Comments on: Will Indy overstay his welcome? http://blogs.e-rockford.com/movieman/2008/04/16/will-indy-overstay-his-welcome/ When film critic Will Pfeifer isn’t watching movies, he’s reading about movies, talking about movies, thinking about movies or dreaming about movies. Now he shares that unhealthy obsession with you. From Hollywood hits to Japanese obscurities, from Oscar night to the summer season, he’s got movies on the brain — and on this blog. Sat, 17 May 2008 00:12:30 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=wordpress-mu-1.2.4 By: John N http://blogs.e-rockford.com/movieman/2008/04/16/will-indy-overstay-his-welcome/#comment-433 John N Sun, 27 Apr 2008 04:21:12 +0000 http://blogs.e-rockford.com/movieman/2008/04/16/will-indy-overstay-his-welcome/#comment-433 Roeser, I'm 67% behind you. I like RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK quite a bit but never cared for any of the sequels. So to answer the question in the title, I think Indy overstayed his welcome starting with THE TEMPLE OF DOOM. Roeser, I’m 67% behind you. I like RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK quite a bit but never cared for any of the sequels. So to answer the question in the title, I think Indy overstayed his welcome starting with THE TEMPLE OF DOOM.

]]> By: The Roeser http://blogs.e-rockford.com/movieman/2008/04/16/will-indy-overstay-his-welcome/#comment-428 The Roeser Fri, 18 Apr 2008 13:03:28 +0000 http://blogs.e-rockford.com/movieman/2008/04/16/will-indy-overstay-his-welcome/#comment-428 I just thought since the moive had skull in the name, a frequent poster named Skull might have something to say. Harrison Ford is good, but I just have never been a fan of the Indy movies. I know that is sacrilegious to say on this site. I just thought since the moive had skull in the name, a frequent poster named Skull might have something to say. Harrison Ford is good, but I just have never been a fan of the Indy movies. I know that is sacrilegious to say on this site.

]]> By: Skull E http://blogs.e-rockford.com/movieman/2008/04/16/will-indy-overstay-his-welcome/#comment-427 Skull E Fri, 18 Apr 2008 12:43:10 +0000 http://blogs.e-rockford.com/movieman/2008/04/16/will-indy-overstay-his-welcome/#comment-427 Roeser: What you want me to say? I loves the Harrison Ford. Roeser: What you want me to say? I loves the Harrison Ford.

]]> By: The Roeser http://blogs.e-rockford.com/movieman/2008/04/16/will-indy-overstay-his-welcome/#comment-422 The Roeser Wed, 16 Apr 2008 21:26:55 +0000 http://blogs.e-rockford.com/movieman/2008/04/16/will-indy-overstay-his-welcome/#comment-422 This sounds like something that Skull E should weigh in on. This sounds like something that Skull E should weigh in on.

]]> By: Brian M http://blogs.e-rockford.com/movieman/2008/04/16/will-indy-overstay-his-welcome/#comment-420 Brian M Wed, 16 Apr 2008 16:56:56 +0000 http://blogs.e-rockford.com/movieman/2008/04/16/will-indy-overstay-his-welcome/#comment-420 I think to cringe at any running time before seeing the film is jumping the gun. Ebert's axiom is spot on. And I don't think what genre a film is should make a difference - A slapstick comedy could be 3 1/2 hours long and I wouldn't care, as long as it's good enough to sustain it, and if a big sweeping epic was not good, I would hope it was the shortest film of the year. I think the new Indy will be just fine. Spielberg was in control on this one, and he seemed determined to keep it more in tune with the last three - using practical effects rather than going CGI, using film vs digital, etc. I suspect the additional time is due to the need for more setup, to explain where the character is after all these years, and how he gets dragged back into his old ways. ...and 2:20 is nothing. If you want bloat, try the Lord of the Rings films. I love 'em, but damn they needed an editor. I think to cringe at any running time before seeing the film is jumping the gun. Ebert’s axiom is spot on. And I don’t think what genre a film is should make a difference - A slapstick comedy could be 3 1/2 hours long and I wouldn’t care, as long as it’s good enough to sustain it, and if a big sweeping epic was not good, I would hope it was the shortest film of the year.

I think the new Indy will be just fine. Spielberg was in control on this one, and he seemed determined to keep it more in tune with the last three - using practical effects rather than going CGI, using film vs digital, etc. I suspect the additional time is due to the need for more setup, to explain where the character is after all these years, and how he gets dragged back into his old ways.

…and 2:20 is nothing. If you want bloat, try the Lord of the Rings films. I love ‘em, but damn they needed an editor.

]]>