I spent a very long time yesterday attempting to take good pictures of our Christmas village. It has a gazillion different settings, but still the pics turned out blurry. This camera has taken good pics before (just not of the village), so in lieu of tossing it in the Brazos River I took video of the village instead.
Alvin and The Chipmunks insisted on serenading during the filming, so if cute talking chipmunks wearing glasses and designer clothes aren't your thing, you might want to turn down the speakers.
Note: If you fit the above description, WHAT'S THE MATTER WITH YOU? How can you not love them, little Theodore especially?
That reminds me that A&TC airs on tv tonight! I still haven't seen that flick.
Word of WARNING:
Camerawork may cause dizziness.
(One Dramamine tablet can be your friend)
Current Mood: 
Oh, the HORROR of the latest Indiana Jones!
At least I think it was another installment of Indiana Jones? The title said it was.
Edited to Add -
I'll always be a fan of the original Indy movies, of Spielberg and Lucas. It's only that at this present moment in time, I'm pretty let down. I never knew just how much a fan I was of Indiana until this latest movie was released. But, at the end of the day it is just a movie and I'll recover.
I think?
If you enjoyed the movie, I'm a little jealous. If not, then you're not alone.
And on two different forums tonight I’ve read posts from people who liked the movie - or haven’t even seen it yet - and whom were downplaying all the negative reviews. Either we’re never happy and expecting too much, or we’re jumping on a negative bandwagon. Now let’s think about this...
Either you liked the movie or not.
I didn’t.
It wasn’t my choice to not like it. It’s just my reaction to what I saw, so don't go making value judgments on people for something so trivial. I, for one, did give the movie a fair chance. Why wouldn't I? I am an IJ fan after all.
And what’s wrong with having a negative opinion about a movie (or anything for that matter) anyway?
I don’t think any less of anyone that DID like the movie. I might not agree with them, but I'm not about to point a reproving finger in their face for their opinion.
The good points of this movie ---
.........
..............
................. 
Give me a few weeks to think on that one.
Putting it bluntly: This movie was a disgrace to the originals. Lucas and Spielberg (two directors/writers I’ve always loved) treated us - their audience - as if we have the mind of cattle.
It’s sad that we’ve waited since 1989 for this nightmare. It was so upsetting and unexpected that I watched The Last Crusade on the same night as a tonic of sorts.
I LOVED the humor and interaction b/w Sean Connery and Harrison Ford in TLC. I just didn't see any of that in this new movie. The spirit of those older movies is dead in Indy 4.
Where the heck is the story? Where’s the character interaction? Indy just discovered he has a son. WHERE’S the bonding between father and son? Oh, wait… There was no bonding b/c the entire movie was nothing but stunts, CGI ants, vine-swinging monkeys, and a lead-lined refrigerator that saved Indiana from a nuclear explosion. Oh, and then there was that quote-unquote 'psychic' Spalko villain. Oh yeah, I was really, really afraid of her. Absolutely terrified. Terrified she might be able to uhh… read my mind or something? No, no. She couldn’t even do THAT!
I consider Spielberg and Lucas geniuses... innovators... but this latest movie felt like a spoof. An April Fools Joke Spectacular. Indiana Jones is not meant to be campy. The spirit of this film just didn't match the originals, and IT SHOULD match the originals, as this was the last IJ flick with Harrison Ford in the lead. Anyone who thinks Indy 4 shouldn’t have been treated as a rare and priceless gem just doesn’t appreciate the beauty that IJ used to reflect. And while TOD wasn’t the best of the original trilogy by a longshot… (to many, myself included, it was the worst of the three b/c of Kate Capshaw’s character)… at least it’s spirit echoed it’s predecessor.
If Lucas and Spielberg want to make the up-and-coming IJ flicks with SHIA LaBEOUF as the star “campy”…. then by all means do it. I won’t even complain as I won’t even bother wasting money on buying a ticket. But don’t debase HARRISON FORD’S previous work in this role; a role that began in 1981 for cripe's sake, and which possesses a loyal, appreciative fanbase. Harrison MADE Indiana Jones what it is… or more correctly, what it once was. Harrison’s Indy should have been sent off with a big and beautiful and unforgettable bang. Not this flop.
And moviegoers SHOULD HAVE HIGH STANDARDS for Harrison Ford’s swan song as Indiana Jones!!!
- From the very beginning, this movie was not the Indiana Jones I remember. (And he should be the same more or less, right? I mean, why wouldn't he be?) Let’s see… the Paramount mountain logo had me filled with a feeling of magic and euphoria that I hadn’t felt since Star Wars made its comeback… but then from that logo pops up a cartoonish CGI prairie dog that had me instantly thinking of Chevy Chase and Caddyshack. Now, was a computer-generated prairie dog really necessary?
What’s wrong with using real one(s)? It looked like the Alvin and the Chipmunks cartoon. Just because we have CGI now, that doesn’t mean we HAVE to use it for every little thing…. and I do mean that literally.
- There were some CG shots that looked really nice, and the ants being CGI was necessary, but I'm not sure sooo many shots like that belong in an Indiana Jones movie. CGI should be used to ENHANCE a movie experience. It should never take you out of it, or in this case keep you from journeying towards it in the first place. Instead of becoming immersed from the get-go, I was involuntarily cringing back into my seat as an unrealistic prairie dog’s beady little animated eyes stared blankly back at me.
It sort of made me feel like I had just entered a parallel universe. I could hear the Twilight Zone music buzzing in my ears.
- Opening Scene (with humans and not CGI prairie dogs) with 50’s music and joyriding had me thinking of American Grafitti. The aliens and flying saucer….. Steven Spielberg. Both jarred me out of the IJ world instantly. I thought that was a little indulgent of them. Yes, Lucas is obsessed with 50’s music and cars. Yes, Spielberg loves his aliens and flying saucers. But did they just forget that this was supposed to be the daring adventures of an iconic hero named Indiana Jones?
- Wouldn't it have made more sense if at the beginning of the movie Indiana was retired from all his adventures? Wouldn't it have been more believable and entertaining if he had been sort of thrust into another adventure without choice? Isn’t he too advanced in age to STILL be an adventurer finding safety in a lead-lined refrigerator (ooh, what a lucky coincidence that was) and continuously finding himself kidnapped? Wouldn’t it have been more fun to watch him having to acclimate himself one last time to any heroic adventures?
- Shia-Tarzan expertly swinging on vines with an army of monkeys was just wrong on so many levels. It was so horrible I was almost laughing. It even looked horrific.
- Babyfaced Shia LaBeouf was REALLY miscast. His acting was fine, but his looks, his personality, his spirit is NOTHING like Harrison Ford. Compared to Ford, he's just.... there. Bland. (This is just my opinion, mind you). They should have used an actor more reminiscent of River Phoenix when he played young Indiana in The Last Crusade. River Phoenix had Harrison’s mannerisms down to a T. I didn’t see any resemblance to Harrison Ford (in body and spirit) at all with LaBeouf . I mean nothing. Zero. Zippo. It makes me think he didn’t take the job very seriously. And this is the man that’s supposed to be carrying the torch of this classic series?
Some other actor could have possessed more of the essence of Harrison Ford. This young man just isn't it. (Again, I'm not referring to his acting). And while I understand that “Mutt” (oh yeah… there’s a name that screams ‘hero’) was raised by his mother, and naturally would have adopted some of her character traits, still there’s this thing called genes. Ever heard of it?
- Aliens don't belong in Indiana Jones. 
Sci-Fi does NOT belong in Indiana Jones!
They could have at least made the whole alien thing be a big surprise at the end. There was no MAGIC in this film. Where’s the mystique? IJ and aliens/interdimensional beings just don't mesh. If the whole alien angle were handled more mysteriously, maybe THEN I’d be fine with it.
- Too much action, and not enough characterization and storyline. Howard the Duck had more depth.
- “Mutt’s” personality was boring and fake. He wore a leather jacket, quit school and liked to comb his hair when a gun was trained on him… err, okay. Sure, I buy that that’s Indy’s son. Even the boy’s name spells adventure and intrigue. And did I mention how impressed I am by a kid that can pick up on vine swinging by osmosis? Extraordinary!
- A romance with Marion… really? Sorry, didn’t buy it for a second. I felt like Spielberg and Lucas just slapped that in there with the same care and love a chef does a flapjack on a grill.
- That “Mac” character served no purpose whatsoever. He was 1-dimensional.
- The fight scene taking place amongst all the flesh-eating ants was far too long and monotonous.
- Jones surviving a nuclear blast inside a lead-lined refrigerator... need I say more? I know, I know. It's a movie and not real life, but it was far-fetched. Not all moviegoers are that easily entertained. Be a little more creative than that. Don’t dumb down your audience. Some of us actually expect to get our money’s worth. Some of us also like to watch movies from time to time that make us actually THINK. With Indy 4 we were treated like 3-year-old’s. (Though I’m sure there are many people out there that have no problem with that).
I never expected this movie to be without flaws and historically accurate. I mean, the key word here is "Entertainment." I'm not one of those people that's difficult to please when walking into a movie theater. I understand that to some people there was nothing the matter with Indy 4.... which is fine. I see nothing wrong with that, and they're as entitled to their opinion as I am mine. And who knows? Maybe... just maybe I'd feel more positive about this film if the name Indiana Jones wasn't attached to it. But, to many devoted fans of this series... Lucas and Spielberg failed miserably here. They could have done so much better than this. SO MUCH BETTER.
While my hopes for this movie weren’t sky-high, they were still pretty up there.
And why not? This is supposed to be Indiana Jones. 
Expecting less would be insulting!
And I repeat: People SHOULD have HIGH standards for HARRISON FORD'S swan song as Indiana Jones!
Dumb down Shia-Tarzan’s portrayal all you want. I’m sure he and millions of moviegoers will be fine with that. Make it as campy and ridiculous as you want, but degrading the last installment of IJ with Harrison Ford in the lead was just WRONG - period.
Now here’s the REAL Indiana..........
In all honesty, I cannot even begin to fathom how anyone can watch ROTLA or TLC and NOT see it’s irrefutable superiority over the disgrace that is Indy 4. How can they look at Harrison and Shia side-by-side and say it’s as it should be?!
It’s a monstrosity. This latest installment was worlds apart from the originals, and since Harrison Ford was the star of Indy 4 it’s only natural... and right... for it to be held to the higher standards of the originals. Why should we always lower our expectations these days?
Harrison Ford placed Indiana Jones on that high platform a long time ago. In 1989 he rode off into the sunset an icon. In 2008 he crashed miserably.
Watching Indy 4, an icon shattered before my very eyes.
