Director: Spielberg

[Strangler Lewis]

Originally Posted by Strangler Lewis

According to the Saving Private Ryan Online Encyclopedia, Steamboat Willie only kills Captain Miller. He is not the soldier who kills Private Mellish. The two soldiers simply look alike. I'm not sure about that.

You can tell it's a sluggish morning.

Maybe I was wrong.

And the movie just got a little less interesting.

[Snowflake]

Good fun, GC!

Catch Me If You Can (2002)
Saving Private Ryan (1998)
Schindler's List (1993)
Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981)
Jaws (1975)

[Alex]

If you liked Catch Me If You Can, I strongly recommend reading the book. It is much more interesting.

[innerSpaceman]

Originally Posted by Strangler Lewis

Maybe I was wrong.

And the movie just got a little less interesting.

Yes, very convenient that the SS Officer is uncredited. Maybe it's a common mistake because it's no mistake at all. Perhaps everyone who's ever seen that movie has that impression because that's what's going on.

But ... I'll take a look at it again. The widow's peak is a potentially convincing difference.


If true, yeah, the movie just got a lot more boring.

[blueerica]

Originally Posted by LSPoorEeyorick

Wow, people don't like Temple of Doom? Full disclosure: I wasn't allowed (or old enough in some cases) to see any of the Indy films in theaters, and I've never watched or even discussed them with others. I had no idea people didn't like Temple.

Read my Raiders of the Lost Ark disclaimer above. While I feel Raiders was the best/classic example, perhaps only because it came 'first,' like many other well-loved films, few give their sequels an honest chance. The latest issue of Entertainment Weekly put it best, IMO:

Indy drinking blood? Kids forced into slavery? Why not? Doom is one of cinema's great sequels because it's so black and daring.

I totally agree with that, especially as I get older. I was young when it came out, so I didn't hold any sort of expectation on the film or what any sequels should or should not be like. Same goes for Last Crusade, which I feel brings a lot of backstory. Sure, it kind of feels late in the game to suddenly put in so much, but the film was far more successful with it than a number of other series that tried to cram backstory into much later sequels.

[blueerica]

And I'm still a bit irked that I had to keep this at Top 5. I had a rather hard time editing that list down.

[innerSpaceman]

The central section of Indy drinking blood and going over to the dark side of some voodoo cult is classic Serial Stuff that is the series raison d'etre.

But the rest of the movie is a theme park ride, and not a film. They simply go from room to room, place to place, and have a set-piece 'adventure' in each location before moving on linearly to the next. That's what passes for a plot and a story. Bah. The dialogue is leaden, not clever. The situations are random, not building. The characters are lame, not lively.

It's really one of the worst movies ever made, not only perhaps the worst sequel of all time.

[cirquelover]

That's why I put the disclaimer of when I watched the first time. Some don't hold up as well. I remember liking Catch Me but it didn't make my list.

[Kevy Baby]

Originally Posted by Gemini Cricket

Yes, I knew you would. That's why I said in the OP to add it if you feel like it.


And, I figured he didn't direct the whole Twilight Zone Movie so why add it? And TUJ is a documentary, which I thought should be categorized differently.
:shrug:

It was just me being anal retentive and bored. I am nowhere near as big of an overall movie fan as most who post in this thread and the Movie Musings thread.

I see very few movies in the theatre. When I do watch a movie (theatre or at home), I tend it enjoy them as I watch movies to be entertained. I can appreciate the art, but I don't tend to analyze them as much as others do. Either I like a movie or I don't.

I really don't care if the the Close Encounters I watch today is exactly as it was when it was released in the theatre in 1977 or other such details (I am onloy using this example because it has been mentioned on this thread - not meant to be directed at ISM [although he is the one who tends to discuss this kind of thing]). This is not meant to take away from those who do have strong opinions on things like that - they just tend to not make a difference to me.

[Cadaverous Pallor]

When looking at the list I feel like less of a film critic and more of a popcorn fan, so you get reviews such as these...

I'd have to put Jurassic Park on my list. I mean, come on, you snooty people. I know as an adult that it had crappy qualities, but come on! It's f'n Jurassic Park!

I can't say I like one Indy movie better than the others. I like all of them equally for their own reasons, though I've seen Raiders less than the rest. I almost think it's unfair to divvy them up. I'd agree with what was said above about Temple of Doom being dark and awesome yet fun (I'm an RotJ fan, remember).

Close Encounters and ET, hell yes.

Jaws I don't remember well. I remember being so young watching it that I thought there was too much talking. I hear it's good.

Empire of the Sun was great. Very good example of how he could make anything seem heartwarming.

Has anyone seen Amblin'? I'd like to know about the movie he named his empire after.