Spielberg Talks ‘Jurassic Park 4,’ ‘Indiana Jones 5,’ & ‘Crystal Skull’

Published 2 years ago by

Steven Spielberg Talks Jurassic Park 4 Indiana Jones 5 and Kingdom of the Crystal Skull Spielberg Talks Jurassic Park 4, Indiana Jones 5, & Crystal Skull

Steven Spielberg’s The Adventures of Tintin doesn’t arrive stateside until Christmas, but it’s already out in Europe and enjoying rave reviews. Indeed, many are calling it a return to form for Spielberg after the disappointing (to say the least) Indiana Jones 4.

Recently, while promoting Tintin, Spielberg also discussed the upcoming Jurassic Park 4 and Indiana Jones 5 – as well as the widely-criticized Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.

On the status of Jurassic Park the fourth – courtesy of Empire – Spielberg said:

“The screenplay is being written right now by Mark Protosevich. I’m hoping that will come out in the next couple of years. We have a good story. We have a better story for four than we had for three…”

Hey, at least three was better than two.

-

Sam Neil in Jurassic Park 3 Spielberg Talks Jurassic Park 4, Indiana Jones 5, & Crystal Skull

On the status of Indiana Jones 5:

“You have to ask George Lucas. George is in charge of breaking the stories. He’s done it on all four movies. Whether I like the stories or not, George has broken all the stories. He is working on Indy V. We haven’t gone to screenplay yet, but he’s working on the story. I’ll leave it to George to come up with a good story.”

Wait, what? ‘Whether [he] likes the story or not’? Is Steven Spielberg hinting that maybe he didn’t like a story (or stories) from the previous Indiana Jones films?

Actually, this isn’t the first time that the man has said less than glowing things about Crystal Skull. Previously, he talked about how he originally didn’t want to make the film and wasn’t in love with the idea of Indiana Jones and aliens (or, in Crystal Skull‘s case, extra-dimensional beings) being in the same film.

On his own feelings about Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, almost universally considered to be the worst Indiana Jones film:

“I’m very happy with the movie. I always have been… I sympathize with people who didn’t like the MacGuffin because I never liked the MacGuffin. George and I had big arguments about the MacGuffin. I didn’t want these things to be either aliens or inter-dimensional beings. But I am loyal to my best friend. When he writes a story he believes in – even if I don’t believe in it – I’m going to shoot the movie the way George envisaged it. I’ll add my own touches, I’ll bring my own cast in, I’ll shoot the way I want to shoot it, but I will always defer to George as the storyteller of the Indy series. I will never fight him on that.”

It’s certainly interesting that Spielberg disliked Lucas’ MacGuffin (much like everyone else on the planet), but the truth is, those little “touches,” the “cast,” and the way Crystal Skull was shot and written (on a micro level) were just as much to blame for its quality – or lack thereof – as Lucas’ basic story was.

The Cast of Indiana Jones and Kingdom of the Crystal Skull Spielberg Talks Jurassic Park 4, Indiana Jones 5, & Crystal Skull

At times, the cinematography felt like something out of a way-too-glossy soap opera TV show. The CGI, which was already unwelcome, was also very bad. Shia LaBeouf was hired for a role he’d already been cast in far too many times – “smart-mouth teenage sidekick” – Karen Allen was way past her prime, and Cate Blanchett as the psychic villainess was about as intimidating as the computer-generated gophers from the beginning of the film.

Speaking of gophers, Spielberg responded to specific criticisms of the film, saying:

“The gopher was good. I have the stand-in one at home. What people really jumped out was Indy climbing into a refrigerator and getting blown into the sky by an atom-bomb blast. Blame me. Don’t blame George. That was my silly idea. People stopped saying ‘jump the shark.’ They now say, ‘nuked the fridge.’ I’m proud of that. I’m glad I was able to bring that into popular culture.”

CGI Gopher in Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull Spielberg Talks Jurassic Park 4, Indiana Jones 5, & Crystal Skull

Most people didn’t hate the gophers as an idea so much as they hated the fact that they were computer-generated cartoons in what was supposed to be an old-fashioned adventure film. In fact, many Indiana Jones fans had hoped that CGI would be mostly absent from the fourth film — in spite of it being released in one of the more CGI-drenched film periods – as a means of harkening back to the originals. Alas, the CG gopher in the opening frames of Crystal Skull made it immediately evident that that would not be the case.

Are you looking forward to Jurassic Park 4 and Indiana Jones 5, Screen Ranters? Do you agree with Spielberg about Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull? Let us know in the comments.

­-

Follow me on Twitter @benandrewmoore.

The Adventures of Tintin hits theaters December 21, 2011.

Source: Empire

TAGS: Indiana Jones, indiana jones 5, jurassic park, jurassic park 4

224 Comments

Post a Comment

  1. Aren’t they already making a Jurassic Park 4? I mean, I heard of a movie where Dinosaurs fight Aliens. Sounds like a Lucas/Spielberg film to me =p

  2. Please, no more aliens or Bermuda Triangle things in the Indiana Jones films. We want the traditional Indy!

    • Yeah! Cause drinking from a cup that gives you everlasting life is any less believable than aliens helping to start human society.

      I never had a problem with the aliens, its just that they beat you over the head with the idea, I wish they made it just a bit more vague, like it could be aliens….and then is, minus a huge mother ship taking off….unless that mother ship shot Shia, in which case I would have to say yes to CGI ship.

      And no monkeys, at least the gophers acted like gophers, what monkeys buddy up with a swinging tool box (Shia) in the jungle and help attack his enemies, once he impossibly tarzans back to them?

      • Also Indy literally had 4 active sidekicks in this film, waaaaaaaaaaay too many, five actually if you include Professor Slughorn.

        • Yep. In fact this movie would be infinitely better if they would remove the unnecessary sidekicks. Even when leaving the aliens. Imagine the 13 thrones room with only Indy and Spalko entering. That would be so much more like the original series!

          Anyway, I personally think that it’s not the aliens that ruined everything. It’s the CGI, that sometimes were unnecessary, and in fact some shots are clearly made only for the purpose of showing off the CGI. Second thing that ruined the film was the feeling of no danger at all. Previous movies were so good, because tho you knew that the main hero will probably live, the film included scenes that were genuinely making you afraid about the hero. It just needs better direction, and this effect is achieved. Looks like Spielberg is not on top of his form. And I won’t wonder what is wrong with Lucas. I just have no comment on what he’s doing o.O”

      • The problem with the aliens was not their believability compared to the other McGuffins. The reasons the McGuffins in the original trilogy were a success is because they had a history to them grounded in real mythos and culture. This gave a depth to them that “the skull of an interdimensional being” does not.

        • Actualy their are myths about crystal skulls and that kinda stuff but i di agree a bit if a smack in the face, I didn’t expect aliens.

  3. Dinosaurs vs Aliens NOW there is a movie I would pay to see. (NO, I was not referring to the Xenomorphs either.) :-)

    • haha

  4. Crystal Skull made $786 million worldwide.

    yeah most people hated it!

    • Titanic made like twice that and a lot of people can’t stand it at this point. We will agree, however, that a whole lot of people wanted to like Crystal Skull, hence the money it made at the box office.

      • Yeah; how much money a movie makes has almost nothing to do with how good it is. Though that sentiment of equating market share to happiness is what drives Michael Bay to keep going, big money movies are usually about marketing, hype, and “Glamorama” in action.

        • I have to disagree with that statement. You may not like Indy 4, but the fact the movie made alot shows tons of people did. There’s no way it would have made that much if others didn’t like it. I’m not saying you’re forced to say its “good”.

          • But that’s not true. Everybody wanted to like the movie, so they went to it. Kids went. In droves. Worldwide. The true test is longevity. Will people still love this, five years later? The answer is no.

    • Indy 4 made so much money because, after so many years of waiting for another Indiana Jones movie, one was finally out. Reminiscing about the three prior movies, we were all hoping for the best, but we got the worst, and we can properly and rightly criticize it after the fact.

  5. just fyi, i liked indy 4. It was fun and entertaining. My only regret is that the film was shamefully expensive ($185 million) to make. I hate seeing decent franchise go crazy with the budget, especially when it’s unjustifiable (nothing technically new to show off on film).

    • Same, it was cool after watching the first 3 I would have expected something different from that franchise.

  6. I would rather watch Indy 4 then Walking Dead S2….so far………

    • Are you High or just slow. Walking Dead S2 has been awesome. I’m a huge fan of the comic series and I love how they are staying “loosely” on the original story. You must not like good entertainment if you would rather watch Indy 4 over Walking Dead S2.

  7. I want to see and Indy 5 and 6 to complete a modern trilogy. They should make them simultaneously like Back To The Future II and III. I want to see short round make a return.

    As for JP4, bring it on! Maybe Vince Vaughan can return. Just kidding

  8. Think I know a way to make a decent Indy 5. Just go back in time! Set the movie in the 1940s! You’ll get rid of what everyone seemed to hate in the 4th; Shia, the Russians, the Aliens, and they could bring back Indy’s father! Besides, who wouldn’t pay to see Indy owning in WW2!

    • The problem with that is Indy and his father would have aged 20 years in a matter of a couple of years. How would that work, unless you would want them both to be CGi throughout the whole film?

      • @Matt
        *sigh*
        I know… I’ve just always wanted a WW2 Indy war epic. And I don’t mean him fighting some Nazi’s in the desert. I mean full on war with the Axis!!! If it wasn’t for the actor’s and their aging, I’d totally want to see this!

  9. George Lucas is doing the story again? George Lucas, who obsessed about putting aliens in Indiana Jones? George Lucas, who seems to have little respect for continuity? George Lucas, who is micromanaging the Star Wars films to death with cheesy and unneeded “improvements”? Geoge Lucas, who seems to be relying more on CGI these days than on actual story? THAT George Lucas? And Speilberg is just going to let him do it??? AAAAAAAAAAAAAAUUUUUUUUUGGGGGGHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    • Great comment.

  10. …And for record, I loved “The Lost World.” Jurassic Park 3 sucked.

    • Amen

      • true that, why do people hate the lost world? i seriously though it was one of the ‘better’ sequels, and definately on par with the first JP

        • lost world sucked

  11. I love ScreenRant but I couldn’t disagree more with the writer of this article.
    I liked Indy 4. People take it too seriously, much like the Star Wars Prequels
    “Oh, Lucas ruined my childhood!” No he didn’t, go grab an old photo album and
    base your life on something else.
    And Indy wasn’t ruined by Crystal Skull, “We expected an old Indy film”
    Then go watch one, there are 3.
    I’m not saying that Indy 4 was a great movie or a bad movie,
    but if you didn’t have fun watching it, it’s your own fault. Perception is everything.

    Jurassic Park 3 better than The Lost World? Are you kidding me?
    At least Lost World was an original Crichton story. JP 3 was purely an excuse
    for Joe Johnston to improve upon (and play with) CG dinosaurs.
    What is it even about?
    JP1: You can’t play God.
    JP2: Corporate entities should not try to control nature
    JP3: Don’t leave your kid on an island full of Dinosaurs (????)

    That being said, I enjoy JP3 and I have it on DVD, but it is in NO WAY better than Lost World.
    Lighten up folks. Put on your hats and crack those whips!!

    • “I’m not saying that Indy 4 was a great movie or a bad movie,
      but if you didn’t have fun watching it, it’s your own fault. Perception is everything.”

      Sorry, but no. It was a bad movie, and I don’t tend to enjoy bad movies, so it was the bad movie’s fault that I didn’t enjoy it, not my inability to force myself to like something that’s not good. The only person involved in Crystal Skull who seemed to be trying was Harrison Ford. Spielberg might as well have directed the movie from a yacht in the Bahamas.

    • There were a vast array of problems with the movie that kept it from being enjoyable even on the most basic level. But the film’s worst issues, by far, came from the script. Indy 4 is one of the most poorly written films ever made. There’s zero tension or suspense in the entire film. Any suspension of disbelief is completely thrown out the window in favor of cartoonish action sequences that make the original three films look like documentaries in comparison. The protagonist has no motivation. The antagonist is weak. The broken plot incoherently strings together a series of set pieces. For more, see this:

      http://mysterymanonfilm.blogspot.com/2008/05/50-flaws-of-indy-iv.html

      • Dang…I just read the link [posted above].
        It’s totally right. Honestly I agree with everything. The problem is, I never noticed that
        stuff when I was watching it in the theater having a blast with my friends. I never questioned how many
        skulls were there or if Indy had enough motivation to be running from flesh eating ants…
        Now I know. Am I better for it? I can now enjoy one less movie in my DVD collection.
        What’s Indy’s motivation in Last Crusade? I don’t remember. That’s not why I love that film.
        It’s a swashbuckling adventure…Not Citizen Kane. I guess I’ll go throw out Phantom Menace, Indy 4,
        Lost World and whatever other kind of fun stuff you guys tell me is a “bad movie”.

        • Don’t throw them out. That’s wasteful. You could probably get a dollar for all of them on e-bay or donate them to a country that doesn’t have DVD players…then it won’t be considered an act of terrorism.

        • Man, nobody cares if you like that movie. Enjoy it with your friends! Please! I’m glad you did! But that doesn’t mean we can’t discuss why it’s a seriously terrible film.

        • Indy’s motivation in the Last Crusade was always a driving force of the plot. The emotional core of the movie is about Indy’s relationship with his father, and the story of how they grow close again during their adventure to find the Grail, which they are both obsessed with finding.

          Indy’s motivation is made clear right off the bat. Indy wants to find his father. But what makes these earlier portions of the movie interesting is that we can see Indy’s passion for archaeology as he picks up his father’s trail at the library. In the catacombs, Indy is practically ecstatic when he finds the Knight’s tomb, which holds the next clue they need to find the grail. This is what Indy lives for.

          Once Indy meets up with his father, the two of them escape together and then face a crossroads. Indy wants to go after Marcus. But Henry thinks it’s more important to go to Berlin and steal back the Grail Diary from the Nazis. Right here, Indy and Henry have a confrontation, and Henry very clearly explains why it would be bad for the Nazis to find the Grail. Now the story has stakes. Indy has to choose between going after Marcus and going after the worldwide threat. In Indy 4, we never know what the stakes are, and we never know what Indy wants. He’s just along for the ride.

          After they get the Grail diary in Berlin, Indy and Henry escape from Germany and make their way to Iskenderun, where they meet Sallah. At this point, it’s all about saving Marcus and stopping those Nazis from finding the Grail and taking over the world.

          The final scene in the Grail temple perfectly encapsulates all the conflicts and motivations that the movie has been developing up to that point. Indy refuses to help the Nazis get through the booby traps, because he knows what’s at stake. But then Donovan shoots his dad, who he’s only just now connected with again (see end of Tank Battle scene). So now Indy’s motivation is more clear than ever. He has no choice but to help the Nazis in order to save his father.

          And then lastly, there’s the excellent scene in which Indy tries to save Elsa from falling, but Elsa wants the Grail so badly that she falls to her death. Then Indy ends up in the same predicament, with Indy trying to reach the Grail. The parallels are clear. In the end, Indy’s strong connection with his father allows him to overcome his desire to possess the Grail.

          The fact is, the original three Indiana Jones movies are more smartly-written than people give them credit for. People get this idea in their head that a blockbuster has some license to be dumb, but that’s really more of a recent thing. If you look back at most of the great blockbusters since they first appeared in the 70s (Jaws, Star Wars, Jurassic Park, Aliens, Predator, Die Hard, Speed, Ghostbusters, etc.), you find that the majority of them (the successful ones, anyway) are far better than their more recent contemporaries. Jaws is an incredibly well-made film, with a tremendously good script. The original Die Hard also had a fantastic script and virtually flawless direction.

          One of my favorite movie critics, James Berardinelli, wrote a good blog post about this very subject.
          http://www.reelviews.net/reelthoughts.php?identifier=669

          QUOTE FROM THE ABOVE LINK:
          “Laziness plays a part in all of this on the side of the filmmakers and the film-goers. No rule states that blockbusters must be dumb. They must be spectacular, but many of the early examples – Jaws, Star Wars, Raiders of the Lost Ark, etc. – were as smart as their less ostentatious counterparts. Blame Jerry Bruckheimer and Don Simpson. Those two discovered that audiences could be fooled into enjoying vacuous films if they showcased appealing stars, impressive visuals, and popular soundtracks. The least important aspect of any Bruckheimer film is the screenplay. Follow the formula, make a billion dollars.”
          —————————————————————

          Temple of Doom may be the dumbest of the original three Indy films, but that’s not saying much, considering the standards of the day. There’s never any doubt as to what Indy wants or what the stakes are. Of course, Raiders of the Lost Ark is the best of the original three (in my opinion) because it had the best script. Indy 4 was a broken movie before it ever went in front of the cameras, because the script was sloppily-written. I’m sure that a good scriptwriter could have made crystal skulls and aliens work (and many will argue that Frank Darabont did just that with his draft, though I’m still undecided on that).

          • Nice post, CrowMagnumMan. I totally agree about former blockbusters having a lot more credibility and for real reason. Jaws is my favorite example — that was a real *movie*.. yet its sequels were disasters. Jaws 3D.. what were they thinking: $$$$

            As for Frank Darabont and the Indy 4 script.. I don’t think his could have made it work. He gets a lot of credit for Shawshank, but that was 17 years ago. All he’s done lately is mess up “The Mist” and “The Walking Dead”.

            • How can you say anything bad about Walking Dead. I own every single Novel and love the fact that it’s not based directly off the novels. If they where then fans like myself would know exactly what’s going to happen. They are keeping true to the basic plot and most characters besides Rick (who in my opion is a little weak in the tv series) and the fact of keeping Shane’s character alive, and the addition of the Darrle and Merle was a great addition. Then comes Hershels farm and watch I he will have a group if zombies including his eldest son locked up in the barn. Every one is right by saying it’s not true to the graphic novels, but the changes in the tv series is what makes it more intresting to me. Stop beings so critical cause the tv and graphic novels are not mirror images of each other cause thats lame. It shows that you have nothing better with your time then to compare apples to oranges. Get a life.

      • I thought the firt three were documenteries. haha

  12. I actually quite liked the McGuffin of “Crystal Skull.” The way I see it, just as “Raiders” – “Crusade” were set in the late 30s, when Nazis were perfect baddies and terrible supernatural powers (a la the Universal horror flicks) were the McGuffins foradventure, In the fifties we have Commies and Flying Saucers. Both speak to the Zeitgeist of the times they were set in, and both with a bit of a kowing smirk at the audience.

    I put “Crystal Skull” far above the almost unwatchably pointless “Temple of Doom” in my Indy rankings — but well below both “Raiders” and “Crusade.”

    • “unwatchably pointless”… really? So what was the point of Skull? Oh and well, we all know that your rankings are what matter. Dude seriously, get over yourself. They are adventure films. All with the point of escapist entertainment. Skull is a bad film. No two ways about it and it is worse than Doom (which I agree is worse than Raiders & Crusade). Maybe you need to watch Doom again. By the way, 2 thumbs up for working “Zeitgeist” and the pretentiously pseudo-intellectual phrase “unwatchably pointless” into one comment.

      • I don’t mean to but in (because I honestly don’t care about which movie is bad/worst/better), but saying something is “unwatchably pointless” isn’t pretentious at all. Let’s not go throwing that word around.

    • I agree awsome comment, all of them except temple of doom were awsome but what next for Indy or is the tool that Shia is gonna carry on the series?

  13. um, jp4=waited long enough NOW DO IT!
    Indy5=……maaaaaayyybbeeeee.
    oh….and wtf is a mcguffin?

    Besides, Prometheus is gonna OWN HARD! :D FOR THE HIVE!!!

  14. Reading this kind of dissapoints me…..I liked crystal skull ….mater fact I really liked it. It was not the best in the series but not the worst…Temple of Doom is by far the worst! To all the morons thAt complained about Aliens in Crystal Skull …..a man pulling you Heart out of your chest while you are still alive ……really?? That is just as lame. I am a tru Indy fan and loved every incarnation of this series …even the young Indiana jones show was great! I hope 5 blows me away… I am sure it will … Let’s face it Harrison Ford looks great for his age but he is getting up there.

    • My personal opinion is that the aliens didn’t ruin the film, it was ruined long before that. The aliens at the end was similar to the rest of the franchise having that fantasy – mystical ending. I was fine with it. My issue is with Indiana having a son. He always had that mysterious manly-man gruff who didn’t really try with the ladies, but they all seemed to swoon. Having a son (and a wedding at the end) takes that away from the character and makes him an unknowing deadbeat dad for 20 years. What’s next? Is James Bond going to be on Maury for a paternity test from 30 different woman to find out if he is the father? If that scene is the next James Bond, I’ll be very angry…however, it should be in a spy spoof film. Back to the topic, they could have brought back Marion who was “the one who got away” in Indiana’s eyes (but he’d never say that), she could have had a son (but why have him be played by Shia), Mutt’s father could be dead or a douche, and Indiana could have rekindled that flame with Marion leading into a sequel where they could discuss a step-father role and the passing of the torch. Or John Cho could have come in as a grown-up Short Round, and the torch was passed to him. They tried too hard to put too much in this film. I did have issues with some of the fantasy-action-adventure scenes (i.e. Tarzan, fridge, ants, etc.), but the movie angered me more with the treatment of the character… archaeologist professor turned adventurer does not need the title of husband and 20 years late father added to it.

    • I can never understand the hate Temple Of Doom is getting. I saw it with my friends back in the 80′s when I was about 11 and to us it was just this kick ass non stop rollercoaster adventure movie. And so much fun! That’s all the Indy movies are meant to be. We can all anylise them and point out the faults (though Raiders is faultless in my opinin) ay adults, but these movies are basically for 11 year olds. I still love alot of the sfuff I loved when I was 11, and seeing Indy 4 as an adult made me aware of it’s shortcomings, but my 10 year old (at the time) nephew saw it and adored it! I showed him the three old ones afterwards and Temple was immediatley his favourite. Kids don’t care about cgi gophers. They just getlost in the adventure. Remember what that was like?

  15. The best thing about Indy 4 was the 2 second glimpse of the Ark in the warehouse. Everything else…and I do mean EVERYTHING, sucked large donkey balls. CGI is great when used to enhance a film’s visuals…but it’s awful when it IS the film’s visuals. Much like the Star Wars prequels, they just look like cartoons or video games. The Empire Strikes Back looks much more “real” than any of the prequels. In Indy 5, lose Shia (HATE that guy) and let Indy come full circle back to the Ark of the Covenant.

    • The studios are so out of touch that they really think that Shia’s ability to make money for them is more important than actually casting someone better. I can just imagine them with a spreadsheet that shows how much an actor costs and how much their presence in the movie adds to its return. Shia, although completely detestable, somehow seems -to them- to be this cool, 20-something kid, when he’s really just a luke-warm eunuch designed not to offend the masses. Unless they do a prequel for Indy 5, they will cast that idiot again.. I hope they don’t, but they don’t know how badly they messed up. They will take a ‘Batman Forever’ all the way to a ‘Batman and Robin.’

      • I imagine your spreadsheet scenario is not too far off the mark. 8)

        Vic

      • I think Shia was an amazing choice in this particular film…he is not at all detestable and i do not believe that they could have made a better choice, the studio could not have gained a better cast member than Shia. Any criticism against him is completely asinine.

        • “Any criticism against him is completely asinine.”

          Wow, someone sat through Indy 4 with wet panties. He’s a tool; get used to people detesting him.

  16. I think all the Indiana Jones movies including Crystal Skulls had built into them the idea that certain knowledge is suppose to be beyond man’s ability to handle. That little idea clicks into all of them, the Judeo/Christian idea that reaching out for forbidden knowledge was at the core of the first human sin and a most egregious one. Even worse than the heroes clay feet, which show in Crystal Skulls more than in any of the other films. It’s exceeded in faultiness by the hubris of the Russian agents and a lesson Jones supposedly learned a long time ago. It’s also kind of stingy to think that the twentieth Century had any less impact on human mythos and culture than many previous centuries. Humans are a myth making creature and that will continue for a long time to come…

  17. Personally i liked the crystal skull. The fact that the beings were aliens just added something special and new to the series, like adding a new ingredient to an old recipe to make it your own…this movie is owned by the 21st century because of that twist. The Crystal Skull was very well directed and couldn’t have asked for a better cast to complete it, therefore i completely disagree with the critics.

    • Hi Butters!

  18. If Lucas is attached to it don’t waste your money.

  19. Guys, guys lets not shout and Scream about Indiana would not want this. i meen yes we all thought it was pretty naff but lets admitt it, theres is something inside us all that wants them to make an Indi 5 and to be honest the best way to go about it is to get objects (like the lost ark, three stones and holy grail) and not get things that they know wont atract an audience

    now for JURASSIC PARK IV
    Ohh My GOD, Ohh My God, Ohh My GOD. JURASSIC PARK ARE THE BEST MOVIES EVER MADE END OF! I cant wait for JURASSIC PARK 4 as we have been waiting for it for, ‘what is it now’, 11 years! its good to see another script been Writen and hopefully this will be better that the last two bits of Drool they called Scripts. I meen who wants to see a Dinosaur which DNA has been crossed with a Human? or a Virus that is killing the Dinosaurs and going to kill Humans? Aparantly though the script has been written acording to Jack Horner (Paleotologist of the JP series) he said “A script has been written and is waiting to be transformed into a film” now Sam Neil (Alan Grant) has been proposed to be a actor in JP 4 and so has Laura Dern, Jeff Goldblum, Richerd Atenborough & Keria Nightly. Also JURASSIC PARK 4 will have animatronics in it and be directed by Joe Johnston (Director of JP 3). THIS IS ALL THE NEWS SO FAR ON JURASSIC PARK 4.

    JURASSIC PARK = BRILLIENT FILM, BEST FILM EVER MADE.
    JURASSIC PARK THE LOST WORLD = A FANTASTIC SEQUAL, BEST SEQUAL EVR MADE
    JURASSIC PARK 3 = A ALL ROUND GOOD FILM NOT AS GOOD AS THE FIRST 2 BUT A GOOD FILM (THE ONLY BAD THINGS IS EVERYBODY DIED AT THE START.)

    PS: NO DINOSAURS WITH ALIENS. NEVER. THAT WILL KILL JURASSIC PARK FOREVER !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    PSS:WHEN THEY MAKE JURASSIC PARK 4 PLEASE KILL ONE OF THE WOMEN NOT JUST MEN IN IT!!!!!!!!

  20. The way Indy 4 started was good, but i dont like how they tried to make shia all badass, but it was good to the point where they found marion, but before that it was amazing. Although i cant see Shia as a serious actor, i can only think of him from Even Stevens, and that tarzan scene was unnecessary in my opinion, i do personally like the last crusade the most, and i like Temple of Doom alot, its not my favourite, but its not my least favourite, in temple, i liked short round, he was a good character, in indy 4 though, it wasnt that amazing. The statue and painting of marcus was cool, and those pictures on his desk, it showed that alot of time has passed and his best friends were dead, but the only thing that pushed the movie on, was returning a skull, and, after he found marion, well thats it really, but he didnt even know it was her. I think it would have been alot better if Mutt had said who his mother is, then it would have given the movie more of a push, but it was an ok movie, its my least favourite out of the indy series, but it wasnt awful.

  21. Jurassic Park 4, come on! Cant you think of another idea using dinosaurs? The remake of King Kong (2005) was in my mind one of the best movies ever. Why not do a remake of Burroughs The Land That Time Forgot? Its a good story. Indy 4 wasn’t as bad as the last 3 Star Wars movies. But keep Shia out of it, would love to see Short Round in the next Indy film.

  22. Yes finally I have been waiting for JP4 to start comming out I love Jurassic Park and a tip don’t make the t-rex die in 3 seconds in to a fight he’s king of dino’s make him look like it but yes thanks can’t wait to see it ill each it in the movies and buy it when it comes out

  23. If they ever decide to do another Indiana Jones movie, bring a younger version of Indy back by using the same techniques they used in X-Men 3 and Benjamin Buttons.

  24. I want 1 more Indiana Jones. No CGI this time, and no Shia LaBeuf.

  25. The problem with Indy4 was Indiana’s characterization. Everybody wanted Indiana from the first 3 films, that’s what we expected. Instead, Indiana was made into a mix of 75% Henry Jones Sr. and 25% Indy.

    All the swagger, sexiness, etc. of Indiana was unsuccessfully crammed into the Mutt Williams character. Shia was ok in small doses, but he’s no Harrison Ford or River Phoenix, or Sean Patrick Flanery!

    In the next film, let Indy be Indy.

    Also, can CGI be used to digitally replace Shia with River Phoenix from The Last Crusade?

  26. There are a couple of things I noticed in the article/comment section.

    There are too many opinions thrown out there as if they were true. Which only lead to agree/disagree games noone on the internet likes.

    In my opinion, Lost World was way better than Jurassic Park 3. I went into the movie without expectations, but I just found the idea of a Dinosaur, not mentioned in the first too movies, was out there and it was stronger/faster/harder than the T-Rex. They also made the Velociraptors look like birds, as if they evolved unlike any other Dinosaur species on the island. The story itself was also a bit shaky as to how Dr. Grant went to back to the island in the first place. In two, Malcolm had a reason, to rescue his girlfriend. In three, Grant gets a cheque, which may or may not be real, and he just flies off with them.

    About Indy 4. I personally liked it. I have seen the other 3, and I think most people didn’t like it because the movie wasn’t made like the old ones. Instead of live action stunts, they relied on the CGI to make it look good. I understand that the CGI didn’t look too good, but people, CGI is not the entire movie.

    You get Indiana Jones, in another adventure (realistic or not) and he solves another puzzle on screen for 2 and a half hours. I read up top in the comments that someone thought that drinking from a cup that gave eternal life could be considered plausible because of myths and legends, while the whole alien business was not. Crystal Skulls are in the world as well, as well as people who believe aliens exist.
    I suggest you read this if you have the time.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crystal_skull
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraterrestrial_life

    If you have an opinion, that’s fine. Want to share that opinion? Fine as well. But don’t ram it down peoples throats and tell them that their opinion is wrong and they have bad taste. Everyone has their own opinion, formed by their own norms and standards, and if you share yours, they can take over that opinion, only if they want to.

    So, just read the article, share your opinion, and be happy people agree with your opinion or tell you their opinion. Otherwise a forum/comment section on any website is just a flaming area, which (in my opinion) is a waste of time.

    • I actually think this should be Jurassic Park 3 and the last film never existing but thats another debate..first-the whole essence of fear and wonder and the unknown were removed from the last two and very sloppy with the science and facts after the first-which was huge on that-also the original cast should all mostly be present,Goldblum without a doubt.I dont mind a link between the dinos and aliens-that opens up fantastic possibilities in the grand sceme of things as long as its not a stupid shoot em up or the “surprise” ending of oh look it was the aliens all along…please take that idea into account steve.

  27. I have always been an Indi fan from since I was a child. The news of indi 4 made me very nervouse. Would they do it justice or not? Well, in my opinion, they certainly did not! As mentioned above, it was totally ruined by CGI, aliens and a very poor cast. Is it possible to make Indi 5 as good as the originals? I fear not, even with all the right ingredients Harrison Ford is just too old now. Its not just his appearance but also his inability to pull off that cheesy charm which he did so well in the 80′s.

    • Apparently, you didn’t see Cowboys and Aliens. Harrison Ford isn’t too old to make a fith Indy movie. Kingdom of the Crystal Skull was not “ruined by CGI”. Most CGI used, looked good in my opinion. Maybe because you have been a fan of these movies since “The 80s”, you don’t prefer a more MODERN technology. Also, you should have been pleased with the movie because of all the junk movies coming out these days, one would think that you would like to see a movie that has been such a joyous part of your childhood, as you say. You don’t really sound like the true Indiana Jones fan, you make yourself out to be.

  28. Shia Lebouf’s immature cockey arrogance completely ruined 4. I hope Speilberg has the sense not to cast him in anymore Indy movies.

  29. The great thing about Raiders was the way it looked. Old school visually. Crystal Skull was just way over the top with the CGI and ridiculous storyline.I always thought the Atlantis story thatwas circulated years bcak was the most compelling.

Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to Gravatar.com and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.


If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it.

Be Social, Follow Us!!