I recently saw ‘Don’t Look Now’ (1973). Good picture, a little slow perhaps by today’s standards but worthy of any movie enjoyer’s time! So this movie was shot in Venice. Venice itself being an already beautiful spot to film even today. The way we get to look in a time capsule of Venice in the 70s makes the movie that much better!
People in the 70s could not in fact appreciate it the same way we do now. Concurrently we also can’t do it for today’s movies. Some movies can only be truly appreciated over time is what I believe. This matter can be expressed in both the movie’s message or, as I did, its cinematography. Hence my question now to you.
I’m going to tweak the OP a little bit to drop my movie unpopular opinion that I haven’t gotten to share here and say:
Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is a damn fine, and more importantly, fun, addition the the franchise that deserves maybe a tenth of the hate it gets online. It’s pulpy, it’s cheesy, the writing swings between passable and unbelievable, and the plot is all of the place, both in tone and in narrative, but you know what: SO ARE ALL THE INDIANA JONES MOVIES!
I honestly think that if that vine swinging scene never left the editing bay that movie would be looked back on a lot better.
I envy your opinion and sadly cannot share it. It’s ok, I’ll just love the first three and take it as it comes.
Yeah, no.
I’ll defend the fifth one, even if the opening feels like you’re watching somebody play a Naughty Dog Indiana Jones game, but not the fourth.
The fucking CGI gopher alone is enough, let alone the swinging with the monkeys bit or the fridge nuke. And even if you take all that out, it’s just not very good.
1 > 3 > 2 > 5 >>> 4