Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny

VincentHanna said:
It's not amazing and Indiana Jones movies have always been silly/unrealistic IMO
Click to expand...

But overall they were well written, well acted and well made, well until Indy 4 :D

I don't think the plot for this one would have been too outlandish for an Indy film, its just, as always it seems nowadays, the execution was very hit/miss (mostly miss TBF) compared to the previous films.
 
unwashed potato! said:
Someone explain to me the point of this movie. I don't mean why did Disney make it, I mean rhe point, the lesson we as an audience learn from this movie. What did I miss? Surely you're supposed to leave the cinema and think, yes that's true, family are more important than treasure, etc etc. I can't think of any lesson I learned from this, perhaps because the characters didn't either!
Click to expand...



Read nitefly below spoiler tag.

Poor Harrison Ford.
2 of his best characters Han solo and Indiana Jones both ended up divorced their sons dying/turning to the dark side (lol) withered grumpy old man.

Im moaning but it was an ok film just those aspects spoiled it for me.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Kyo
Efour said:
Honestly that's why I dislike fleabag.
She is literally a con artist, gets 20+ people killed. She is only concerned about being able to sell relics. She laughs after the massacre of Antonio banderes crew and immediately goes back to thoughts on selling the golden mcguffin. She doesn't go on a journey she doesn't develop as a character. Why did they write her like that ?
Click to expand...

Might be worth adding the spoiler tags to some aspects of that.

I don’t think that’s right at all.

She clearly has a character arc (even if it’s not as painfully ham-fisted as shouting “I’m having a character arc!!!”).

Her identity of being thief was a hard shell she’d created to protect herself to stop getting hurt (“the only thing worth believing in is cash” etc).

Jones however noted that she clearly wasn’t just in it for the cash and that she did have passion for the subject / redeeming her dad’s legacy (“nobody memorises all of dad’s diaries for treasure”).

By the end she saved Jones from himself as he thought he had nothing to live for.

As for the bits in bold specifically:

- if she had no regard for anyone she wouldn’t have, for example, saved them on the boat
- she expressed guilt for her comments after saving them on the boat, noting that in her moment of victory she had reverted to her cocky thief persona.

I can’t 100% recall but I think she also went out her way to save Jones during the diving scene.
 
Last edited:
Nitefly said:
Might be worth adding the spoiler tags to some aspects of that.

I don’t think that’s right at all.

She clearly has a character arc (even if it’s not as painfully ham-fisted as shouting “I’m having a character arc!!!”).

Her identity of being thief was a hard shell she’d created to protect herself to stop getting hurt (“the only thing worth believing in is cash” etc).

Jones however noted that she clearly wasn’t just in it for the cash and that she did have passion for the subject / redeeming her dad’s legacy (“nobody memorises all of dad’s diaries for treasure”).

By the end she saved Jones from himself as he thought he had nothing to live for.

As for the bits in bold specifically:

- if she had no regard for anyone she wouldn’t have, for example, saved them on the boast
- she expressed guilt for her comments after saving them on the boat, noting that in her moment of victory she had reverted to her cocky thief persona.

I can’t 100% recall but I think she also went out her way to save Jones during the diving scene.
Click to expand...

You're right about the spoiler tags I've edited my post although for some reason I couldn't spoiler quote it so deleted it lol.

Ok yes and no is what I'll say to your points. These are definitely things that happened in the film :p
I think every one has a self interest angle. I walked away from the film feeling like i did. If it was too subtle for me for some reason then i think a lot of people will feel alike.
Just browsing around "professionals" reviews there is a fair few that share my current opinion. Its weird how it seemed so hit and miss on something that should be plain as day.

Could it be that her acting style/direction was so "something" that she just didnt come across as convincingly sincere or serious or with meaning?
This could be a me problem most likely..
Maybe i just hate her voice as she reminds me of so many Oxford women i went to uni with.. and my sisters Ex wife..... haha
 
Last edited:
Efour said:
You're right about the spoiler tags I've edited my post although for some reason I couldn't spoiler quote it so deleted it lol.

Ok yes and no is what I'll say to your points. These are definitely things that happened in the film :p
I think every one has a self interest angle. I walked away from the film feeling like i did. If it was too subtle for me for some reason then i think a lot of people will feel alike.
Just browsing around "professionals" reviews there is a fair few that share my current opinion. Its weird how it seemed so hit and miss on something that should be plain as day.

Could it be that her acting style/direction was so "something" that she just didnt come across as convincingly sincere or serious or with meaning?
This could be a me problem most likely..
Maybe i just hate her voice as she reminds me of so many Oxford women i went to uni with.. and my sisters Ex wife..... haha
Click to expand...

Yeah adding tags using the auto feature can be a menace - I tend to just write the tags in: “[ spoiler ]” (no gaps) and then add in the “ / “ to close it :)

Yes, she did have a self-interest angle and was, mostly, a terrible person! This was often shown in a comic way, such as the reveal of her gambling debts and her saying the engagement ring didn’t go for a high price. A ‘scally’ for sure.

I do feel like there is a certain stigma around her being in the film, but it’s also perfectly fine to have not liked her in character for being a bit too mean. Indeed, perhaps her character would have been better with more of an endearing softer side.

I mention stigma against her as there was hoohah in the thread pre-lease re: Fleabag saying she was ‘self-sufficient’ in the trailer… as if she was somehow a ‘shoehorned empowering female figure’. Yet the same clip had the line about the gambling debts and she clearly was supposed to be an openly terrible person being amusing about it.

The humour doesn’t have to land, but in no way is that the film is going for the ‘empowering female’ angle. Anyone that says that either hasn’t watched the film or has a hangover from that awful L3 robot in Solo which I absolutely hated.
 
Last edited:
@Nitefly - Based on your spoiler above I have one question as I haven't seen this and, to be blunt, probably won't but something you said intrigues me -

Nitefly said:
The humour doesn’t have to land, but in no way is that the film is going for the ‘empowering female’ angle. Anyone that says that either hasn’t watched the film or has a hangover from that awful L3 robot in Solo which I absolutely hated
Click to expand...

Does she "fail" at anything during the film and, by comparison, does Indy "fail" at anything in the film?

I think that is where, from the various 2* to 5* media reviews I've seen, they seem which to differ with those 2* ones (BBC etc) saying FWB is just there to be better at everything than Indy i.e. she never loses an argument to him, her way is always right, she always wins against other "stupider" men, everything she does works after anyone elses way fails etc and I think thats where the complaints of "Empowered (zero flaw) Female" might have come from but I'm not sure if thats a true account of her character in the film.

PS - I also manually write my own Tags too, I'm too used to doing it that way to change to using AutoTags :D
 
Can't believe how many videos ranting that the female character makes Indiana Jones look silly Youtube has recommended to me. Had no idea I was such a sexist.
 
unwashed potato! said:
Someone explain to me the point of this movie. I don't mean why did Disney make it, I mean rhe point, the lesson we as an audience learn from this movie. What did I miss? Surely you're supposed to leave the cinema and think, yes that's true, family are more important than treasure, etc etc. I can't think of any lesson I learned from this, perhaps because the characters didn't either!
Click to expand...

The partriarchy won't smash itself!

:D
 
Last edited:
ianh said:
@Nitefly - Based on your spoiler above I have one question as I haven't seen this and, to be blunt, probably won't but something you said intrigues me -

Does she "fail" at anything during the film and, by comparison, does Indy "fail" at anything in the film?

I think that is where, from the various 2* to 5* media reviews I've seen, they seem which to differ with those 2* ones (BBC etc) saying FWB is just there to be better at everything than Indy i.e. she never loses an argument to him, her way is always right, she always wins against other "stupider" men, everything she does works after anyone elses way fails etc and I think thats where the complaints of "Empowered (zero flaw) Female" might have come from but I'm not sure if thats a true account of her character in the film.

PS - I also manually write my own Tags too, I'm too used to doing it that way to change to using AutoTags :D
Click to expand...

Yeah I’ll answer that - some ‘minor spoilers’ though:

Eh, taking issue with her ‘needing to fail’ would be a bit of a strange take, as would saying ‘she didn’t fail enough’….

She is inherently a whole bunch of epic fail because of the debt she has got herself in, she’s been chased by gangsters and is just a total **** in how she uses Jones.

At no point did she come across as someone who is ‘perfect’ at everything. She was the expert in what they were after and, unsurprisingly, is an expert at it. But Jones is there doing puzzle solving too.

In no point was there an emphasis on there being ‘stupid men’. There is a bit where Jones is struggling to climb up a rock face but that’s a bit more ‘I’m too old for this ****!’ than anything else.

Actually, going further into proper spoiler territory:

… one smart ‘potentially important’ female character gets murdered pretty early on in the film - so really not sure how anyone can say that the film is ‘empowering females’.

Meanwhile, Jones is in full arse-kicking mode in the intro, kicking it to the Nazis, hurrrghh!! Go Indy!

Hope that clears it up, from my perspective at least :)
 
Last edited:
Nitefly said:
… one smart ‘potentially important’ female character gets murdered pretty early on in the film - so really not sure how anyone can say that the film is ‘empowering females’.

Hope that clears it up, from my perspective at least :)
Click to expand...
Agent Mason Agent the CIA chick? I wonder if they wanted her as it would be more antagonising to the Nazis "a person of colour" When mads laid into the Waiter guy in the hotel about his origin and role in ww2, I thought that was pretty edgy for a disney film
 
Last edited:
Efour said:
Agent Mason Agent the CIA chick? I wonder if they wanted her as it would be more antagonising to the Nazis "a person of colour" When mads laid into the Waiter guy in the hotel about his origin and role in ww2, I thought that was pretty edgy for a disney film
Click to expand...

Yup I was expecting her to last a bit longer and help the protagonists. Her death was a surprise to me so early in the film.

Yes I thought that hotel scene was a bit 'edgy'. The Nazis are obvious racists, but it rare to see them being racist in a modern day context.

On an unrelated note, I did think how the main bad guy and his henchmen went out was a bit lame in hindsight. You normally get really bombastic, supernatural / ridiculous deaths... just having a plane crash is a bit.... eh!

The main henchman guy was a pretty great support villain though... until he started shooting Romans out of the plane :confused::o

(Edited to add to the spoiler)
 
Last edited:
It was ok, just totally mediocre and not really memorable at all.

No where near as good as The Flash or Transformers Rise of the Beasts but not as bad as some of the other duff films of recent.

Dial of Destiny is the sort of film that when it comes up on TV/Streaming you would definitely look for an alternative before watching.

This is not a good place to end up for a £300m film.

I'm fairly ambivalent to the original trilogy so not overly invested; but this, even objectively was just average.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Kyo
Nitefly said:
Yeah I’ll answer that - some ‘minor spoilers’ though:

:)
Click to expand...

Thanks for that, as much as its not a film I ever want to see (although the praise of the first act sound fun and universally praised) I was finding the almost hyperbolic nature of the complaints about FWB's character a bit much. I mean I don't rate the vast majority of current screenwriters at all but there seemed to be a lot of "taking the tiniest things she says/does and exaggerating its negative effect for more effect" complaints and, whilst I'm sure she is what I would consider a badly written character, it all just seemed to be overly nit-picky at times.
 
I think what most will agree on.. the ending scene was utterly crap, especially for this to be his last movie.

Also, RLM review, presumably some swearing in it, not watched yet.

 
Last edited:
Oooof - It made just $60 million US Domestic Box office against a previously prediction of $73m - I would guess that one reason (of many) that they be missing that missing that usual first week "bump" before word of mouth gets around about poor films, is because they allowed the Cannes screening a month before release which looked to have killed a lot of pre-release hype with so many negative reviews given, even from MSM like the BBC etc.

www.the-numbers.com

Weekend projections: Dial of Destiny first with a disappointing $60 million - The Numbers

Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny will easily take top honors at the box office this weekend, but its $60-million debut is a disappointing start
www.the-numbers.com www.the-numbers.com

screenrant.com

Indiana Jones 5 Opening Weekend Box Office Ends Up Even Worse Than Solo

Indiana Jones 5 is opening with $60 million.
screenrant.com screenrant.com

www.indiewire.com

‘Indiana Jones’ May Lose More Money Than ‘The Flash’ as Summer Now Lags Behind 2022

With Indy's $60 million opening weekend, the summer box office needs Tom Cruise and "Mission: Impossible" more than ever.
www.indiewire.com www.indiewire.com

www.hollywoodreporter.com

China Box Office: ‘Indiana Jones 5’ Bombs With $2.3M Opening

Harrison Ford's octogenarian hero generates little to no nostalgia in China, where none of the first four films in the classic adventure franchise were ever released.
www.hollywoodreporter.com www.hollywoodreporter.com

One comment I'd seen in the RLM comments section was that in 1989 both Indiana Jones and Keaton's Batman were fighting to be the biggest box office winners and in 2023 Indiana Jones and Keaton's Batman (via The Flash) are now fighting to be the biggest box office losers, a sad harmony there :(
 
Last edited:
We watched it on Saturday and both my partner and I are huge fans of the original trilogy (I mean, who isn't, for the most part).

It was just a bit flat throughout and a largely depressing way to end Harrison Ford's time in the franchise. I really hope it's over now and that there will be no new films or remakes.

The ending felt even sillier than KotCS and that takes some doing when interdimensional beings (aliens) are involved.

I had seen some praise for the de-aging process in the early scenes, but it wasn't great to my eyes, his expressions weren't the same at all. It's a minor point overall, but there seems to be a long way to go with this technology.
 
Last edited:
Yesterday, I had the opportunity to watch a movie at the cinema, which was a perk of my health insurance that allows me to see one film per month for free. Initially, I was unsure about my decision to watch this particular movie due to the negative reviews and general discussion surrounding it. However, after seeing it, I found it to be a decent film overall. While some critics criticize it for its perceived "woke" values or for deviating from the style of the original Indiana Jones films, I personally found it to be an enjoyable experience. In my personal ranking, I would place it in third position among the five films in the series. Of course, it's hard to surpass the brilliance of the original film and "The Last Crusade," which I watched a few days ago and still stands out in my mind.

One aspect of the movie that impressed me was the de-aging technology, which has made significant advancements. Compared to films like "The Irishman" from a couple of years ago, where the de-aging effects often looked odd, this movie executed it exceptionally well. It was especially impressive considering that much of the action was likely performed by a stunt double, with the actor's face digitally mapped onto it. It made me dream about the possibilities, like having a James Bond film where viewers can choose their preferred Bond actor. For example, imagine watching "Goldfinger" with Roger Moore as James Bond!

However, the thing that stood out to me (totally minor). First, I noticed someone wearing ASICS trainers in 1966 Sicily, Additionally, at the beginning of the movie, there appeared to be an excessive use of Coca-Cola product placements, which felt somewhat distracting.

Overall, I had a good time watching the movie and appreciated the advancements in de-aging technology. While it had its flaws, it provided an enjoyable ride and secured a respectable spot in my personal ranking of the Indiana Jones films.
 
Is this review re-written by ChatGPT or something ^ very strange post especially when you check the users previous posts and writing style. The most obvious is the lack of capitalisation on previous posts.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom