Re: Better than Indy Jones

Posted by Crusader from athe530-k227.otenet.gr on December 07, 1999 at 17:55:46:

In Reply to: Better than Indy Jones posted by Will Wheaton on December 07, 1999 at 10:29:03:

Just consider this; whoever in the whole wide film-watching world, admitted liking Indy for its special effects, even back in 1981. My humble opinion is that Indy had the worst effects ILM had ever produced, including every non-Lucas film. And, yet, they are by far LucasFilm's best films (remember, LucasFilm is the company known for makng the SFX and then building a movie around them :-) ). That about says it all.
Also, you say it yourself: "...the millions (?) of others dedicated to the new Indiana Jones". There, you admit it, Indy is the original adventurer and no matter how many Mummy movies you'll get, they will always be Indy-like, but Indy never Mummy-like! By the way, "numerous sequels"? How many mummies are there to be resurrected and take revenge, anyway?

I think I'm getting into ShortRound's turf with this, but who can resist this?:
"Well -- I thought archaeologists were always funny little men searching for their mummies"
Willie Scott, Temple Of Doom.

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup:

Name:    
E-Mail:  
Subject: 
Comments:

Link URL:   
Link Title: 
Image URL: