Indy Watch
This is ridiculous. I'm actually not in bed yet, and it's 2:00am. And it's because of Indiana Jones.If you didn't know this, the first official showing of the new Indiana Jones film will be tomorrow (today, I guess, since it's 2:00am...) at the Cannes Film Festival. That's when reviews will finally come out. That's when we might have a good idea whether...well, whether it's going to rock or suck. Or somewhere in between ("ruck"?).
I really didn't think I cared about this anymore. I thought I'd just resigned myself to "Well, Lucas came up with the story, so that means it's probably going to stink, but maybe Spielberg can save it some". I was planning on low expectations. And I'm going, one way or the other, next Saturday night, so really, do I even want to know what others are saying?
Yeah. Apparently, I do. Because I'm hitting "refresh" on different web sites, trying to find the first news. I don't even have them time difference figured out, or what time they're showing the film, so I don't know how soon I'll get the news. But all of a sudden tonight, I'm obsessed with knowing, and I'm doing something I really resist doing (because it erodes my faith in humanity) and reading message boards. I know there was supposed to have been a bad review on Ain't It Cool News last week (though...isn't the film NOT supposed to be showing until today/tomorrow?). But now, a very recent posting on both the Rotten Tomatoes board and the AICN boards show a link to the first newspaper review, from the Times in London, Sunday edition. Scope this headline:
Crack! Indiana Jones takes whip to doomsayers
Ignore all the gossip, the new Indiana Jones film is worth the wait, says John Harlow in the first newspaper review
That seems to be from someone at Cannes (so wait...does that means it's been shown? Or WHAT?). And that's fantastic news. However, that means all I've got to base things on are ONE bad review and ONE good review. This is not a good scientific sampling. The suck part of this is that even as early as earlier today/yesterday, I really didn't care that much. Now, all of a sudden, this is really important to me. Now I just HAVE to know. Now, suddenly, there's a chance that maybe Lucas WON'T destroy another piece of my childhood. It was almost easier just assuming it was going to suck. Having this spark of hope, now, is worse. Now I'm emotionally invested. Now I'm daring to dream. Cynicism's always easier, isn't it? Maybe that's why it's so popular. But it's also a useful defense mechanism. You can't break my heart, mean old world, if I keep it locked away and out of the sunlight. Is having hope better? Or is expecting everything in life to suck mightily and being pleasantly surprised when something doesn't the smarter way to go?
This time of night, I have no answer, and it doesn't matter anyway. Within a matter of hours, I'll know one way or the other. And you know what? I will NOT share the news here. I would imagine many people DON'T want to know in advance, and just want to go into the film cold and make up their own mind. Power to ya! One way or the other, I'll not only know, but I'll be going with a big group of people next Saturday night to see it. So I think I'll save the verdict - that of the critics, and that of myself - until next weekend, and will write all about it then.
So now, I'd better get to sleep and stop looking for news that isn't there yet. Let's just all hope that we get ourselves in Indy film worth watching, one with a lot of action, adventure, laughs, and an agreeable stuntman-to-CGI ratio. I could use a little Indy magic this summer. Fingers crossed.
And if it all goes wrong, be sure to pick yourself up this new shirt from Dr. O's House of "T". May come in handy.
UPDATE: Damnit! Second review just went up...and it's another good one! How the hell am I supposed to sleep now?! They're starting to come in! AAIIEEE!!!
I think I've got a seven-year-old bottle of Ambien under the sink. Wonder if that would help?
posted by Michael O'Connell @ 1:55 AM
5 Comments:
At May 18, 2008 at 4:44 AM ,
Martin Maenza said...
Mike, breathe, man. It'll be okay. It'll be okay.
Remember: the only review that really matters is your own.
We've often found films that critics hate that we (my wife and I) totally love. Sometimes we're in sync with critics. It's just a personal thing.
Trust yourself. Trust not others who's job it is to review. And what is the educational requirement for a reviewer anyway? I never saw it on my college curriculm (then again, I went to a technical university so go figure - we did have some film making classes - I had a roommate one summer who was a film major, and he even let me be an extra in a number of his films).
At May 18, 2008 at 1:11 PM ,
Michael O'Connell said...
Yeah, I'm better now. Weird how the brain works in the middle of the night when you're half awake. Suddenly, this all became supremely important to me.
But I'm now quite relieved. I said I wasn't going to mention on this blog how the reviews saw it, but I figured I'd veto that idea if the news was good. And it seems to be. The film showed in one of the toughest venues imaginable. I don't know if you know the story about how "The Da Vinci Code" premiered there and was SAVAGED by the crowd and by critics there. Boos and jeers and everything. And that was a highly anticipated film (which was one of the reasons why), but even that wasn't as waited for as this one. And already the rumors were on the net that Indy 4 was a crapfest, so people were going in with that opinion.
And the good news is, the reaction seems to be largely positive. The first few reviews were all good ones, and the not-so-good ones that trickled in didn't seem to be all that bad. It's too early to get a proper consensus, but the initial one seems to be right what I was expecting - it's a "popcorn movie", one that's a hell of a fun ride, but not meant to be compared with the first film. Obviously, having one that stood up to the first is a nice dream, but a very unrealistic one. Particularly since everything I've heard of it and seen in the trailers suggests that it's much more over-the-top than the previous films. But no one who's seen it seems all that bothered by that fact. I've even seen a couple of four-star (out of five) ratings. So it now seems that I should do exactly what I was planning to do - go in expecting to just cut it some slack, have a good time with it, and not over-analyze it and try to make it live up to my opinion of what it should be (like the first one...which isn't going to happen. How can any fourth film in a series, over twenty years later, hope to be?). I'm expecting a high cheese factor, ridiculous situations, way too many gags...and I'm okay with that. As long as I know what I'm getting going in, so I can gauge my expectations accordingly. My biggest fear was that it was going to make viewers angry - that, after all this time, it was going to be a big insulting piece of silly garbage that would completely insult long-time fans. It appears that fans are liking it just fine. The Tomatometer won't really tell the tell until more reviews are in, but so far, it's right where I expected it to be.
I agree that no single reviewer's opinion should dictate how I feel about a film. I'm very against that. Tim used to drive me crazy with that when we were young. He'd read one review and make up his mind based on that. I most remember him reading one review for "Ferris Bueller" that said the parade scene was ridiculous, and he hated that scene, because of that, before ever seeing the film. And he walked out of it saying, "Well, yeah, it was a good movie, but I agree, the parade scene was lame". Had he never read that review, he would have enjoyed it as much as the rest of us did. Tim, I should note, is not that way anymore. That was then.
But I also know that the chances of me really liking a film if most critics dislike it are pretty slim. I've learned this enough over the years. This is why I just stick to the Tomatometer. If it's only, say, 20% positive, based on over 100 reviews, I can be all but certain that I won't dig it, particularly with how much I over-analyze films. I've seen too many people want to rail against this idea and say that meter doesn't matter, and they're going to see it and make their own opinion. Hey, I respect that - but most every time it ends the same, with that person walking out disappointed and feeling foolish. I trust the meter. The law of averages - on average - works when it comes to film reviews. Just my opinion.
But I can now relax when it comes to Indy. It definitely sounds like a film that you're going to have to make up your own mind on, not one that's universally accepted as crap. That's all I ask. I'm once more excited to see it (I was going to see it anyway, but it's nice to know I don't have to have that sinking feeling of dread waiting in line outside the theater), and am very much looking forward to sharing it with a big group of friends and having a great time.
At May 19, 2008 at 12:09 PM ,
Anonymous said...
It will be interesting for sure huh Mike. To me, being 20 years older I want to see if what captured me in the first films still captures me. Or, has even Indy and the prototypical Indy action scenes now dated and dont have the same magic. Dunno. But Tami and I will be there fo sho. what time?
Da K
(I have the hardest time with this account for some reason, eh oh well)
At May 20, 2008 at 11:11 AM ,
Jim McClain said...
Sounds like another night at the drive-in this weekend!
At May 20, 2008 at 12:36 PM ,
Anonymous said...
Dah duh DAH duh, dah duh duh!
That's all I need to see it :)
My folks are in this weekend, so it'll probably be another three weeks before i can see it, but...
Dah duh DAH duh, dah duh duh!
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home