Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny - Review (No Spoilers) 

Did it seem like the movie went through re-shoots?

Lol pull the other one it's got bells on 😂

OK, glad that you addressed this because I was about to mention that many other reviewers, as much as I love you dan, have CONFIRMED the leaks to be true. Which, if so, makes me far less enthused about the movie

I posted a #question! hoping you get a chance to see and address it! My late father loved Indiana Jones movies, and it got me interested in art and history, and archeology. I am one of the "non-haters" of TheFilmThatShallNotBeNamed 😅so I know I'll love this film.

@@Internatube Indeed, the major leaks in the last 2-3 weeks or so have now been confirmed by major reviewers who have actually seen the movie from multiple sources

He's probably shooting at 3 am lol. Don't wanna wake up anyone.

I came to say the same thing, very comforting!

Good way to wake up in the morning lol

Everytime you hear that is not Dan. It is an Ai with his face.

I was just going to leave the same comment. Just waiting for him to tap the mic and repeat "Indiana Jones" in a whisper.

Agreed. I prefer general recommendation levels like "Highly Recommended," "Recommended," "On the fence," etc. I do find review grades *in general* more helpful than none at all, as I feel we subconsciously 'rank' all films we see anyway... or at least I do.

Playing devil's advocate: what is the difference between this and 1-5 stars? Is there one?

@@YouFightLikeACow something about numbers feels more definitive , like a right or wrong answer on a test, while scales like this come off as more opinionated. I know that's more of an illusion because the number scale is still the opinion of the person giving the score but to have a descriptive scale gives more context than a number.

@@YouFightLikeACow there isn't.

@@YouFightLikeACow Yes there is a difference. 1-5 stars means different things to different people, just like letter grades. Some people see "C" or "3 stars" as OK while others see anything below a "B" or "4 stars" as "trash" or failing. Having a descriptive scale lets you know what the person ranking the movie actually means with their ranking.

looks like 1-5 scale with extra words

@@peterwardle4854 It basically is. But the point is people will assign their own feelings to numbers, whereas this scale assigns his feelings to the movie. Numbers wise, most people would consider a 2 to be a bad movie, but on his scale, his 2 placing could be a decent movie overall, but he's not a fan of it.

@@roofdogblues7400I agree this scale is clearer than a numerical scoring. 3/5 can be interpreted so many different ways, but this way of rating clearly explains what he means by it. I’m really pumped for it! Great work Dan!

@@roofdogblues7400 There is no difference between a bad movie and a film you don't like since saying it's bad is saying you don't like it. You might think other people will like it more or less than you, but that's a different story.

@@miz4535 I disagree, since people use words in multiple ways, a word can have multiple meanings. But we are talking about a numerical rating system. There are two movies I can think of that are masterpieces according to lots of people that I would rate a 2 out of 5, because I found them boring and couldn't watch without falling asleep. If I just used an out of 5 rating and rated them a 2, you'd think I thought those movies were bad, but by every other standard of judging a movie, as professional reviewers tend to do, they're great movies, and just because I found them boring, doesn't mean you will. But if you went on my rating, you'd avoid watching them because I rated them poorly. But if I used a sliding scale that put them on the "I'm not a fan" tier, you may be more inclined to watch them for yourself, especially if you listened to or read my review. Those movies are Blade Runner and Lost in Translation.

Great comment!

If I may nitpick, I'd argue for Rurouni Kenshin: The Beginning instead of The Final. It's the most stripped-down, the most realistic, the least cartoony, etc., as well as the most standalone of the live-action series. Takeru Satoh is like the Grim Reaper in that movie. Also, I favor The Raid (2011) over its sequel (2014) any day. I liked the latter, but it was *at minimum* half an hour too long and boasted an entire subplot with Yayan Ruhian that should've been cut.

CGI not a surprise 🙄

Mad max fury road is a god awful mad max film,it's utterly terrible

Literally every aspect was better in this film. I don't think ur being fair, divorce nostalgia, not great.

Until you see it and realise it's a load of crap.

You’d have to be pretty special to manage a Crystal Skull 2 😅

I thought it was a strange choice to show it at cannes. I always thought that cannes was a venue for more highbrow arthouse films and not summer blockbuster popcorn flicks

@@metallicnole4514 considering the lacklustre reviews that came from the screening that decision really puzzled me.

@@metallicnole4514 I think Disney wanted to copy what Paramount did, which was to show Top Gun Maverick at Cannes which got a great reception. Sadly for Disney, it did not work for Indy 5

cannes is a very elitist event, it is true that top gun was very lucky but it is not a place where blockbusters should be, disney made a mistake, a great comparison is what happened with elemental, that movie was strongly criticized there, but if you see the opinion of a more normal critic, you can see that the movie is not bad or mediocre at all.

I don't see why a numerical score doesn't allow this. If someone said "it's good" that's one statement about what could be many types of films, so you have to take into context the type of film. Same thing applies with a numerical score.

There are so many people saying a film is awful and have words like 'garbage' or 'woke' or 'terrible' in the thumbnails. It gets annoying and sad after a while.

Numerical scores allow this as well. Not a fan could be something like 4/10, while stay away is like 1/10. And people shouldn't just look at the score at face value anyway but listen to the review to get the context needed. Problem is some people just look at the score, which is why it's better not to have any.

I would say no because it encourages remakes and sequels (yet again) without being that great to warrant it.

@@miz4535 I believe A-List gives free movies every week, so it won't be his money.

I wouldn't bother. Sounds like a "watch on airplane" type of movie to me

@@roofdogblues7400 I would rather watch something actually good in any case

@@jameswilliams-zr8co why is that interesting? Look what they did with Star Wars, Jurassic Park. There are precious few examples of this working, notable recent examples are Blade Runner 2049 and Top Gun Maverick. The people making the former were allowed to have a creative vision, but it cost the studio. The latter was a sequel to a film that's not good, and they made it years later to allow the technology to improve and to have a good script. These are exceptions but also circumstances not present for this film, where it's "board room approved" to the max and made first and foremost for money, although I'm sure Ford and Mangold are still passionate. Also, the idea of Indiana Jones and the idea of an old man who is musing on the past and becoming irrelevant are simply incompatible. They want to attach a character study to an existing brand and it just won't work because of the nature of the brand. You either make a character study, or you make something people expect from an Indiana Jones film. You can't make both. This is one of the fundamental problems with sequels: people's expectations of what it should be impact what it can be even if those ideas are good in a vacuum.

I'd have said "See it now." So - see it now! I just loved it. I've been a Ford fan for 50 years... no time to waste.

Yes!

I love it when a fun movie is out around my bday. Still have fond memories of being taken for sushi & Trek VI on my bday as a kid. Enjoy ! & an early happy bday !

Indy is now 50 years older. That makes him 50 years older, but not an OLD MAN. Gorgeous, funny film.

Kennedy Is dead for a long time and thus won't partake in the next presidential election, so you can't vote for him.