• Most new users don't bother reading our rules. Here's the one that is ignored almost immediately upon signup: DO NOT ASK FOR FANEDIT LINKS PUBLICLY. First, read the FAQ. Seriously. What you want is there. You can also send a message to the editor. If that doesn't work THEN post in the Trade & Request forum. Anywhere else and it will be deleted and an infraction will be issued.
  • If this is your first time here please read our FAQ and Rules pages. They have some useful information that will get us all off on the right foot, especially our Own the Source rule. If you do not understand any of these rules send a private message to one of our staff for further details.
  • Please read our Rules & Guidelines

    Read BEFORE posting Trades & Request

Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny

Yeah the reveal was terrible and basically raiders with her head exploding but less awesome. Also the alien looked extremely fake even by the standards back then. It felt 100 % like Spielberg letting George Lucas do his thing.

The alien looked like every sci-fi movie alien ever. This is part of the reason why I mentioned making the aliens a cheesy Flash Gordon-esque type earlier, because it would've been so much more original than some green skinned guy with black eyes, while also keeping things within the movie serial logic of the franchise.

Of course, I'm not a fan of throwing aliens into an Indiana Jones movie in general. But if they had to do it, they could've made them more interesting to look at.
 
I don't think aliens were necessarily a bad idea for Indiana Jones. In fact, I think most things that sound like a bad idea can work with good writing. Indie 4 had more than just bad writing. People blame it on aliens because the bad indiana jones movie happened to be the one that dared to use aliens.
 
Indie 4 had more than just bad writing.
Nah, it only had bad writing, and by a small margin. It's the sorta movie I look at and think it would've been great with one or two more rewrites. The acting and production design is on point, besides veering a bit too digital in some places. The script truly feels like it was almost there, but then stumbles the landing like that stormtrooper on the staircase.
Glad that George was invited to the premier after getting shafted from ROS
Was he not invited or did he just see the writing on the wall like everyone else and decide to bail?

Oh and if you want my rankings, I'd go with release order. I appreciate KotCS more than TLC for actually trying something new but you can't argue with results, and TLC is just plain better. One thing I will say, though, is that TLC is the only film in the series I'd consider too light. Too much humor. I also consider RotLA and ToD practically interchangeable in terms of quality. The only masterpiece I can think of whose sequel is also a masterpiece.
 
Last edited:
Well, went to see it and it was as I expected.........................overhated as hell.

Seriously, this wasn't that bad and Indy being depressed actually works a bit here rather than TLJ.

I actually got what they were going for in the ending (Indy seeing that he still has family that cares for him rather than being so focused on the family that he lost), it's just a bit rushed is all.

I will say I loved the time travel aspect. The idea of Nazis flying across the sea shooting up Roman Legionaries is so gloriously insane in a 30's serial way.



7/10
 
GENERAL THOUGHTS

So, there's definitely stuff to like in Dial of Destiny. Ford still looks good in the outfit, and still has a great growl. Pheobe Waller-Bridge is a dynamic screen presence, and could make a fine archeological heroine in a movie of her own. James Mangold is a skilled director, and with a huge production budget, the movie looks great.

But.

I've said it again and again: the person behind the camera is less important than the quality of the script being shot, and this just isn't a good script. Indy has apparently spent the last 25 years believing his half of the Archimedes dial is of no particular danger or importance, as he keeps it in university storage, not a bank vault, and freely hands it over to a goddaughter who openly tells him she's trying to reunite it with its other half. But, as soon as the baddies capture it, he does a 180-turn, and insists he and Helena have to work together to stop them from completing the same mission, despite having no reason to have changed his own beliefs about the artifact. (Also, this insistence that he and Helena cooperate marks the end of the first act... roughly halfway through the runtime. There's your first clue another draft was needed.)

Grade: B-

SPOILERS FOLLOW

The idea of a Nazi going back in time to fix the Reich's mistakes is an inspired plot device, but Indy doesn't fully learn about the plan until the start of the third act, which is much too late to establish dramatic stakes. Moreover, the time travel mechanism has to be better established then "a few people take a glance at half of an ancient dial, and are immediately convinced, despite no evidence whatsover, that it's a workable device for such a feat." On the one hand, I appreciate that the Archimedes dial is scientific in nature, but on the other hand, there really needed to be either some supernatural basis for the idea of being able to locate/predict fissures in time, even if those fissures occur naturally, or a practical demonstration of the dial's utility/accuracy. (Also, never mind continental drift, which is negligible over a 2,000-year period, these apparently completely natural fissures entirely compensate for planetary/galactic orbits, I guess? Very thoughtful of them!)

Speaking of which, if Voller is so hell-bent on retrieving the dial, why has he not looked up Indy before now? Despite his government contacts, did he have no idea that the guy he already fought is alive and well, and teaching archaeological history in NYC? Is it just massively convenient that he learned about Indy's existence when he happened to be staying in the immediate vicinity? He must have known about Helena because his goons were following her, right? That's why they arrived at the college? Did he never learn who her godfather was? Just how shoddy was his team's intel??

So much for the plot, now for the characters. It's wildly out of character for Mutt to have enlisted to fight in Vietnam; it would have been much more effective had he died while on an expedition with Indy. Killing him off via backstory is a fine choice in of itself, but sending him to the war just makes not only him seem like a total dope, but Indy, too, for not talking him out of it - which, again, given his character, should have been the easiest thing in the world.

As for Helena... oy. She doesn't work as a character, because she's really two characters: an unlikable, amoral rogue in the first act, and a devoted and loving goddaughter in the third act. The audience can only guess that bonding with Indy during their second-act tomb raiding inspired her to reform her errant ways, because there certainly isn't any evident justification for this change.

More quibbles: the kid character is completely unnecessary, and shouldn't have been included. Also: no offense to cabbies, but I'd expect more from Sallah than mere cab-driving from a guy as intelligent and brave as him after being in the States for ~20 years. (Couldn't he have become a formidable history professor, also?) And, there's just no good reason, other than lazy writing, for Voller to appear in the prologue if there's no justification for his instantaneous belief in the dial's power - and there isn't. (Granted, it does set up Voller's distrust for Hitler's poor decision-making, but the Führer's blunders are already legendary in number and scale, so that hardly seems necessary.)

The movie's action is... okay. All the major sequences drag on much too long, and without any injuries or sense of exhaustion to give them the edge a sequel to Raiders should have.

As for the idea of Indy retiring in Ancient Syracuse... to my surprise, I really liked it, and felt it justified the otherwise b-a-n-a-n-a-s plot swerve of actually traveling two thousand years into the past. But, by bringing (forcing) Indy back to the present, it merely amounted to a bananas plot swerve for the sake of an action climax. What's more, it made Voller into a total idiot, by rushing into a fissure on blind faith that not only would this dial have perfect accuracy, but that he understood how it works/how to read it, despite never having possessed it for more than a few minutes in the dark. It might have been one thing had Indy somehow tricked everyone into going to the wrong time, but Voller ended up just playing himself.

Finally, I groaned aloud when Marion showed up just to put a nice bow on the series, because the series just did that last time, and made her a major character, rather than a 'member berry cameo. If the movie had allotted, say, 10 minutes otherwise given to the endless action sequences to showing them struggling to hold their relationship together after Mutt's death, their reunion might have been more effective, but to me at least, bringing her in for only the last scene felt like an unearned flashing "SURPRISE! APPLAUSE!" sign. Their scene replaying the Raiders dialogue did somewhat redeem said ending, however.

In conclusion, Indiana Jones and Hermione's Time-Turner is merely mid, and too damn long. It's better than Skull, and, though much less interesting, far more tolerable than the headache-inducing Doom. But it lacks Last Crusade's goofy charm and emotionally earned ending, let alone Raiders' genuine greatness.

Now, instead of rebooting/recasting Indy, can't we just come up with an entirely new 1930s archaeological adventurer? It worked for The Mummy '99, which is still the second-best archaeological adventure flick ever made. (y)
 
Last edited:
Nice analysis - do you think a good fan-edit can somehow fix the issues mentioned by you (not only shortening a number of over-the-top action scenes or bizarre CGI scenes), but actually make the plot or Helena's character stronger and more consistent?
 
^ I'm afraid not re: Helena; her character shift is just too pronounced and jarring. I would think, however, that the action could be cut down quite a bit...
 
If Mr. Cinema will pardon my replying to his review in this thread... :)


By the end of the film it had all got very convoluted so excuse me if I've got this wrong but... if Archimedes could not have factored continental drift into his calculations, then how could he have designed a device that brought people back to the exact time he intended?

The dial stuff is truly baffling. It's a fixed time loop (because the watch and "dragon" carvings were already in/on the tomb), okay, fine. But the time rifts are a natural phenomenon, which Archimedes is merely measuring, using... math. The rift just happens to be occurring during a major battle. Okay, fine. I'm pretty sure Indy yelling about continental drift was just him pulling anything he could think of out of his arse to upset Voller, but I'd be more upset about flying through a sky-portal that, for all you know, contains electric storms that will fry every cell in your body even if it does lead to the time you think it does.

Apparently the original idea was for Voller to actually make it back to the late 30s, but Mangold wanted to do something less predictable. Okay, but what I want to know is, was the dial/time-travel process always this nonsensical?


Sallah [... is] driving a New York cab, instead of working at a museum, or lecturing in archaeology, as befits the important character introduced in Raiders.

Hear, hear! No offense to cab drivers, but surely a guy as smart and educated as Sallah should be a respected academic at this point, too?!
 
Last edited:
Do we have any evidence that Sallah is "smart and educated"? As far as we know he's just some guy. Not stupid, sure, but he's never demonstrated any academic qualifications.
 
Yeah, I don't understand the logic behind these arguments. He's a resourceful man that helps Indy, but why should he be an academic?
 
My review of the 5th film linked by @Gaith above was continuing thoughts I had in a recent review of the 3rd film (in the larger context of reviewing all the films): https://letterboxd.com/tm2yc/film/indiana-jones-and-the-last-crusade/1/

A lot of these varying opinions can come down the way one personally imagines a character in the absence of much backstory. His posh British accent (as performed by Brit JRD) and his love of Gilbert & Sullivan operettas gave me the impression he's studied archaeology at Oxford/Cambridge (Googling "Gilbert and Sullivan Society" brings those universities up in the top 10 results). Maybe I'm reading too much into it those character traits. But surely he has to be "smart and educated" to be one of the top guys in the archaeology game at least?

As way of explanation of this cultural trait (of which the privately educated Davies, the son of a British colonial officer, was well aware I'm sure) Fry & Laurie do a 1992 comedy sketch (at the start of this episode of their show) about the British upperclass Oxford/Cambridge/Foreign-Office types being obsessed with Gilbert & Sullivan:

 
https://indianajones.fandom.com/wiki/Sallah_Mohammed_Faisel_el-Kahir

I don't consider myself a die-hard Indy fan, nor have I seen Dial of Destiny. But according to the fan wiki link above, Sallah is described as one of the greatest diggers in Egypt. I once had the misfortune of digging up a dead tree stump as a teenager, and I can tell you that it's some backbreaking soul-crushing work. Being the greatest at that has to count for something. His connections with so many archaeologists and experiences with digging up monuments also make me wonder how he could go from having a reputation as the "greatest digger in Egypt" at a young age to "taxicab driver" at old age.
 
"Digger" is just slang term for a field archaeologist/palaeontologist isn't it?

Like in another Spielberg film referencing Dr. Alan Grant:

"...because Grant's like me... he's a digger"

 
Okay, but what I want to know is, was the dial/time-travel process always this nonsensical?
I read that at one point, the plot of earlier drafts involved the Bermuda Triangle. So we can see how that element kind of morphed into the "time fissures" in the final movie. I don't know how nonsensical it was in those drafts, maybe people just flew into the Bermuda Triangle with their fingers crossed, or maybe they had the Dial to help them predict where/when they'd end up!
 
Oh hey, now that we've presumably all seen Dial of Destiny, is anyone thinking of a fanedit? I actually feel like it occupies that middle ground where it's good enough to watch but not good enough to obsess about details I'd want to fix, hence, not worth bothering!
 
Oh hey, now that we've presumably all seen Dial of Destiny, is anyone thinking of a fanedit? I actually feel like it occupies that middle ground where it's good enough to watch but not good enough to obsess about details I'd want to fix, hence, not worth bothering!
There's honestly not much I would change about it. The tuk tuk chase scene goes on about two minutes longer than it needs to, and they really needed to have an AI voice clone or someone who can do a passable imitation of a 40 year-old Harrison Ford in the prologue, but aside from a few minor trims for pacing that's really about it.
 
SPOILERS LISTED HERE...

Personally, I genuinely loved the film - despite its flaws. I don't think that ANY final Indiana Jones movie would've or could've been everything that we'd hoped, nor live up to everyone's expectations. But I truly enjoyed myself and found it to be a surprisingly emotional movie. I liked that it directly dealt with Indy's age - they didn't have a 70-year-old Indy performing stunts like a spry 35-year-old. I also liked how it showed him at his lowest point, having lost his son & wife, and living in a world that's moved on from him (nobody cares about the mysteries of the past anymore, when the mysteries of space and the future beckon). The casting, production design, and even the plot were terrific. Having said that, though, there are a few things I wished were different:
  • Indy's actions drove the plot more, particularly as the film went on. I get that he gets sucked into a plot not of his making, but it would've been nice to see his decisions and actions causing circumstances to progress. As it is, a lot of the time it just seemed he was along for the ride.
  • Related to the above point, there were a number of times it felt like Helena Shaw & the Dial of Destiny, until the filmmakers suddenly remembered, "Oh, this is supposed to be Indy's story."
  • I generally liked Helena as a character and found her interesting, but she did come across as annoyingly obnoxious a few times. I didn't mind her showing Indy up once or twice, but it seemed to happen a LOT in this movie. However, I think with a few judicious cuts, that can be mitigated.
  • It wasn't Indy's choice to return to 1969. The ending just seemed so abrupt. His agency was taken away from him. I would've liked it to be his choice to come back. It could've been done easily, but again we had Helena making that decision, not him.
To address some of the criticisms of the film, I personally liked the action sequences. I've seen a lot of chatter about radically cutting the length of the opening WW II prologue and the tuk tuk chase in particular (and, admittedly, the tuk tuk sequence is a bit long). However, I quite enjoyed them. Most of what I'd cut are a lot of Helena's more cringeworthy, eyerolling lines to tone her down a bit & streamline the flow of things. If I were to make some suggestions about alterations to the movie, here's my list:
  • Tighten the New York Helena rooftop chase. Also, I don't know if there's a way to tighten the Nazis killing the college teaching staff - ?
  • Change the television newscast voiceover in which Indy is named as a suspect in the college staff killings. Like the FBI being suspicious of him in Crystal Skull, it's a plot point which never really went anywhere. I'd simply have the newscaster say that Indy is missing & the authorities are hoping to find him. Likewise, I don't know whether his line about being wanted for murder & hoping to clear himself can be cut. I'd think he'd have motivation enough to just go after Helena to get the dial back.
  • In Morocco, cut "...and then I stole it. That's called capitalism."
  • You can barely hear Voller saying, "See you in the past, Dr. Jones." Don't know if there's any way to make that line a bit louder...?
  • Cut a chunk of the Helena/Rahim exchange, i.e. "Does it have to be that part?" Just go straight to her saying the ring didn't fetch as much as she thought.
  • Cut the whole "How did you get to be like this?" "You mean beautiful, clever, independent, self-reliant, blah, blah, blah" exchange. And for the record, before I'm accused of being one of "those" fans, I LOVE strong, brave, feminine women hero characters - Princess Leia, Padme, Ripley, Marion Ravenwood, Lois Lane, Mina Harker, Tracy Di Vicenzo, etc. - even Olive Oyl! But the difference here is that you knew they were kickass characters because of their actions. It's a difference between "show me, don't tell me".
  • Cut Helena & Teddy's exchange related to Antonio Bandaras' sea captain (if possible). A look exchanged between them is all that's needed to show how they feel about the situation.
  • On the boat, cut Helena revealing the deck of cards and talking about making the mark believe they chose their own card. I'd have Indy simply ruin it by saying, "The deck is stacked," and leave it at that. Otherwise, it's yet another example of her one-upping Indy again.
  • Cut Helena gleefully going on about selling the Grafikos. Maybe just celebrate that they got out of there alive.
  • I don't know if there's any way of having Helena actually show remorse that Banderas died when Indy interrupts her to say his friend got killed - ?
  • Cut Teddy stealing money from the kids in Siricusa. Maybe keep him looking longingly at the other kids - it's a brief but nice character moment showing how lonely he is as an orphan - but otherwise his character is pretty inconsequential in relation to the larger film. I think it can go from there to him having ice cream & getting kidnapped by Voller & his gang.
  • Once Indy gets shot and dragged off to the airport, the film dragged for me. I don't know if there's any way to tighten up that whole sequence of him being taken to the airport, Helena getting onto the plane, and Teddy stealing the other airplane or not...?
  • Once they're in the past, try to tighten up the battle sequence between the plane and the ancient Romans. I know they bring the plane down, but it'd be nice to have them do it fairly quickly, showing how just because you've got guns doesn't mean you're the toughest dudes around.
  • I don't know that it's possible to somehow have it be INDY'S decision to return to 1969. Rather than Helena clocking him, perhaps just have him pass out? I don't know. That'd be a genuinely tricky one. I'm not sure there's anough material there to manipulate it into such an ending.
And that's it. Thanks for putting up with my two pesos' worth of ideas. Hope it wasn't annoying.
 
It wasn't Indy's choice to return to 1969. The ending just seemed so abrupt. His agency was taken away from him. I would've liked it to be his choice to come back. It could've been done easily, but again we had Helena making that decision, not him.
Yeah this is one of the two things that really bugged me when watching it the first time. I read later that Phoebe Waller-Bridge came up with this ending... well, duh, actors always want to steal the scene, or steal the whole movie. The director should have stood up for a proper ending for the protagonist. I think a younger Harrison Ford would have stood up to her, but he's just tired and cranky and didn't really care enough anymore. (The actor, not the character!)

The other thing that bugged me isn't really fixable. I had been really excited to see the digitally de-aged Harrison in scenes "just like the original trilogy" ! But they decided to light the scenes soft and flat, like current movies, instead of using hard backlight / kickers and sidelight and all the tricks of traditional lighting and cinematography. So, that sequence doesn't look like the original Indy trilogy. Also I think that lighting it differently meant that the reference material of young Harrison that the AI used, wasn't really suited, because it was lit differently. So I think that contributed to the AI de-aging not looking as good as it could have.
 
Back
Top Bottom