Comments
George Lucas is patient, having waited decades to lube up his computer-generated schlong for a good ol’ fashioned Star Wars corpse-fuckin’. He shall simply wait for Spielberg to die, and then will have his filthy way with this movie. And then, choking on his own hubris, he’ll go back to Temple of Doom and replace Short-Round with a Gungan.
Nah, I’m excited, seriously. I think it’ll be really good, but I doubt it’ll be as good as the first or third flicks. My dad and I were discussing this the other night: Nazis are always better villains than Cold War-era Russians. And having an action set-piece in the warehouse from the final shot of Raiders (like I’ve said before, one of the great all-time final shots in movie history) feels like blasphemy, even if Spielberg’s stealing from himself.
Justin said:I think it’ll be really good, but I doubt it’ll be as good as the first or third flicks.
And having an action set-piece in the warehouse from the final shot of Raiders (like I’ve said before, one of the great all-time final shots in movie history) feels like blasphemy, even if Spielberg’s stealing from himself.
i still don’t understand people’s non-love of the second movie. it has some a lot of hilariously awesome moments. and indy is SHIRTLESS, BLOODY, AND DIRTY FOR HALF OF IT.
that great all-time final shots is mostly a painting. i think that probably makes it even better (eff cgi). i love the fact that they’re revisiting it, though it would also be wholly successful if it stayed untouched and locked away forever.
mandy said:i still don’t understand people’s non-love of the second movie.
It ranks last out of all three. Is there any denying that?
i honestly don’t pay attention to rankings. i pay attention to what i like, and as much as i enjoy the other two, the second one if far from a red-heades stepchild.
I love the second one and think it’s a classic, but there’s stuff about first and third that elevate them higher in my regard.