The Hot Blog

So sad that this kind of "reporting" passes as news. What's worse, is this kind of "media virus" does in fact work on some potential movie patrons. It just seems mean to run with it before everybody else has had a chance to discover for themselves.

Thanks for pissin' in my cheerios? Let me get my subscription renewed right away!

And having just come back from SPEED RACER -- the "mainstream critics" couldn't be more more wrong on that one too. What a fresh blast of air at the cinema.

Marvin Levy sure came out swinging.

Marvin knows that, in the end, this is all a bit nothing. And he almost never shows anger in public. Smart publicists do not raise the level by responding much.

Still, the fact that this won't cost Indy anything at the box office is no reason not to be disgusted. A rape is not okay because the victim didn't get pregnant and can still have sex.

After reading the article, I think NYT did successfully contact “ShogunMaster" with the help of Ain't It Cool News. (On Ain't It Cool News, I didn't find a message of ShogunMaster about saying that he is a theater executive) I think NYT did know who the person is.

Of course, a theater executive is not supposed to post his review online.

"The man who posted as ShogunMaster, reached via the Web site, said he is a theater executive who saw the film at an exhibitors’ screening this week. He spoke on condition of anonymity to avoid reprisal from the studio."

There is no indication of confirmation here. If they confirmed he was a theater executive, it should have read "he is a theater executive who said he saw..." And they surely could have confirmed his position in the industry without giving him up to his employer or anyone else.

But if they did somehow confirm it and AICN knows who the guy is, that particular hypocrisy sits squarely on Paramount's shoulders.

I don't really want to defend AICN but Indiana Jones is going to suck. Its my personal opinion but I fell very strongly about it. Spielberg obviously a great directer and I'm an admirer of his work but this will be first very mediocre film in a very long time. The trailers that's been released has done nothing to make me think otherwise.

PS: Same goes for Hancock

Good, bad, mediocre... it doesn't really matter, does it? The theatres will be full all weekend long!!! I personally plan to be in my local cinema on opening night... and will perhaps head up 200km north to my grandmother's for the weekend... who lives 5 blocks away from a possible showing in English to see it again!

It's INDIANA JONES!!! Disbelief will be suspended for 2 dark hours, and everyone's inner child will surface joyfully!

cheers!

:p

My feelings on this: Paramount has done a lot of favors for AICN over the years, treating them better than many if not all other websites, treating them as if they're the New York Times of websites that deserves special treatment for any and every geek-related movie because they're worried that they have enough power to turn the geek crowd off to their movies. THey've given them exclusive interviews and set visits (granted, some they got themselves but still... they were for movies owned and paid for by Paramount who could have quelched them) and allowed things like sending a print of Tim Burton's Sweeney Todd down to Harry for him to be the first person to see and review it.

And this is how they're paid back... by the site running unsourced reader reviews, negative ones at that, of potentially their biggest tentpole of the summer. Spielberg has already had problems with the internet in the past (as has LucasFilms) and it's been a real hard struggle to get them to have confidence in the new medium as a viable community to promote your movies... and with the NY Times legitimizing AICN's choice to post reader reviews, they're causing even more damage.

I'm sure that the movie probably won't be great.. I mean, how could it? But there's a reason why everyone else is being forced to wait until 5/18 (four days before release) to see the movie and for AICN to create a workaround to trash the movie before everyone else makes one wonder why the studios keep giving them special treats. Frankly, I don't think it's worth the extra hits/traffic, and I'm guessing my boss doesn't either.

And I feel the same way... this will be another one of those movies where reviews won't matter one iota.

I'm no fan of NYT, but don't single them out for slapping Indy when the LAT/Hulk article you linked to uses the exact same practice but for a different result. It's damage control ginned up as journalism and the last people I'm faulting is AICN when a bunch of lazy clowns want to use quasi-blogs as a source of information.

The audience for AICN thrives on the buzz, it's fun and a way to pass the time while waiting for the movies.

Heat makes an excellent point by saying all these fans, regardless of quality of product, are buying a ticket (and probably the DVD). Most of us, even if we hate it, will end up arguing it's the best one in 8 years on a blog somewhere.

I agree that traditional journalism reporting on internet buzz is a slippery slope, however there is a canary in the coal mine aspect to the buzz. It's newsworthy in some way. When a new product in an industry I am only casually familiar with is nearing release, I always ask "what are the geeks saying?". The counterbalance is that the movies' commercials are spouting quotes lauding praise from "critics" I have also never heard of who, like ShogunMaster, I have no frame of reference for and frankly may or may not exist.

For many of us summer movie season is the apex of our interest in film. We can't get enough of it and want to speculate and gather every available bit of information. Is it too far removed from printing an oscar favorites list 4 months before three quarters of the movies have been released.

Don't forget the main subplot behind Indy is that Lucas held up production for years because he didn't like the scripts coming in. If this story isn't tight, it's legimate to question Lucas. He's on shakey ground with his core geek audience these days.

I doubt the "core geek audience" means anything to Lucas these days. Methinks that with $1 billion in the bank from the prequels, that audience is pretty much irrelevant, if it ever mattered to begin with. 27 people do not a blockbuster make. No one will care that the geeks are sniping if the movie does as well as expected.

Chisox, thanks for that insightful piece of news. You just saved me the price of a ticket!

:/

Trust me, as a diehard Cubs fan you can't really take anything anyone going under the name of "ChiSox" seriously. From my experience, Sox fans would rather "hate" first and be "real fans" second. ;)

Ah, the uncomfortable interplay of information and promotion. I seem to recall stories of Last Crusade having early production problems, the film still turned out ok. I knew that Predator had to go back for major reshoots, more of a mixed bag with that one. This all happening before teh internets, of course.

"He's on shakey ground with his core geek audience these days."

Quite frankly, I like many am sick of this core geek audience.

If Harry Knowles loves something...it is probably crap.

I am sick of Hollywood pandering to them. I am sick of their childish four letter word vocabulary and I am sick of their opinions.

If the geek culture were one person I would vote for tying it up to a tree and putting an apple on its head, William Tell style, and letting every person on the planet take a arrow to it until the apple was missed.

I can't wait to see Indy IV and every time I read that a geek says it will suck my anticipation goes up a little higher.

I can't believe someone other than IOIOI just referred to David Poland as 'Heat'.

"Quite frankly, I like many am sick of this core geek audience.

If Harry Knowles loves something...it is probably crap.

I am sick of Hollywood pandering to them. I am sick of their childish four letter word vocabulary and I am sick of their opinions."

Well-said Nicol. That's exactly how I feel as well. As I said elsewhere, Drew sat in the editing room of POTC 2 and then a few weeks later wrote a glowing review of it. That sums up AICN perfectly.

Trade screenings like where this asshole saw the movie, are set up by distributors as a convenience for exhibitors. Many states by statute require screenings in advance before exhibitors can book the film. By slamming the film, this douchebag asshole cuntlips has not only stabbed Paramount in the back after they invited him to the screening, but he's potentially affected his own business because word has now gotten out (due purely to his opinion) that the movie's no good.

Hey exhibitors, when a studio invites you to see a movie, don't nerd out and post your reviews on anonymous internet nerd sites. You should be fired for your assholery and your theatre should go bankrupt.

I'm pretty sure those reviews on AICN aren't even genuine. They don't go far enough into specifics to be convincing, they are also wrong on basic details (ShogunMaster reported the running time as 2:20 when it's been certified by the BBFC as 2 hours 2 minutes), and quote lines of dialog ("It's not the mileage, it's the years") that even Spielberg told EW are not in the movie. There's nothing in them that couldn't be gleaned from a quick scan of the Topps trading cards now at Wal-Mart and Target. Shame on AICN, which i didn't think could sink any lower after it's infamous 'Harry has chosen HD-DVD and here's why!' clanger. And thanks DP for bringing sanity to the proceedings. My take on the movie? I'm sure Crystal Skull won't be another Raiders (or even another Last Crusade) but i'm sure it'll play just fine on it's own terms. Spielberg hasn't made a kick-ass, rollicking blockbuster since Jurassic Park a long 15 years ago, and i'll be there on 5/22 to lap this one up.

Is DP right about the Times? Absolutely. Am I personally (and selfishly) pleased that my expectations were knocked down Phantom Menace levels? Unfortunately, yes.

Drew sat in the editing room of POTC 2 and then a few weeks later wrote a glowing review of it.

POTC2 had an editing room?

Harry Knowles is an unethical arsehole, exposed as such by Film Threat 8 years ago. He's no different from that drunk New York City congressman who fathered a love child.

By legimitizing AICN the New York Times has continued its descent into a mouthpiece for propaganda. Judith Miller and Michael Gordon ain't the only ones in the Newspaper of Record whose material is filled with Hype and B.S.

As for "Indiana Jones 4"? I have no plans to see it because I was not into it back in the day.

^Hahahaha.

Chucky...do you see movies at all?

I do see movies and in theaters, jeff. It's just that in a recession I'm more prudent with what I see.

Hard to tell from your relentless drumbeating against pretty much anything that is either popular or critically-acclaimed.

jeff, thought the exact same thing about the non-io heat comment, mdoc totally duped me.

re: indiana jones, the trailer was strangely flat (but i put no value on previews one way or the other...when did they become 'trailers' anyway? i don't get it), but i was so phyched to see marion r. i just about jumped out of my seat! indiana's never been as good as when he and marion were together

They're "trailers" because they used to come at the end of the movie. Hence they "trailed" it. So I recall reading somewhere once upon a time.

It isn't 'news', but it is a story all the same. The interesting points were actually the dogmatic exhibitionist screenings laws, and confirmation that The Berg has his hands in every detail of his projects.

"It's INDIANA JONES!!! Disbelief will be suspended for 2 dark hours, and everyone's inner child will surface joyfully!"

But what about the people who weren't even around for to have an inner child that remembers Indiana Jones? Will they be bothered?

they'll be 'phyched', whatever the hell that is... sorry, just laughing at my own typo

I keep reading about how "psyched" people are about "Indiana Jones," but IRL, I haven't seen as much of that. Yeah, people are going to see it, but are people as pumped about it as "Iron Man?" Not that I've personally witnessed.

My wife was having a conversation with a school teacher this past week whose elementary school kids were all talking summer movies. The boys all wanted to see "Iron Man," the girls wanted to see "Caspian," but when the teacher brought up "Indiana Jones," the class was uniformly "meh."

When I was that age, Indiana Jones was the shit. Now there's a whole generation who looks at it about the same way I looked at "The High Road to China" - disinterest and shocked that my aunt was all about the Selleck.

The third trailer does look a lot better. They have more wide-shots and context to the scenes and it does not look anywhere as cheap as the original trailers did. The original trailers - did - make the film look like it was shot on plastic sets. I say this as someone who holds Raiders as his favourite film of all time and has already purchased his Indy M & M's.

They also took out that horrible reaction shot of Marion giggling when the wheel flies at them. That insert of Blanchett ramming the car though still looks horribly fake. I fear she, sexy as hell though she is, will be the weak link. Still not convinced she is a very good actress.

As for Indy's connection with the youth of today... I also taught some teens two weeks ago and referenced some upcoming summer movies. When I mentioned Indiana Jones most only had a vague recollection of who he was and while they had heard of Raiders, could not recount the plot or anything specific about it.

They were about 15-16 year olds. I think this will be bigger with older people taking their families and introducing it to a new generation. That is why Lucas is marketing the merchandise with Indy photos from all three films...not just the new one.

Well if you guys aren't hearing people talk about Indy, your lucky. It is like 1999 all over again in my groups, with people looking forward to returning a to a beloved franchise that just released a very underwhelming trailer.

And once again, I'm more pumped for the dark Warner Brothers picture than the Lucasfilm fluff.

Big surprise that Raiders is Nicol's favorite film. I can picture him squealing with delight every time the American with a gun shoots the sword-wielding Arab.

Also, it's clear already that Spielberg is going to get a free pass and that Lucas will be blamed for something negative, no matter what the result,

Apparently you're supposed to embrace your inner child with this film, but not with the prequels. I can tell you right now what kids 20 years from now will be watching more.

Nicol, what more proof do you need exactly in relation to proving Cate Blanchett is a good actress? Elizabeth? Little Fish? The Talented Mr Ripley? I'm Not There? The Aviator? Thank God He Met Lizzie? Bandits? The Man Who Cried? etc...

The only way I can rationalize Nicol's Cate Blanchett comment is to figure that he has radically different criteria for what he considers to be 'good acting' than I do. To be fair to him, Armond White agrees with him (but I don't know why).

folks need to remember that Lucas predicted that exactly this would happen months ago in vanity fair:

" Lucas is convinced he won’t please everyone. “I know the critics are going to hate it,” he says. “They already hate it. So there’s nothing we can do about that. They hate the idea that we’re making another one. They’ve already made up their minds.”
At least the legions of Indy geeks will be pleased, right?
“The fans are all upset,” Lucas says. “They’re always going to be upset. ‘Why did he do it like this? And why didn’t he do it like this?’ They write their own movie, and then, if you don’t do their movie, they get upset about it. So you just have to stand by for the bricks and the custard pies, because they’re going to come flying your way.”"

and although we haven't heard from legit critics yet, the NYTs willingness to spread the negativity of the internet 'reviews' seems to indicate that Lucas was right and they already hate it.

Yeah, but Lucas thinks "sand is rough...you're soft" is good dialogue.

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

URL:
Remember me? YesNo

Comments: