I love any movie with artic scenes. They're always fascinating. Much more interesting than one set in Burbank.
I think people will go to see it, but a $300 million production budget now puts it in the kind of territory where it needs to be one of the highest-grossing movies of all time just to make its money back, as was the case with the Avatar sequel a couple of months ago. I mean, I'll probably see it when it comes out but I can't see it making that kind of money.
I think it's been established that there is no time travel/old Indy/Young Indy in the same scenes involved. The film starts with events in 1944 where he defeats the Mads Mikkelsen Nazi character then the rest of the film takes place in 1969 where they face each other again and Indy has to prevent him from attaining the 'Dial of Destiny' time travel device and prevent him changing the events of 1944 and the outcome of WW II.
I hope this article is inaccurate or he was quoted out of context. It sounds like all the fun and adventure has been sucked out of it.
My guess is that the time-travel McGuffin is going to be a theme for Indy looking back on his past, and there will be a crucial moment when he has the opportunity to use the Dial (or whatever it is) to change it at some crucial point. Similar to his being tempted to take the Grail versus leaving it in Last Crusade, etc.
Well, the film is now complete, and I’ve heard it makes the heart beat in many, many ways. Unlike some of the words in this thread, copious amounts of CG wasn’t used. Most of the $300 million budget was spent on set construction.
I hope there’s some sort of self-aware joke made at some point in the movie along the lines of, “Nah, you can’t go back and try to recapture the past, I’m an old man now, there’s no point in trying to relive past glories,” etc.
I’m curious about whether the dial of destiny time machine has any basis in existing stories or myths. Obviously, the Ark of the Covenant and the Holy Grail are both biblical. The sacred stones and crystal skulls are less firm, but at least were based on existing tales and objects. It seems hard to believe that the dial of destiny comes from any specific legends, but if not, it would be the first Indiana Jones MacGuffin that was just pulled from the screenwriter’s ass.
I believe it's loosely based on this object, which can be seen at the National Archaeological Museum in Athens, Greece: Antikythera mechanism - Wikipedia https://greekreporter.com/2022/09/15/antikythera-mechanism-secret/
Interesting, thanks! It makes the idea of time travel as a plot element more palatable to me if it is based on an actual archaeological object, especially one that is a bit mysterious and seemingly “futuristic.” The Greek Report article even describes the missing portion, somewhat humorously, as a “Holy Grail” for marine archaeologists! That would tie in with the underwater scenes in the trailer, and there are a few Greek-looking statues as well. I think I’m already liking the movie more!
Just watched the trailer from the Super Bowl, oh, excuse me, I mean the "Big Game" (jfc), and I just shake my head that these movies need to have so much CGI. I mean, they can't even shoot a sky or a mountain anymore without the help of computers?? It just looks so fake. I know, old man yells at cloud, but I'm so sick of it.
I don’t believe that’s true. Most of the $300 million budget was spent on practical effects and sets. More than any film before it, I’ve heard.
I don't doubt that what you state about the budget is true. But the trailer looked full of CGI effects.
I don't know if that's much better. Doesn't a production budget of that size (and presumably a promotional budget just as big) put it in the same category as Avatar 2, in the sense that it needs to be one of the highest-grossing movies of all time just to break even?
