Indiana Jones Suffers From Long Knives Of Internet Reviews

New York Times   |  MICHAEL CIEPLY   |   May 10, 2008 10:11 AM


Show your support.
Buzz this article up.

Mr. Spielberg customarily avoids leaky test screenings. Even Marvin Levy, his publicist of more than 30 years, said he had not yet seen the new movie.

Still, there it was, at 6:42 a.m. on Thursday: a harshly critical review on aintitcoolnews.com, from a poster who identified himself as "ShogunMaster." Rife with details from the film, the review said, "This is the Indiana Movie that you were dreading."

By that afternoon two other less critical, but less than sparkling, reviews also appeared on the Web site.

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.

Read the whole story here.


Comments
38
Pending Comments
0
Post a Comment

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

Hint sample
View Comments:

He is my favorite. Just saw hisprofile on millionaire&celebdatingsite "W e a l t h y R o m a n c e. co m" last week. I am wondering what kind of relationship he is looking for on that site.

replyReply favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 07:34 AM on 05/13/2008

Critics are just failed and bitter actors. Who cares what they think.

replyReply favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 11:06 PM on 05/11/2008

I saw it. They're full of crap. It's good. It's an Indy flick, it's NOT reinventing the wheel and it's NOT as good as say Raiders, but if you have fond memories of the series as a whole-there is NO reason to not like this one, to.

replyReply favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 07:32 PM on 05/11/2008

I cringe inside when there's a big hollywood blockbuster that everyone goes to see...you just KNOW it will propound some kind of authoritarian and/or zionist prejudice.

replyReply favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 02:59 PM on 05/11/2008

I love Indiana Jones. I only hope the altecocker version holds up.

replyReply favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 02:07 PM on 05/11/2008

I could really care less what the critics say about a film. Movies are mindless entertainment. I'm going to see this film and enjoy it for what it is.

replyReply favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 01:44 PM on 05/11/2008

no you're not.

replyReply favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 02:56 PM on 05/11/2008

OH YES I AM!!! There is an old expression - Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach. and those who can do neither , criticize. I'll be at the theatre on opening day. See you at the movies.

replyReply favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 11:58 PM on 05/11/2008

the teacher part is not true

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 02:09 AM on 05/12/2008

zzzz. Indiana Jones? Are they kidding with this shit. Give it a rest Hollywood. Jones was over 20 years ago. They did this for the cash. Of course it's horrible. Go see National Treasure.

replyReply favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 01:40 PM on 05/11/2008

Indy shot up with Viagra and B12, oxygen bottle just off camera...

replyReply favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 01:19 PM on 05/13/2008

Is this supposed to be some kind of shock? Spielberg hasn't made a decent film in years. Anytime you are making a sequel to a sequel to a sequel, chances are the film isn't worth the film it's printed on. This movie has only one goal, like the last 20 Spielberg films, making big profit from the idiot masses.

replyReply favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 06:29 AM on 05/11/2008

Common, franchises are not meant to live forever. (Nothing is) Look at Home Depot! Godfather Three. Even the last season of David Chase's neo-Shakespearean Masterpiece was a pale imitation of its real greatness.

replyReply favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 01:59 AM on 05/11/2008

"Even the last season of David Chase's neo-Shakespearean Masterpiece was a pale imitation of its real greatness."

Blasphemy!

replyReply favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 10:54 PM on 05/11/2008

Sounds like someone is setting up for less than expected opening weekend profits.
Maybe the film didnt come out as well as Steven hoped, and now his PR person of 30 years is trying to lesson the blow.

replyReply favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 01:11 AM on 05/11/2008

Apprently one username critic from a geek website is enough to make news

replyReply favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 08:59 PM on 05/10/2008

It's a strange website. They will give 33 reviews of Iron Man for example like it's the coming of 'Gone w/ the Wind' or whatever. No I donno why either.

replyReply favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 07:34 PM on 05/11/2008

I hope it isn't as bad as Ironman.

Is that the kind of movies straight people like?

I need something with a little more emotion, a little more gayer like Terminator.

Ironman was no Terminator.

replyReply favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 08:28 PM on 05/10/2008

"a little more gayer"?

replyReply favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 09:24 PM on 05/10/2008

I'll be there with bells on. I've yet to see a reeeaaaly bad Spielberg film. Some not as good as others, but most eminently watchable. And what the hell, its going to be a great popcorn flick if nothing else. Ironman was great by the way.

Got opening day tickets.

replyReply favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 04:52 PM on 05/10/2008

"War of the Worlds" was pretty damn unwatchable from a boring, dull perspective.

replyReply favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 02:17 AM on 05/11/2008

BS, once the lightning hit and the space ships came up, it was cool.

replyReply favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 02:11 AM on 05/12/2008

Oh yeah War of the Worlds had a pretty good first half, but WHERE was the Second? Spielberg raced thru it.

replyReply favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 07:35 PM on 05/11/2008

"Shogun Master" is a studio executive. He knows that doing this will mean blowback (The Bush Admin.'s favorite term). And yet, DESPITE all the dangers involved, he just couldn't resist putting it out. Knowing full well that it will be all over the tabloids, blogs and more.

And, the worst thing of all? If it's as bad as he says it is, why doesn't he take the opportunity to say THIS is why we need original content? Not rehashing the the same crap to death just to satisfy the corporate accountants? Because if he does, then it's goodbye to the limo, personal assistants, corporate jet. You get the idea......

http://blog.myspace.com/globalcomedy

replyReply favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 04:24 PM on 05/10/2008

How can it possibly live up to the hype and expectation? Since it probably can't, enjoy it for what it is.
If you don't want to see it, don't. Sure, much of what is shown is derivative, but what isn't. Recording artists, mostly the same over and over. Book series, more of the same. Art, pretty much the same style from the same artist. Politicians, same ol' same ol'.

replyReply favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 12:15 PM on 05/10/2008

I agree.

And I'd sure rather see Indy one last time than that seizure inducing adaptation of a cartoon that was crap to begin with that is Speed Racer.

replyReply favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 12:29 PM on 05/10/2008

What does Hollywood expect, re-make after re-make after re-make and the same old winkled aging once stars trying to make there last dollar. I believe that they have ran out of ideals and our relying on zombie movies, re-makes, teen slasher, and of course dragon movies. Independent movies are where all the talent are these days.

replyReply favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 11:56 AM on 05/10/2008

How is this a remake...it a sequal you idiot

replyReply favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 08:58 PM on 05/10/2008

Yes indeed it was a sequal, which by the way is spelled "sequel". This caught my attention, so I looked into your past posting with Huffington Post and do you know what I found InofTouch? To my amazement I found so many child like spelling errors, go figure! I guess you are projecting your low self esteem issues onto me. Anything that I post on Huffpo has nothing to do with you, so please do not take things personnel.

replyReply favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 11:36 PM on 05/10/2008

personal |ˈpÉ"rsÉ"nÉ"l|
adjective
1 [ attrib. ] of, affecting, or belonging to a particular person rather than to anyone else : her personal fortune was recently estimated at $37 million.
¢ done or made by a particular person; involving the actual presence or action of a particular individual : the president and his wife made personal appearances for the reelection of the state governor.
¢ done, intended, or made for a particular person : a personal loan.
2 of or concerning one's private life, relationships, and emotions rather than matters connected with one's public or professional career : the book describes his acting career and gives little information about his personal life.
¢ referring to an individual's character, appearance, or private life, esp. in a hostile or critical way : his personal remarks about Mr. Mellor's work ethic were unprofessional | you look like a drowned rat"nothing personal.
3 [ attrib. ] of or relating to a person's body : personal hygiene.
4 [ attrib. ] Grammar of or denoting one of the three persons. See person (sense 2).
5 existing as a self-aware entity, not as an abstraction or an impersonal force : Jews, Christians, and Muslims believe in a personal God.
noun
an advertisement or message in the personal column of a newspaper; personal ad.
¢ ( personals) another term for personal column .
ORIGIN late Middle English : from Old French, from Latin personalis "of a person," from persona (see person ).

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 12:03 AM on 05/12/2008

"personnel"

lol

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 01:47 AM on 05/11/2008

Sorry Harrison, didn't know you were on Huffpo.

replyReply favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 11:06 PM on 05/10/2008

Easy now, InofTouch. Jgalvan used the wrong term, that's all.

Anger issues?

replyReply favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 09:08 PM on 05/10/2008

I have fond memories of all three films. They are some of the high points of my filmgoing experiences as a youth. I can't imagine it being a truly BAD film. Greatest ever? probably not. But it would have to be pretty horrifying to not at least be entertaining (therefore satisfying to me.

I can imagine an Indy film, "Not quite as good as the rest." But not a BAD film.

replyReply favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 10:50 AM on 05/10/2008

Perhaps you are simply not very imaginative.

replyReply favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 11:17 AM on 05/10/2008

All I can go on is past outings, and even ToD was a fun, entertaining, albeit dark 2 hour romp.

replyReply favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 11:40 AM on 05/10/2008

You must be logged in to reply to this comment. Log in