If you like this type of content, I do a weekly box-office round up lives team on Patreon. Join at any level to gain access to the box-office live stream as well as the weekly 90 minute Q&A. Learn more here: www.patreon.com/seanchandler
WHAT HAPPENED? Women wearing "THE FORCE IS FEMALE" T-shirts got control of the franchise and turned it into a female mary sue lesbian like fantasy movie where women run everything and run rings around men. Kind of like what they did to the Star Wars Franchise and even the Galactic Starcruiser Hotel Experience.
I think that all the studios are finally getting their lessons served to them about what we want, and why we don't like what we're getting. It's the year of the audience.
I think it’s more so the year that audiences are getting bored and tired, and realizing that they’re not actually liking what they’re getting. People aren’t boycotting these movies, they’ve just stopped caring enough to buy tickets. But in a sense you’re right that studios are only doing this to themselves.
I don't think most people have a problem with a God Daughter taking the lead role and taking over the Indiana Jones in the future. However, If they were going to do that, they needed to cast the equivalent of a younger Harrison Ford. That girl would need to be a Star and would have been able to carry the movie. Phoebe Waller Bridge, just isn't that actress. She's Not "A Star" meant to lead a movie to a billion dollar box office number. Anyone could have told Kathleen Kennedy that.. and I'm sure they did and they were silenced. 💩
Between this video and The Flash box office breakdown, I'm loving how on point you are with these. Very logical and unbiased - there's always much more than one reason for low ticket sales
You left one out. Its not just skepticism with Lucasfilm. Disney itself is a damaged brand. There are a LOT of people who have completely written off Disney in general
ONE OF THE REASONS: Phoebe Waller Bridge’s Character. I wanted characters that we already knew and loved and who treated Indy with respect. I wanted so much more of Marion. I want to see Short Round & more Salah. I think it was a mistake introducing a new character that no one cared about and who wasn’t tied to a character that we cared about.
Well, she was tied to Indy; it was just executed poorly. And her purpose was the same as Shia's the last time around: Draw in new, young viewers and establish a younger actor to take over as the franchise's lead, which makes perfect business sense and is fine in and of itself. The problem with SLB was that he publicly self-destructed in spectacular fashion right after they made that movie, including openly shitting on it himself. The problem with PWB is that she clearly wasn't a draw for effectively anyone as well as the inane idea rampant under Kathleen Kennedy's reign that to raise up the new generation, you have to tear down the old. (By contrast, most of the recent MCU projects have had their own share of writing problems, but - with the possible exception of Secret Invasion (Soren and Maria Hill got very lazy fridgings, and Talos and Nick Fury exude sad old man energy in first two eps) - all the passings of the baton so far have been done respectfully.)
THE worst side character ever (even though she really is the lead character!). I hated her in Fleabag but went in open minded for this film and she grated on my soul after 5 minutes. Someone telling us how great and hot she is whilst age shaming our hero and laughing minutes after Indy's friend is murdered is not going to make people enamoured with your character. The fact that she is the action lead who saves Indy repeatedly and even knocks him out for at least several hours with one punch is just icing on the cake. Truly awful.
@@brobogan5102 Yeah no doubt, I kept waiting for her character to be brought up, as she is reason #1 on everyone's list of why this movie has done so poorly, and it's like, ok, he's trying to do something different here, but you can't just ignore her, it's disingenuous.
@TheLucasbuck well he was an 80 year old man lol and nah the girl from Temple of Doom who begs for his help one minute and screams at him the next was a far more irritating cliche.
21:48 for reference. John Wick 4 had budget of 100 mil, opening weekend made around 74 domestic and 64 mil international so 138. Indy was 129 (60 US, 69 int). Wick ended up 187 domestic 245 international for 432 total. And Indy will probably end up in low 400s. The difference is literally that JW4 has break even at like 250-300 mil, while Indy's is like 750 or more. They both performed similar in first weekend.
It's weird to me that a fourth movie in an action franchise starring Keanu Reeves that started with his dog dying would out gross an Indiana Jones movie and a Flash movie with Michael Keaton's Batman returning!
@@gimlisbeardcombmost people don’t have dizney plus they’ll jus rent the movie ,this movie is targeted towards older people and they don’t go to the movies as much as teens
Plain and simple: No one wanted to see a depressed old man Indiana Jones moping around and yelling at kids to keep their music down while being dragged on an adventure where’s he’s clowned around and saved by his goddaughter.
@@mike91mdk45 lol, you really think he’s only doing it for money at this point? He’s 80 and loves this franchise, he wouldn’t have done another movie if he didn’t like the direction of the story
I’m 17, I went to see the movie today (a holiday where I’m from) only about 20 people there, none of them under the age of 35. You are definitely right, younger people just don’t care about old-fashioned characters like Indy
I thought the same thing too. I’m 26 and was kinda surprised that they’re were more people in their 30’s or older for my screening. I feel like Indiana Jones is outdated for the new generation.
It's the same with Star Wars. Zoomers just don't care. the target audience of star wars are people who were kids when 4-6 and 1-3 released. if they wouldn't have made the star wars event in fortnite most zoomers wouldn't even know what star wars is. entertainment in general shifted. when the old star wars movies came out there wasn't a single live service game. today you can play games 24/7 and that's what most zoomers do. they don't give a shit about movies or the theater experience. if they can't watch it on their second screen while playing games, they simple don't watch it at all. hell, even many millennials are that way...
I’m 25 and my wife and I went to go see it on Friday. Been a huge Indiana Jones fan since I first saw them when I was about 8-9, and my dad was always a huge Indy fan as well. Our theater was probably only half full on Friday, and most of the people I would say were late 30s-early 40s. Granted we saw it in IMAX, but even so something’s wrong if a theater isn’t full on opening weekend for an Indiana Jones movie. However looking at how they promoted the film, I probably wouldn’t have been in a hurry to see it if I wasn’t already a big Indiana Jones fan.
Finally we have a honest non-biased breakdown of why this movie didn't work. You summed it up perfectly. I grew up in the 80s and 90s and watched the Indy movies. When this was announced I wondered who, other than someone like me, would check this out. Disney really made a huge mistake spending so much money on this. All of your points are absolutely valid. Harrison Ford is a legend and is well respected by everyone, even the younger people who may be familiar with his work. HOWEVER, there isn't enough younger people that are wild about him to actually show up at his movie. One way that Disney could have countered that is to release Indy AFTER Captain America: Brave New World in which Harrison has a big role as "Red Hulk". That movie would theoretically put Harrison Ford back on the map in the minds of the younger audience and may have helped boost the audience for Indy 5. At the end of the day, it may not have saved that movie but I dont think it would have hurt it either.
You could apply the exact same logic to Tom Cruise being less familiar with younger audiences, but his movies are doing just fine. There goes your theory.
Wish younger people watched these movies more. As a 20 year old, Im sad this is a thing and I grew up with Indiana Jones as raiders of the lost ark is my favorite movie of all time.
You like Indiana Jones because you were exposed to the franchise when you were a kid. Parents of millennials and zoomers failed to expose them to one of the most iconic characters.
The funny thing is the release of the new movie is making people go back to watch the old ones haha. Raiders was on the tv yesterday and we watched it, I just watched Crusade a couple hours ago on Disney+ and it was even better again than I remember it That or I’m a bit starved for a actual great movie lol
This movie came out at the wrong time. There should've been a legacy sequel in the early 2000's and then maybe one more in the 2010's. Making a 5th movie 15 years after the 4th movie which was already 19 years after the 3rd movie makes little sense
Crystal Skull was that legacy sequel and it ended with the perfect bow on top. Unfortunately Shia Labeouf went off the rails so he was abandoned as a leading star. The filmmakers saw Ford do a decent job as Han and figured "we can squeeze one more out of Ford before he croaks". Ford always liked Indiana more than Han anyway and I'm sure he's pleased with a massive paycheck.
Hell, I'm 51 and didn't want to see grampa Indy. Add insufferable girl boss and that's an easy pass. Lucas was brilliant. He always added a prominent character for kids as the principles aged. Ewoks, Short Round, Jar Jar, and even Mutt. Here you have Helena's sidekick, but he wasn't featured in marketing materials that I could see.
I mean the movie was filmed during COVID, had to stop production because of Harrisons injury, used deaging for at least 30min (and Ford looks much older than Jackson did in Captain Marvel) and the movie was mostly filmed on location (and the third act is very large scale and was probably very expensive as well) They shot all over England and Scotland, Italy and Morocco. Moving film equpment, cast and crew all over the world is already pretty expensive, but doing that with COVID restrictions etc? Even more expensive. I imagine the orignal budget was going to be around 200M.
Indiana Jones was a spectacle! I was 6 years old when I remember Temple of Doom had lines around the block to watch the movie a week after it premiered a week before.
But if the people of the Cannes Film Festival aren't the people who will enjoy a big crowd pleasing movie .... why did they give Tom Cruise an award and say how great Top Gun Maverick was in 2022?
@@gbrow1604It’s a good film, but it’s a film that’s 15 years to late that released smack dab in the middle of a busy summer. The audience scores has the moving placed in the high 80s
John Wick built its own fan base instead of relying on Nostalgia or trying to win a new modern audience with an old IP. They could have gotten money from any Indiana Jones fan if they put in Short Round and made Indy like he was.
Nah, Harrison Ford is Indiana Jones. There's a point where Hollywood needs to just create their own new movie franchises instead of bringing back old ideas to reboot.
Several of these reasons have kept me from getting interested, but the #1 is that I didn’t trust Lucasfilm to make a good Indy movie. I was almost expecting them to end the movie him passing the torch to Helena, but it sounds like they at least had the sense to not go that far.
I’m pretty sure it mostly comes down to the generation that would go see this film is sick and tired of the woke politics of Disney and unofficially boycotted the film.
My uncle played snaggle tooth in star wars 1977 he was proud of his two weeks work on it . Seeing the recent sequels and what disney did to luke was so wrong. In some ways disney have tarnished the legacy of those original films sadly . My uncle told me george lucas was a joy to work with as well as harrison ford .
wow that is very cool dude! You must be one lucky nephew, funnily enough my aunt was good friends w the Fisher family and got me a handwritten signed Empire poster by Carrie back in 2015 for my bar mitzvah, only a year before she passed
I think it’s because people now know that they can wait till it goes to streaming in a couple months to go see it. There’s no urgancy to watch any movies anymore like it was back when movies would go to streaming six months later. Now, you have movies going to streaming while it's still in theaters.
To me, it seemed like Disney had issues marketing the film. This movie should have been positioned to be an event film, and they didn’t have a plan in place to build the buzz to make it perform like one.
I think it may have some legs though. It has 9 days of breathing room to establish some staying power, and with actual word of mouth being much stronger than the early negative buzz, the 40+ crowd that doesn’t run out to see movies opening weekend might yet give this film life.
You hit the nail on the head with this review. I went to see Indy 5 yesterday... I actually like the movie overall and agree that it's an improvement over 4. Our theater was filled with people older than me... I am 50. I only missed Raiders at the theater as my mom thought I was too young.. anyway, It's a shame that it's not doing better, but... I like the movie. Now if GI JOE can be done right then we're onto something...It's been a weird year with having Indy and Batman back like it's 1989 again. Thanks for your review.
I can't stand an independent, snarky, empowered strong woman that's insufferable - like Phoebe what's er name. I do like a woman that's independent, strong while also likeable and sexy. Like f'rinstance, waaait fooooor itttt, MARION in the original Raiders.
If we imagine that Indiana is a real person we can say that after all he’s been through he doesn’t deserve to be harped at by a self indulgent bitchy and rather unattractive skinny British woman. (Now we know that Kathleen Kennedy had a type)
It is not better than 4 at all. Stop constantly pointing out monkey scene. Its horrible but its like 2 seconds. Fridge scene is absolutely ok. Of course. Movie’s audience is 36-70. I am 40 and was there with my dad who is 70 hah. But there were young people. But the theater overall was empty
I saw the movie and thought it was alright and our theater people older than me.I have no interest with indiana jones at all and I feel the same way with Michael keaton batman movies as well. Same thing, have no interest or connection to them but people who are in their late 30s and 40s will probably pick keaton as their favorite batman and other people who are in their 20s like me since I'm 24 will pick Bale as their favorite batman.
I'm a zoomer, and I thought Indiana Jones was much more popular that it was. This movie taught me that like 95% of gen z'ers didn't care about this franchise. I'm 19, and I was easily the youngest person in the theater and the only person under 50 who I know who was hyped for this movie. Indy is easily my favorite franchise and Raiders is my favorite movie of all time. I liked this movie though. I agree with your points though, I was very skeptical of the movie, and I think the bad and borderline slanderous internet buzz around it drove some people under 30 away from the film.
Yea I’m 24 so most of our first Indy film anyone around my age group was crystal skull. I enjoyed it as a kid still love it how but Indiana Jones is a relic of the 80s
Other generations do love Indy and go to the theater, but most generations hate this woke s@@t unlike Zoomers. We don't want to see another iconic male character get treated like a burned-out loser and working with some smug English chick. We learned our lesson from The Last Jedi.
Yeah Im 29 so crystal skull is the only one I saw in theaters. As a kid I liked it and nostalgia keeps me from downgrading it to much. However my father hated it and wouldn't have gone to see dial of destiny if I hadn't bribed him with pizza first. I was the youngest member of the audience. Good analysis sir.
Yeah. Crystal Skull does get a little too much hate. Now it's not a good Indiana Jones film. But it's not a bad film either and I still cracked up with the vine swinging Shia Labuaf. Not to mention some of Indi's one liners, him still being afraid of snakes, and yes, the nuke fridge scene I liked too. So when I saw the teaser for Dial of Destiny, I wasn't sure if I was hyped for it or not. But it wasn't until I heard about the reshoots that made me realize this film's in trouble. So I was glad to duck out. But at that point, I was already duct out because I didn't want to see another Lucasfilm movie until Kathy Kennedy is permanently gone. Surfice to say, she still works at Lucasfilm. She really brought this on herself. So yeah. Indiana Jones 5 is considered the worst one.
I can understand why teenagers aren't interested. But it seems odd to judge a film aimed at older people on its opening weekend performance, when we rarely go then
@@bathecat9834 I forgot about avatar, but just because a movie didn’t flop doesn’t mean it’s profitable. All of their movies except those two have not earned back their budgets, so they have failed and only taken losses on all those films.
Like you aluded to, I think multiple things contributed to the poor showing. Personally, the most glaring problem Dial of Destiny had its need for existence. While it was awesome to see Indy on the big screen for the first time (born in 02', didn't see Crystal Skulls), making a film based on _the_ call to action/adventure character while his actor is in his 80s naturally limits the film. This also creates a higher demand for VFX to compensate. Just like Luke in TLJ, LucasFilm made the decision to turn their franchise's/IP's main hero into an depressed verison of themsleves that audiences simply don't want to see. Just because a character ages doesn't allow incite sadness and despair like Luke/Indy endured. Of course, external reasons for the film's bomb hurt it too, but I think that the franchise should have ended with Indy and his dad riding off into the sunset in _The Last Crusade_ . It really highlights the diminshing return issue that franchise IP's tend to have.
I loved the Indiana Jones movies as a kid, I thought the Last Crusade was a perfect ending for the franchise. I watched the Crystal Skulls and went why? And this movie is even more of a why? Not to mention I don’t trust Disney to handle Indiana Jones with anything like the respect and care a beloved icon deserves. Disney has lost my trust in their ability to make something worth watching and that makes me sad.
There are no such things as perfect endings or send-offs, only good ones meant as a way of satisfaction. Also, the reason why Dial of Destiny needs to exist is to wipe away the horrible wound that is Crystal Skull. I mean, Sci-Fi Aliens, really George Lucas in an Indiana Jones movie?
I didn't even see Disney attempt to market this film to younger generations. For example, the Disneyland ride is one of the most popular yet it was not renovated to coincide with this film. A totally missed opportunity. Usually Disney is very forward thinking abt cross-media marketing but this was an oversight. I'm 29 and gree up watching the original trilogy with my parents. I went as a kid to see Crystal Skull with my family because the film felt like an EVENT. The trailer for Dial looked awful esp the de-aging done to Ford. I have no desire to see this one and will wait for streaming b
It wasn't meant to be a giant spectacle it was meant to be special and that's 100% what it was for 3 movies. Honestly... That ride off into the sunset in Last Crusade. THAT WAS IT.. The perfect ending. They should have remade Allan Quatermain instead.
The fact I and many other massive Indy fans out there were skeptical for it I think are reason enough for it bombing. At that point you’ve lost trust with your top consumers. I think another big reason is that unfortunately my generation (I’m 18 so whatever generation that is) have no clue what Indiana Jones is and don’t have an appreciation for it. They’re not going to go watch something like this. The audience that will are much older and have better control over their money. They were probably skeptical as well, and chose to wait to catch it on streaming. These are just my guesses. Also no Spielberg… or Lucas. Only Kennedy and her team at Lucasfilm. I can’t speak for everyone but that’s a big reason people don’t trust Lucasfilm nowadays…
You be surprise how many young people like Indiana Jones , my brother and I grew on the Lego Indiana Jones game and later we saw the movies, so we are going to see the fifth one
@@yveltalpoderoso1303 as did I. Literally I have your same story. Started with the Lego games, begged my parents to rent the movies from Blockbuster nearly every week, had a bunch of toys, figures, legos, etc. Not saying there isn’t love for it within our generation. I’m saying there’s not many people. You wouldn’t see the same amount of love for Indy from our generation you would see for Marvel and it’s MCU for example…
Honestly i feel a big reason is that it is the last one and only people that care about the theatrical experience will see it and the others will just see it whrn it hits blu ray/streaming. The money it makes wont go into making another one so it doesn't matter much to fans if it doesn't make as much as the others in a profit sense, i saw the film twice and enjoyed it and i hope it can do well but not gonna bat an eye if it doesn't.
Thank you for mentioning the “Woke-Police” who clearly have an agenda beyond critiquing films (Critical Drinker exhibit A). I am perfectly fine with harsh critique - Sean seems to critique films relatively free of bias - but too many “critics”’really just want to shove in words like “girl boss” and “Mary Sue” in place of actual thought.
The thing is, movies now a day are filled with this “mary sue” characters that indeed seen like perfect and always do things better than our childhood hero. Instead pf giving them a character development arc like most of the other people have, they instantly make them mary sue.
@@adahidgalan2882 it’s just a lazy critique that doesn’t mean anything other than “I don’t like OP female characters.” Plenty of male characters fit the same description, but don’t get singled out. John Wick is the ultimate dude Mary Sue, but no one labels him separately.
@@thearchivist250John Wick isn't overconfident and he's usually got the movies all to himself. Much of these "Mary Sue" complains come from new female characters that are "upstaging" the established characters. The worst part of the likes of CD is that he's not entirely wrong. That makes his narrative stronger. Disney is inadvertently actually playing on their side.
@@ThePrinceofHisOwnKingdom pretty much agree with you. It is hard to like someone who hasn’t gone through the hero’s journey and instantly is an op without even training. The is no struggle to what they can do. They are label Mary sue because of it. Imagine Luke training all his life to only be replace by Ray just because “she can”. Same can be said about any other character regardless of the gender. If there is no struggle, you don’t tend to like the character. That’s why most of the new super hero movies are flopping. This new heroes do not go through any problem and end up in the same place they were at the beginning. Look at Thor 4, Antman 3, Rey Skywalker, Flash (he didn’t learn from the problems of time traveling). But yeah normally they are trying to push girls to be better than their old counterpart without any training or proper development and struggle are called mary sue.
@@adahidgalan2882 It’s just about story and character development. Captain America gets a single injection and is almost perfect ever after. Still great movies. Rey isn’t initially OP, yeah she has an accelerated ramp cause main character in Force Awakens, but whatever cause next two SW films are terrible. Luke has almost no training (how long on Dagoba in ESB? Two weeks max?) then just self trains I guess off camera. Miles Morales literally goes from nothing to almost perfect Spider-Man in 5 minutes after a sad talking to from Peter and his Dad. And Into the Spider-Verse one of the best films ever of any genre. John Wick goes from years of retirement and to kicking ass instantly.
If this movie was about 30 minutes shorter I’d view it in the Theater. My wife and I are in the target demographic (and loved the first three movies); but when any movie goes over 2-and-a-half hours we just wait for it to go to Digital. There’s just so much being pushed at us via all the various streaming services that we never lack for something to view - so we can just wait for the movie to become available on Digital - where we can conveniently pause the movie when needed. It doesn’t help that the experience in the theater is only marginally better now than viewing the movie in our Home Theater with Dolby Atmos.
They keep wrecking classic characters, simple as. Deconstructed heros aren't always the best way to go about a movie. The "bad reviews" actually increased my interest because critics don't usually love these types of movies.
@@dawsynasay4841 I’ve kinda resisted saying Star Wars because there is still so much more you can do with it. What happened before the republic? What happened after the sequels? If the main Star Wars trilogy happened long ago, how is it now?
Aliens and Terminator also need to call it quits. We will never good a film in either franchise that will even be close to what they were in their prime.
I think the difference between Uncharted and Indy is that kids play the Uncharted games, so they knew the characters and wanted to see the movie. I saw Raiders at the age of 11 and loved it, but I suppose the youth of today aren't the youth of 40 odd years ago, they prefer more explosions, less talking, it's a shame, but I think it is true. But then, again, Top Gun came out in '86, The Last Crusade came out in '89 and yet the audience was there for Top Gun Maverick, and not there for Indy, so it's not that people won't go see an old established character, they just want a good movie. I remember Chris Pine was asked when Star Trek 2009 came out if it would appeal to a new generation of movie goers and he stated that the average movie goer needed more excitement, more explosions, more action to keep their attention than the normal Trek movies and shows gave, so his was different to pull the new audience in.
Let’s not pretend a lot of thought went into this movie. Clearly every single big studio is hopping onto the nostalgia train and the (not incredibly competent) executives at Lucasfilm thought “We haven’t done Indiana Jones yet, and Harrison Ford is about to retire!”. Now, keep in mind, this is coming from someone who didn’t hate the movie. I thought it was generic but fun, and I can still tell you a thousand reasons Dial of Destiny shouldn’t have been made. I’m not necessarily mad at the product that we got, I’m just mad the movie was made in the first place.
Kathleen kennedy and phoebe waller bridge are the 2 biggest reasons…but you offer some very good legitimate points also in particular turning our hero into a supporting character whos on his last legs
@@kill3rs529 or even Kathleen Kennedy, for that matter. Yes I agree she's a terrible producer but I just think "the average Joe" isn't gonna really be interested in a new Indiana Jones film where the main lead is an 80 year old man so many years after the last one came out, which isn't particularly well liked by quite alot of people.
Great breakdown! I wouldn't be shocked if the budget was even closer to $350 million. I actually enjoyed the movie, didn't love it (went in with super low expectations too).
Nah. The people who care about Disneys politics and care about it so much in an Indy movie are the people he addressed whining about woke this and woke that crap.
Can't believe the same guy who directed 3:10 To Yuma, Logan, and Ford v Ferrari made something so generic and nonsensical. That's not the reason it flopped but it certainly won't help moving forward
Mangold will be fine. He’s already in the process of making a Dylan biopic, and he’ll be making a Swamp Thing movie after that. Indiana Jones 5 was never going to do well regardless of who made it
I’m shocked, yet not shocked. There’s a huge anti Disney sentiment out there politically but at the end of the day I still thought it would pull in a lot more. Mind you the mistake of opening it early at Cannes didn’t help….
$330 million to produce... that they'll own up to. Another $100 million MINIMUM marketing spend, and i'm being super generous there. They had superbowl spots and ads in the subways. Those things together = $1 Billion to break even. I've never met an investor that wanted their investment to break even... have you? This fish stinks
It's rumoured it originally only, and I say only even though this is still a ridiculous amount, $200 million to make, but they had a ton of reshoots after terrible test screenings. Now James Mangold will tell you there wasn't a single reshoot, but John Williams, the famous composer, stated he had to rescore some music because of the reshoots. Also there is no way they spent $300 million without a hell of a lot of reshooting, the CGI wouldn't have cost that much, not when you compare it to an MCU movie that usually come in under $200 million.
Williams confirmed he was mistaken and that his quote was taken out of context. There was also zero test screenings done for this film; that has been backed up by several sources. This movie cost $300 million because of location shoots, ton of CGI, a delay in filming due to Ford injuring himself, and COVID restrictions. GOTG3 cost $250 million and Ant-Man was $200 million. Don’t be an idiot
No dude, the reason Indy 5 is failing is because fans are tired of Kathleen Kennedy purposely destroying the iconic male hero characters that many of us grew up with and trying to replace them with hollow Mary Sue female girl boss lead characters. KK needs to be gone.
Films released in 1987: Predator RoboCop Lethal Weapon The Lost Boys Full Metal Jacket The Princess Bride HellRaiser InnerSpace The Running Man Evil Dead 2 Empire of the Sun Beverly Hills Cop 2 The Untouchables Trains, Planes and automobiles The Witches of Eastwick Good Morning Vietnam Creepshow 2 Harry and the Hendersons The Gate Batteries not included Hamburger Hill Dirty Dancing Masters of the Universe - & over 3,787 additional films released internationally that year.. Contrast...
It really comes down to one reason: Phoebe Waller-Bridge. That's it. Her character was leaked over a year ago and how she was going to ruin the film. This already turned off a lot more hardcore Indy fans. Then it opened in Cannes. The RT 🍅 scores were horrible. Some of the audience were said to be looking bored. So then the early reviews come in from some of the core Indy fans and it was all true. That's why nobody ran out to watch this film. This was a year-long process of "lowering" expectations from those leaks because Kathleen Kennedy inserted herself into this film. Emasculate another iconic character after turning into an old man. Luke Skywalker, Obi-Wan Kenobi, Han Solo, Willow, and Indiana Jones all broken down old men. Han and Indy were separated from their wives. And only Pete 'Maverick' Mitchell and Johnny Lawrence got the finale they deserved.
Only massive online dorks saw an issue with any of these things. Like 20% of box office earnings come from hardcore fans. The rest has to be filled by the general public and they don't care abt "emasculation" or whatever else u incel keyboard warriors cry abt. No one cares abt Indiana anymore and creating a 5th movie after the 4th properly wrapped up the series makes no sense. The only people that care abt seeing this movie are folks in their 50s.
Dude, Johnny Lawrence got the most epic conclusion ever. He grows up, becomes a better man, and gets a second shot at being a father. He then goes into Iron Eagle ass-kicking overdrive when he sees the sonogram photo of his child and its the best scene of any 80's legacy character ever made (with Danny LaRusso crane kicking Terry Silver a close second). Cobra Kai f*cking rules. THAT'S how you tell stories with legacy characters. If you can't tell an Indy 5 story that leaves the audience pumping their fists and and cheering at the credits...DON'T MAKE IT.
Maybe to you incels it is… I will admit that her character isn’t well written but that doesn’t change the fact that this film is a generic CGI fuck fest devoid of any character
Even without considering the revenue potential, you have to question why so much more money needed to be spent. If they can make Raiders for 80million in today's money, then double that should have been plenty. Less CGI, more practical techniques, clever decisions and letting the script take more responsibility to engage the audience, would saved them a fortune and made a film that probably would have brought in a lot more too.
Seemed like a feminist picture where they brought Indi to simply play second fiddle and make her look good. I’d rather stick to having good memories than watching that type of nonsense
The film wasnt meant to cost that much money. The price tag that was greanlit was closer to half the budget, with $200m be the absolute max after marketing and advertising. The budget blew up because, first off, the de-aging cgi had to be fixed and worked with a few times to get it looking decent. As you can tell, they didnt de-age Harrison's voice. The ending had to be reshot. Fleabag was going to take Indy's place as he dies in the ancient past. We would have seen Fleabag doing past Indy adventures in his place. All that was changed. Since the ending was changed, the moments leading up to that crap ending had to all be re-edited. All this costed tons & tons of money. Then advertising and marketing? Money thrown at this "hand over fist". (
I thought it was alright but I don't like how they did the whole deconstruct the character and make them a sad old man like they did with Han and Luke. I'm also one of the few that likes Kingdom of the Crystal Skull so to kill Mutt off screen and have Marrion and Indy divorced wasn't great in my opinion.
2:33 I think the reason is twofold: One Disney tends to spend too much on their movies nowadays. (which you discussed on Sean Chandler Plus). Two this isn't the first time Kathleen Kennedy has increased the budget much higher than it should have been (I.E. Solo and Rise of Skywalker.) 3:17 Let's just settle this inflation issue here and now in today's money: Raiders of The Lost Ark cost: $60,223,168.32 and its Domestic Opening was: $27,789,054.25 Temple of Doom cost: $81,959,153.03 and its Domestic Opening was: $74,164,574.14 Last Crusade cost: $117,726,580.65 and its Domestic Opening was: $71,997,213.48 And Kingdom of the Crystal Skull cost: $261,322,392.16 and its domestic opening was: $141,450,046.42 Meanwhile Dial of Destiny cost: $300,000,000 and its domestic opening was $60,368,101 Pretty easy to see how this film cost way too much and earned way too little. 4:30 Sleep with one eye open Sean because you didn't include either Kotor games on the wall of Star Wars games you just projected so better stay vigilant of people that see them get snubbed and will make it so that you better triple-check the locks on your doors at night.
I died when you said grandpa vibes 😂 which is true even though I love the man and he has brought so much greatness to film. Only thing I would add is the unnecessary nature of the movie. Even though the last one was not popular among the fans, it seemed to end on a finality. I guess the same thing could be said for Last Crusade and Star Wars, but Harrison is 80! There is no compelling story to tell there
Can we stop labeling things a bomb when it’s only been out for five days?? Like seriously, Marvel opening weekend numbers have taken the nuance out of box office analytics.
Here was the reason I haven’t wanted to see it. I don’t wanna watch a movie where the main character is belittled and replaced by some generic strong female lead. Why do I gotta watch a great character get told how to be the character he is…
5:03 I have to disagree here. Top Gun: Maverick. Top Gun was a movie for its time. I was in High School when it came out. It never became a franchise, it is chocked full of what people call anachronistic attitudes. It had been over forty years since it was in theaters, yet Maverick's global box office was 1.4 billion. Maverick was not a character that was beloved like Indiana Jones was. I simply don't think that age of the films, or even age of the main character is the issue. It is because it is a deconstruction, just like Last Jedi. It is a Kathleen Kennedy self-insert, again, and it features a terrible woman in Phoebe Waller-Bridge. It insulted the fans, where as Tom Cruise courted and praised, and thanked the fans. Nobody trusts Disney after the spate of other films doing the same thing.
I just don’t think that average, everyday people were interested in watching this movie. The audiences that rush out to watch movies in their opening weekend aren’t people who are terribly interested in the Indiana Jones franchise. So, that means that the opening weekend isn’t going to be great.
I'm interested in indiana jones, I am not interested in an 80 year old Indiana jones however or one that is made by Disney. Just let the franchise rest in piece
@@vitalizhdanov1397 There’s some truth to that. But here are some reasons why I don’t think those movies are a one to one comparison. 1. Tom Cruise is 20 years younger than Harrison Ford 2. Tom Cruise is currently a much bigger movie star than Harrison Ford 3. Top Gun: Maverick has incredibly broad appeal that Dial of Destiny doesn’t have 4. Top Gun: Maverick’s a movie that was absolutely worth the theatrical experience, while Dial of Destiny doesn’t have anything like that 5. Top Gun: Maverick is a significantly more liked movie than Dial of Destiny
I’m 19 and I’ve always loved Indiana Jones ever since I was around 4 to 5 years old so it’s sad how not a lot of people around my age aren’t interested in these movies or this character
Since so many movies failed this year, I don't think there is one universal answer to why? And we have different studios - Disney/Pixar/Marvel, WB/DC, and such. But most of them have streaming services, which have gotten the audience's money and trained people that the movies will show up in 45, 60 , or 90 days.
I am 39 and have no desire to see this movie simply because the last movie was so awful. I just refuse to have that feeling again. Plus an 80 year old Indiana Jones just sounds sad.
My thoughts on the film now that I've seen it. No spoilers, actually. 1) His age. You knew how old Ford was walking in the door, so you can't slam the movie for that. That's a non issue. They even address it in dialogue in a few places where Indy was talking about how everything hurts when he's doing things. 2) The de-aged Harrison Ford looked like what I remember him looking like in the mid 80s'. There might have been one or two small bits where it was kind of noticeable, but I had no issues. The de-aged stuff was 100% in the first action segment which took the first 10 mins of the movie or so. After that it was current Ford. 3) They definitely date the movie by having a neighbor of Indy's playing Beatles music. 4) A tad too long at 2.5 hours I thought. It dragged a bit in the non action sequences once you're about 2/3 of the way in, but it's not THAT bad, really. 5) Phoebe Waller Bridge's character worked well for me. I kept thinking she was both a friend and a foe at the same time, so that's a good unknown. 6) There was one scene towards the end of the movie that I won't ruin, but felt WRONG to me. Like "We're doing this? For real?" I didn't care for this scene, much in the same way the alien ship taking off at the end of 4 made me go "Really?" But beyond that last one I had a good time. Did I enjoy it? Yes. Was it necessary? No, not really. It was also an ending to the series as well. No post credit scene.
Excellent breakdown and presentation. You got a new subscriber. Only suggestion: look up synonyms for skeptical and use them. (You said skeptical way too many times.)
The movie Indy 5 suppose to make me escape into another reality to make me happy and hopeful. I already can get that same reality from watching documentaries from TV. I left the theater feeling sad and depressed.
The problem is they flat out could have made this amazing with getting short round, maybe cgi Sean Connery, and Shia back at the end or something but they wanted to focus on Helena who’s by far the worst side kick.
Why can't they explore aging with beloved heroes they create? Because Disney hasn't created a beloved hero that isn't based on established media in over 20 years? Exactly. I appreciate you looking for extra reasons for this film's failure. Some were interesting to think about. But the core is that Kathleen is an abysmal producer that has no clue what fans want and will pay for yet still spends $100s of millions on movies that no one wants to see. And Disney is a failing company. You don't need to look deeper than that.
Obsessive craftsmanship wins the box office; not lazy filmmaking. Therefore John Wick 4 > Indy 5; Top Gun Maverick > Indy 5. James Cameron > Indy 5. Don’t overspend and underdeliver. Movie goers are not as forgiving as they used to. Hollywood needs to go back to basics. Focus on stories, authenticity, and originality. Movie goers want to see obsessive craftsmanship not lazy use of CGI. That’s why James Cameron and Tom Cruise are rewarded by movie-goers, while The Flash and Dial of Destiny are rejected by them.
I don't think it's about audiences getting bored or whatever, I think it's about attention being split. People just saw Guardians 3 and Across the Spider-Verse, and now Indiana is out against the latter plus Elemental, Transformers, etc. It's alot of big movies in a short time period
what are you even talking about. Guardians 3 came out in may. everyone who wanted to see it, saw it 1-2 months ago... Across the Spider-Verse came out 1st of June. that's now over a month old. Everyone who wanted to see it had 4 weeks. that's like an aeon in the movie industry LEL Not a single person didn't go watch Indiana 5 because he didn't saw Guardians 3 or Across the Spider-Verse yet. If you waited that long, you didn't care about those in the first place. so if you would want to watch one of those now and Indi 5 would be good, you would just watch it because that's what people talk about now.
@@mike91mdk45 i mean it made 60 million domestic. For a movie aimed at older audiences from an IP that isn't exactly relevant starring an 80 year old, that's impressive. It just as a budget that's way too big, and strong competition
@@owenmenning3878 yes but >most< people watch a movie around the release and not 4-6 weeks later. No one said people watch movies only in the first week they release but >the most< people watch a movie when it's fresh. There will never be more people watching than in the first week. If the movie doesn't get enough people to watch it in the first week, it's over. There is no comeback from this.
Or you’re just a sexist wacko who allows Kennedy to live rent free in your head? You people act like Kennedy killed your entire family. Seriously, it’s pathetic
If you like this type of content, I do a weekly box-office round up lives team on Patreon. Join at any level to gain access to the box-office live stream as well as the weekly 90 minute Q&A. Learn more here: www.patreon.com/seanchandler
more like Dial of Dullness ....
Your video should be retitled: 9 Reasons Why It's Too Soon To Say Dial of Destiny Bombed Since June 30, 2023.
Are you jealous that most of the Fandom Menace sites have more subscribers than you?
WHAT HAPPENED? Women wearing "THE FORCE IS FEMALE" T-shirts got control of the franchise and turned it into a female mary sue lesbian like fantasy movie where women run everything and run rings around men. Kind of like what they did to the Star Wars Franchise and even the Galactic Starcruiser Hotel Experience.
People hate Disney.not Lucasfilm
I think that all the studios are finally getting their lessons served to them about what we want, and why we don't like what we're getting. It's the year of the audience.
I think it’s more so the year that audiences are getting bored and tired, and realizing that they’re not actually liking what they’re getting. People aren’t boycotting these movies, they’ve just stopped caring enough to buy tickets. But in a sense you’re right that studios are only doing this to themselves.
Bruh that’s exactly what he said thanks for the correction dork
So what do people want to see?
@@michaeljordan5630 Original stories that aren't agenda driven.
You make it sound as if audiences used to go to see films they didn't expect to enjoy! It's always been the year of the audience
Also, Top Gun Maverick and John Wick 4 both had great word of mouth. Indy 5 has had a negative buzz.
I don't think most people have a problem with a God Daughter taking the lead role and taking over the Indiana Jones in the future. However, If they were going to do that, they needed to cast the equivalent of a younger Harrison Ford. That girl would need to be a Star and would have been able to carry the movie. Phoebe Waller Bridge, just isn't that actress. She's Not "A Star" meant to lead a movie to a billion dollar box office number. Anyone could have told Kathleen Kennedy that.. and I'm sure they did and they were silenced. 💩
There's a John Wick movie?
AND Top Gun was the first time audiences really got out after the pandemic, so people were ready to go.
Between this video and The Flash box office breakdown, I'm loving how on point you are with these. Very logical and unbiased - there's always much more than one reason for low ticket sales
The flash is a special case
You left one out. Its not just skepticism with Lucasfilm. Disney itself is a damaged brand. There are a LOT of people who have completely written off Disney in general
ONE OF THE REASONS: Phoebe Waller Bridge’s Character. I wanted characters that we already knew and loved and who treated Indy with respect. I wanted so much more of Marion. I want to see Short Round & more Salah.
I think it was a mistake introducing a new character that no one cared about and who wasn’t tied to a character that we cared about.
That he completely walks around this 500 gorilla turd in the room tells me all I need to know.
Well, she was tied to Indy; it was just executed poorly. And her purpose was the same as Shia's the last time around: Draw in new, young viewers and establish a younger actor to take over as the franchise's lead, which makes perfect business sense and is fine in and of itself. The problem with SLB was that he publicly self-destructed in spectacular fashion right after they made that movie, including openly shitting on it himself. The problem with PWB is that she clearly wasn't a draw for effectively anyone as well as the inane idea rampant under Kathleen Kennedy's reign that to raise up the new generation, you have to tear down the old. (By contrast, most of the recent MCU projects have had their own share of writing problems, but - with the possible exception of Secret Invasion (Soren and Maria Hill got very lazy fridgings, and Talos and Nick Fury exude sad old man energy in first two eps) - all the passings of the baton so far have been done respectfully.)
THE worst side character ever (even though she really is the lead character!). I hated her in Fleabag but went in open minded for this film and she grated on my soul after 5 minutes. Someone telling us how great and hot she is whilst age shaming our hero and laughing minutes after Indy's friend is murdered is not going to make people enamoured with your character. The fact that she is the action lead who saves Indy repeatedly and even knocks him out for at least several hours with one punch is just icing on the cake. Truly awful.
@@brobogan5102 Yeah no doubt, I kept waiting for her character to be brought up, as she is reason #1 on everyone's list of why this movie has done so poorly, and it's like, ok, he's trying to do something different here, but you can't just ignore her, it's disingenuous.
@TheLucasbuck well he was an 80 year old man lol and nah the girl from Temple of Doom who begs for his help one minute and screams at him the next was a far more irritating cliche.
21:48 for reference. John Wick 4 had budget of 100 mil, opening weekend made around 74 domestic and 64 mil international so 138. Indy was 129 (60 US, 69 int). Wick ended up 187 domestic 245 international for 432 total. And Indy will probably end up in low 400s. The difference is literally that JW4 has break even at like 250-300 mil, while Indy's is like 750 or more. They both performed similar in first weekend.
Don't forget that John Wick 4 will bring in streaming revenue. Indy 5 will go straight to D+ where nobody will pay extra to see it
@@gimlisbeardcomb That's a good point!
It's weird to me that a fourth movie in an action franchise starring Keanu Reeves that started with his dog dying would out gross an Indiana Jones movie and a Flash movie with Michael Keaton's Batman returning!
@@gimlisbeardcombmost people don’t have dizney plus they’ll jus rent the movie ,this movie is targeted towards older people and they don’t go to the movies as much as teens
I also think John Wick 4 will show to have much better legs at the box office. Indiana Jones will have a massive dip this week.
The reviewer that said "this film makes him a real hero with flaws" has apparently never watched a previous Indiana Jones movie...
He wasn’t wrong
@@handznetyes he was
@@handznetNo, he was very wrong.
Plain and simple: No one wanted to see a depressed old man Indiana Jones moping around and yelling at kids to keep their music down while being dragged on an adventure where’s he’s clowned around and saved by his goddaughter.
Well, Harrison Ford himself would disagree with you based off his interviews
Facts
@jackdubs25 I'm sure harrison has a few million reasons to disagree..
@@mike91mdk45 lol, you really think he’s only doing it for money at this point? He’s 80 and loves this franchise, he wouldn’t have done another movie if he didn’t like the direction of the story
I’m 17, I went to see the movie today (a holiday where I’m from) only about 20 people there, none of them under the age of 35. You are definitely right, younger people just don’t care about old-fashioned characters like Indy
Man I’m in that minority too. Aside from most people my age, I enjoy 80s and 90s classics.
I thought the same thing too. I’m 26 and was kinda surprised that they’re were more people in their 30’s or older for my screening. I feel like Indiana Jones is outdated for the new generation.
Older ones don't care about "crabby old man Indy" either!
It's the same with Star Wars. Zoomers just don't care. the target audience of star wars are people who were kids when 4-6 and 1-3 released. if they wouldn't have made the star wars event in fortnite most zoomers wouldn't even know what star wars is. entertainment in general shifted. when the old star wars movies came out there wasn't a single live service game. today you can play games 24/7 and that's what most zoomers do. they don't give a shit about movies or the theater experience. if they can't watch it on their second screen while playing games, they simple don't watch it at all. hell, even many millennials are that way...
I’m 25 and my wife and I went to go see it on Friday. Been a huge Indiana Jones fan since I first saw them when I was about 8-9, and my dad was always a huge Indy fan as well. Our theater was probably only half full on Friday, and most of the people I would say were late 30s-early 40s. Granted we saw it in IMAX, but even so something’s wrong if a theater isn’t full on opening weekend for an Indiana Jones movie. However looking at how they promoted the film, I probably wouldn’t have been in a hurry to see it if I wasn’t already a big Indiana Jones fan.
By my math, that means almost 3 times as many people bought tickets for crystal skull than dial of destiny… ouch :(
Kathleen Kennedy and Disney reputation definitely hurt this but most of these are also good points
Finally we have a honest non-biased breakdown of why this movie didn't work. You summed it up perfectly. I grew up in the 80s and 90s and watched the Indy movies. When this was announced I wondered who, other than someone like me, would check this out. Disney really made a huge mistake spending so much money on this.
All of your points are absolutely valid. Harrison Ford is a legend and is well respected by everyone, even the younger people who may be familiar with his work. HOWEVER, there isn't enough younger people that are wild about him to actually show up at his movie. One way that Disney could have countered that is to release Indy AFTER Captain America: Brave New World in which Harrison has a big role as "Red Hulk". That movie would theoretically put Harrison Ford back on the map in the minds of the younger audience and may have helped boost the audience for Indy 5. At the end of the day, it may not have saved that movie but I dont think it would have hurt it either.
You could apply the exact same logic to Tom Cruise being less familiar with younger audiences, but his movies are doing just fine. There goes your theory.
I don't know why Lucasfilm thinks the only way to "humanize" legacy characters is to make them sad, hopeless, and depressed.
Wish younger people watched these movies more. As a 20 year old, Im sad this is a thing and I grew up with Indiana Jones as raiders of the lost ark is my favorite movie of all time.
You like Indiana Jones because you were exposed to the franchise when you were a kid. Parents of millennials and zoomers failed to expose them to one of the most iconic characters.
The funny thing is the release of the new movie is making people go back to watch the old ones haha. Raiders was on the tv yesterday and we watched it, I just watched Crusade a couple hours ago on Disney+ and it was even better again than I remember it
That or I’m a bit starved for a actual great movie lol
This movie came out at the wrong time. There should've been a legacy sequel in the early 2000's and then maybe one more in the 2010's. Making a 5th movie 15 years after the 4th movie which was already 19 years after the 3rd movie makes little sense
Crystal Skull was that legacy sequel and it ended with the perfect bow on top. Unfortunately Shia Labeouf went off the rails so he was abandoned as a leading star. The filmmakers saw Ford do a decent job as Han and figured "we can squeeze one more out of Ford before he croaks". Ford always liked Indiana more than Han anyway and I'm sure he's pleased with a massive paycheck.
Or a 4th Film shouldve came out in the 90s and 5th in the late 2000s
Hell, I'm 51 and didn't want to see grampa Indy. Add insufferable girl boss and that's an easy pass. Lucas was brilliant. He always added a prominent character for kids as the principles aged. Ewoks, Short Round, Jar Jar, and even Mutt. Here you have Helena's sidekick, but he wasn't featured in marketing materials that I could see.
i actually have no idea how this movie cost 300 million to make
They spent half the budget on the opening section even though they could hire some youtuber to deepfake for a couple thousand lol
329 mil production and 150 mil print/publicity = 479 total spent, F'kin INSANE
John Wick films have huge set pieces and practical FX yet cost 1/2 of this film
@@PerryCoxPF93 Not even half. A third or a quarter of the budget of this dumpster fire.
Big production, plus I'd imagine Harrison Ford's paycheck was $20 million+
I mean the movie was filmed during COVID, had to stop production because of Harrisons injury, used deaging for at least 30min (and Ford looks much older than Jackson did in Captain Marvel) and the movie was mostly filmed on location (and the third act is very large scale and was probably very expensive as well)
They shot all over England and Scotland, Italy and Morocco. Moving film equpment, cast and crew all over the world is already pretty expensive, but doing that with COVID restrictions etc? Even more expensive. I imagine the orignal budget was going to be around 200M.
Deepfakes are quick and inexpensive to make. They shouldn't be spending anything on deepfakes.
So what?
What's your point? Doesn't make it a good movie.
@@scottmatznick3140it does.
point is, Covid increases its difficulty to filming it.
@@kartikadewi3270 it doesn't because increased difficulty in filming doesn't result in piss poor writing.
Indiana Jones was a spectacle! I was 6 years old when I remember Temple of Doom had lines around the block to watch the movie a week after it premiered a week before.
But if the people of the Cannes Film Festival aren't the people who will enjoy a big crowd pleasing movie .... why did they give Tom Cruise an award and say how great Top Gun Maverick was in 2022?
People try to come up with so many excuses for the movie flopping other than maybe it's just not that good.
@@gbrow1604It’s a good film, but it’s a film that’s 15 years to late that released smack dab in the middle of a busy summer. The audience scores has the moving placed in the high 80s
John Wick built its own fan base instead of relying on Nostalgia or trying to win a new modern audience with an old IP. They could have gotten money from any Indiana Jones fan if they put in Short Round and made Indy like he was.
I still want the reboot. Spielberg said he’s the American James Bond and they should reboot him like that.
Nah, Harrison Ford is Indiana Jones. There's a point where Hollywood needs to just create their own new movie franchises instead of bringing back old ideas to reboot.
Several of these reasons have kept me from getting interested, but the #1 is that I didn’t trust Lucasfilm to make a good Indy movie. I was almost expecting them to end the movie him passing the torch to Helena, but it sounds like they at least had the sense to not go that far.
As much as they’re stupid. This would be too horrible even for them
I’m pretty sure it mostly comes down to the generation that would go see this film is sick and tired of the woke politics of Disney and unofficially boycotted the film.
My uncle played snaggle tooth in star wars 1977 he was proud of his two weeks work on it . Seeing the recent sequels and what disney did to luke was so wrong. In some ways disney have tarnished the legacy of those original films sadly . My uncle told me george lucas was a joy to work with as well as harrison ford .
wow that is very cool dude! You must be one lucky nephew, funnily enough my aunt was good friends w the Fisher family and got me a handwritten signed Empire poster by Carrie back in 2015 for my bar mitzvah, only a year before she passed
Cool. But be aware- the Indy 5 is not franchise killer as new Star Wars. It’s perfectly fine movie.
@@handznet i agree i really enjoyed dial of destiny and was surprised at the mixed reviews.
Honestly I think people are way too hard on Luke. If anything at least he had a really badass death
I think it’s because people now know that they can wait till it goes to streaming in a couple months to go see it. There’s no urgancy to watch any movies anymore like it was back when movies would go to streaming six months later. Now, you have movies going to streaming while it's still in theaters.
Agree 100
Tune to Show Business tomorrow night for the answer...GAUNTLET DROPPED.
(spoiler: DIsney didn't eat the entire cost, Paramount took on some of the releasing)
Perfect analysis. Bravo sir 👏. Could not have imagine a better summation of these issues!
To me, it seemed like Disney had issues marketing the film. This movie should have been positioned to be an event film, and they didn’t have a plan in place to build the buzz to make it perform like one.
I think it may have some legs though. It has 9 days of breathing room to establish some staying power, and with actual word of mouth being much stronger than the early negative buzz, the 40+ crowd that doesn’t run out to see movies opening weekend might yet give this film life.
Mission impossible is yet to release, which is going to hurt this movie even more 😅
@@craiggaynier1565 cope, buddy, cope. no one is going to watch Indiana Sue.
Instead they had to ear rape new yorkers on the subway with ads
No fatigue or the only fatigue was the agenda people are tired of.
You hit the nail on the head with this review. I went to see Indy 5 yesterday... I actually like the movie overall and agree that it's an improvement over 4. Our theater was filled with people older than me... I am 50. I only missed Raiders at the theater as my mom thought I was too young.. anyway, It's a shame that it's not doing better, but... I like the movie. Now if GI JOE can be done right then we're onto something...It's been a weird year with having Indy and Batman back like it's 1989 again. Thanks for your review.
I can't stand an independent, snarky, empowered strong woman that's insufferable - like Phoebe what's er name. I do like a woman that's independent, strong while also likeable and sexy. Like f'rinstance, waaait fooooor itttt, MARION in the original Raiders.
If we imagine that Indiana is a real person we can say that after all he’s been through he doesn’t deserve to be harped at by a self indulgent bitchy and rather unattractive skinny British woman. (Now we know that Kathleen Kennedy had a type)
It is not better than 4 at all. Stop constantly pointing out monkey scene. Its horrible but its like 2 seconds. Fridge scene is absolutely ok.
Of course. Movie’s audience is 36-70. I am 40 and was there with my dad who is 70 hah. But there were young people. But the theater overall was empty
I saw the movie and thought it was alright and our theater people older than me.I have no interest with indiana jones at all and I feel the same way with Michael keaton batman movies as well. Same thing, have no interest or connection to them but people who are in their late 30s and 40s will probably pick keaton as their favorite batman and other people who are in their 20s like me since I'm 24 will pick Bale as their favorite batman.
@@kevinh5349 how is marion likeable or sexy?? She is the most insufferable character in the entire franchise lmao
I'm a zoomer, and I thought Indiana Jones was much more popular that it was. This movie taught me that like 95% of gen z'ers didn't care about this franchise. I'm 19, and I was easily the youngest person in the theater and the only person under 50 who I know who was hyped for this movie. Indy is easily my favorite franchise and Raiders is my favorite movie of all time. I liked this movie though. I agree with your points though, I was very skeptical of the movie, and I think the bad and borderline slanderous internet buzz around it drove some people under 30 away from the film.
Yea I’m 24 so most of our first Indy film anyone around my age group was crystal skull. I enjoyed it as a kid still love it how but Indiana Jones is a relic of the 80s
Other generations do love Indy and go to the theater, but most generations hate this woke s@@t unlike Zoomers. We don't want to see another iconic male character get treated like a burned-out loser and working with some smug English chick. We learned our lesson from The Last Jedi.
I was pretty flabbergasted when I saw DOD opening night with 7 others and we were literally the only ones in the theater 😬
I'm seeing it on Friday and I'm so curious how many people are going to be there.
It was almost like your own private screening
I love all the different versions of your intro! And I love these kind of videos you keep putting out! Great video!
Yeah Im 29 so crystal skull is the only one I saw in theaters. As a kid I liked it and nostalgia keeps me from downgrading it to much. However my father hated it and wouldn't have gone to see dial of destiny if I hadn't bribed him with pizza first. I was the youngest member of the audience. Good analysis sir.
Yeah. Crystal Skull does get a little too much hate. Now it's not a good Indiana Jones film. But it's not a bad film either and I still cracked up with the vine swinging Shia Labuaf. Not to mention some of Indi's one liners, him still being afraid of snakes, and yes, the nuke fridge scene I liked too. So when I saw the teaser for Dial of Destiny, I wasn't sure if I was hyped for it or not. But it wasn't until I heard about the reshoots that made me realize this film's in trouble. So I was glad to duck out. But at that point, I was already duct out because I didn't want to see another Lucasfilm movie until Kathy Kennedy is permanently gone. Surfice to say, she still works at Lucasfilm. She really brought this on herself. So yeah. Indiana Jones 5 is considered the worst one.
I can understand why teenagers aren't interested. But it seems odd to judge a film aimed at older people on its opening weekend performance, when we rarely go then
Disney just keeps taking L’s with all their new releases. Gotg3 was their only profitable film in like the last two years.
What about avatar way of water
I think bro forgot the whale Way of Water was… but other than that I don’t think any other Disney films have made much back
@@NinthShinigami basically they released only 5 or 6 movies only elemental flopped don't know what u are talking about
@@bathecat9834 I forgot about avatar, but just because a movie didn’t flop doesn’t mean it’s profitable. All of their movies except those two have not earned back their budgets, so they have failed and only taken losses on all those films.
Multiverse o Madness, Wakanda and avatar??
Like you aluded to, I think multiple things contributed to the poor showing. Personally, the most glaring problem Dial of Destiny had its need for existence. While it was awesome to see Indy on the big screen for the first time (born in 02', didn't see Crystal Skulls), making a film based on _the_ call to action/adventure character while his actor is in his 80s naturally limits the film. This also creates a higher demand for VFX to compensate. Just like Luke in TLJ, LucasFilm made the decision to turn their franchise's/IP's main hero into an depressed verison of themsleves that audiences simply don't want to see. Just because a character ages doesn't allow incite sadness and despair like Luke/Indy endured. Of course, external reasons for the film's bomb hurt it too, but I think that the franchise should have ended with Indy and his dad riding off into the sunset in _The Last Crusade_ . It really highlights the diminshing return issue that franchise IP's tend to have.
I loved the Indiana Jones movies as a kid, I thought the Last Crusade was a perfect ending for the franchise. I watched the Crystal Skulls and went why? And this movie is even more of a why?
Not to mention I don’t trust Disney to handle Indiana Jones with anything like the respect and care a beloved icon deserves.
Disney has lost my trust in their ability to make something worth watching and that makes me sad.
There are no such things as perfect endings or send-offs, only good ones meant as a way of satisfaction. Also, the reason why Dial of Destiny needs to exist is to wipe away the horrible wound that is Crystal Skull. I mean, Sci-Fi Aliens, really George Lucas in an Indiana Jones movie?
"The force is female" .... I knew we were in trouble.
DID YOU ACTUALLY HAVE THE GALL TO SUGGEST (insert sensical hypothesis)?!?!
Indiana Jones just doesn’t work with todays audiences, it’s old fashioned and dated at this point
I didn't even see Disney attempt to market this film to younger generations. For example, the Disneyland ride is one of the most popular yet it was not renovated to coincide with this film. A totally missed opportunity. Usually Disney is very forward thinking abt cross-media marketing but this was an oversight. I'm 29 and gree up watching the original trilogy with my parents. I went as a kid to see Crystal Skull with my family because the film felt like an EVENT. The trailer for Dial looked awful esp the de-aging done to Ford. I have no desire to see this one and will wait for streaming b
Fantastic video!
Edit: I'd love more videos like this.
It wasn't meant to be a giant spectacle it was meant to be special and that's 100% what it was for 3 movies. Honestly... That ride off into the sunset in Last Crusade. THAT WAS IT.. The perfect ending. They should have remade Allan Quatermain instead.
The fact I and many other massive Indy fans out there were skeptical for it I think are reason enough for it bombing. At that point you’ve lost trust with your top consumers.
I think another big reason is that unfortunately my generation (I’m 18 so whatever generation that is) have no clue what Indiana Jones is and don’t have an appreciation for it. They’re not going to go watch something like this. The audience that will are much older and have better control over their money. They were probably skeptical as well, and chose to wait to catch it on streaming. These are just my guesses. Also no Spielberg… or Lucas. Only Kennedy and her team at Lucasfilm. I can’t speak for everyone but that’s a big reason people don’t trust Lucasfilm nowadays…
You be surprise how many young people like Indiana Jones , my brother and I grew on the Lego Indiana Jones game and later we saw the movies, so we are going to see the fifth one
@@yveltalpoderoso1303 as did I. Literally I have your same story. Started with the Lego games, begged my parents to rent the movies from Blockbuster nearly every week, had a bunch of toys, figures, legos, etc. Not saying there isn’t love for it within our generation. I’m saying there’s not many people. You wouldn’t see the same amount of love for Indy from our generation you would see for Marvel and it’s MCU for example…
I don’t think it’s that people don’t know Indiana Jones. I think it’s that people don’t trust Disney to make a good sequel at this point.
Honestly i feel a big reason is that it is the last one and only people that care about the theatrical experience will see it and the others will just see it whrn it hits blu ray/streaming. The money it makes wont go into making another one so it doesn't matter much to fans if it doesn't make as much as the others in a profit sense, i saw the film twice and enjoyed it and i hope it can do well but not gonna bat an eye if it doesn't.
Thank you for mentioning the “Woke-Police” who clearly have an agenda beyond critiquing films (Critical Drinker exhibit A). I am perfectly fine with harsh critique - Sean seems to critique films relatively free of bias - but too many “critics”’really just want to shove in words like “girl boss” and “Mary Sue” in place of actual thought.
The thing is, movies now a day are filled with this “mary sue” characters that indeed seen like perfect and always do things better than our childhood hero. Instead pf giving them a character development arc like most of the other people have, they instantly make them mary sue.
@@adahidgalan2882 it’s just a lazy critique that doesn’t mean anything other than “I don’t like OP female characters.” Plenty of male characters fit the same description, but don’t get singled out. John Wick is the ultimate dude Mary Sue, but no one labels him separately.
@@thearchivist250John Wick isn't overconfident and he's usually got the movies all to himself.
Much of these "Mary Sue" complains come from new female characters that are "upstaging" the established characters.
The worst part of the likes of CD is that he's not entirely wrong. That makes his narrative stronger. Disney is inadvertently actually playing on their side.
@@ThePrinceofHisOwnKingdom pretty much agree with you. It is hard to like someone who hasn’t gone through the hero’s journey and instantly is an op without even training. The is no struggle to what they can do. They are label Mary sue because of it. Imagine Luke training all his life to only be replace by Ray just because “she can”. Same can be said about any other character regardless of the gender. If there is no struggle, you don’t tend to like the character. That’s why most of the new super hero movies are flopping. This new heroes do not go through any problem and end up in the same place they were at the beginning. Look at Thor 4, Antman 3, Rey Skywalker, Flash (he didn’t learn from the problems of time traveling). But yeah normally they are trying to push girls to be better than their old counterpart without any training or proper development and struggle are called mary sue.
@@adahidgalan2882 It’s just about story and character development. Captain America gets a single injection and is almost perfect ever after. Still great movies. Rey isn’t initially OP, yeah she has an accelerated ramp cause main character in Force Awakens, but whatever cause next two SW films are terrible. Luke has almost no training (how long on Dagoba in ESB? Two weeks max?) then just self trains I guess off camera. Miles Morales literally goes from nothing to almost perfect Spider-Man in 5 minutes after a sad talking to from Peter and his Dad. And Into the Spider-Verse one of the best films ever of any genre. John Wick goes from years of retirement and to kicking ass instantly.
If this movie was about 30 minutes shorter I’d view it in the Theater. My wife and I are in the target demographic (and loved the first three movies); but when any movie goes over 2-and-a-half hours we just wait for it to go to Digital. There’s just so much being pushed at us via all the various streaming services that we never lack for something to view - so we can just wait for the movie to become available on Digital - where we can conveniently pause the movie when needed. It doesn’t help that the experience in the theater is only marginally better now than viewing the movie in our Home Theater with Dolby Atmos.
They keep wrecking classic characters, simple as. Deconstructed heros aren't always the best way to go about a movie.
The "bad reviews" actually increased my interest because critics don't usually love these types of movies.
Some franchises just need to rest in peace, the lord of the rings and especially Indiana jones are the main ones I can thing of.
Although I did like this movie and won’t mind going to see it again in theaters(although I might not because if money)
Star Wars is another one. They’re beating a dead horse with that series at the moment
@@dawsynasay4841 I’ve kinda resisted saying Star Wars because there is still so much more you can do with it. What happened before the republic? What happened after the sequels? If the main Star Wars trilogy happened long ago, how is it now?
Aliens and Terminator also need to call it quits. We will never good a film in either franchise that will even be close to what they were in their prime.
Harry Potter is another franchise
I think the difference between Uncharted and Indy is that kids play the Uncharted games, so they knew the characters and wanted to see the movie. I saw Raiders at the age of 11 and loved it, but I suppose the youth of today aren't the youth of 40 odd years ago, they prefer more explosions, less talking, it's a shame, but I think it is true. But then, again, Top Gun came out in '86, The Last Crusade came out in '89 and yet the audience was there for Top Gun Maverick, and not there for Indy, so it's not that people won't go see an old established character, they just want a good movie.
I remember Chris Pine was asked when Star Trek 2009 came out if it would appeal to a new generation of movie goers and he stated that the average movie goer needed more excitement, more explosions, more action to keep their attention than the normal Trek movies and shows gave, so his was different to pull the new audience in.
Studies show that attention spans are at an ALL time low.
Not that surprising in this day and age.
Let’s not pretend a lot of thought went into this movie. Clearly every single big studio is hopping onto the nostalgia train and the (not incredibly competent) executives at Lucasfilm thought “We haven’t done Indiana Jones yet, and Harrison Ford is about to retire!”. Now, keep in mind, this is coming from someone who didn’t hate the movie. I thought it was generic but fun, and I can still tell you a thousand reasons Dial of Destiny shouldn’t have been made. I’m not necessarily mad at the product that we got, I’m just mad the movie was made in the first place.
Kathleen kennedy and phoebe waller bridge are the 2 biggest reasons…but you offer some very good legitimate points also in particular turning our hero into a supporting character whos on his last legs
Is something wrong with Waller-Bridge? I'm not very familiar with her work.
@@PerryCoxPF93she's annoying but hardly the sole reason the film was a box office failure!
@@PerryCoxPF93 No. Her work in Fleabag is phenomenal but women in franchise gets people angry for dumb reasons
I think 95% of people won't even know who she is so I doubt she's a reason for the movie failing.
@@kill3rs529 or even Kathleen Kennedy, for that matter. Yes I agree she's a terrible producer but I just think "the average Joe" isn't gonna really be interested in a new Indiana Jones film where the main lead is an 80 year old man so many years after the last one came out, which isn't particularly well liked by quite alot of people.
Great breakdown! I wouldn't be shocked if the budget was even closer to $350 million. I actually enjoyed the movie, didn't love it (went in with super low expectations too).
Problem 10. Disney jumped into politics and now a large portion of their fan base just want to see Disney fail. When you divide you subtract.
Nah. The people who care about Disneys politics and care about it so much in an Indy movie are the people he addressed whining about woke this and woke that crap.
This movie isn’t woke at all. And Mermaid was (my god why) successful
What politics? Disney is always on the side of money. This is greed, not politics.
@@BloodeeJacobNah. Disney has shoved their politics down are throats for years now and it’s caught up with them.
@@Robby_RobTheir politics have been so surface level like "racism bad, sexism bad", I don't think you can even call it politics.
Can't believe the same guy who directed 3:10 To Yuma, Logan, and Ford v Ferrari made something so generic and nonsensical. That's not the reason it flopped but it certainly won't help moving forward
Logan is vastly overrated, just like Mangold.
Mangold will be fine. He’s already in the process of making a Dylan biopic, and he’ll be making a Swamp Thing movie after that. Indiana Jones 5 was never going to do well regardless of who made it
I’m shocked, yet not shocked. There’s a huge anti Disney sentiment out there politically but at the end of the day I still thought it would pull in a lot more. Mind you the mistake of opening it early at Cannes didn’t help….
Disney will blame this movie’s failure 100% on Reason #6. Because clearly THEY did nothing wrong.
$330 million to produce... that they'll own up to. Another $100 million MINIMUM marketing spend, and i'm being super generous there. They had superbowl spots and ads in the subways. Those things together = $1 Billion to break even.
I've never met an investor that wanted their investment to break even... have you?
This fish stinks
It's rumoured it originally only, and I say only even though this is still a ridiculous amount, $200 million to make, but they had a ton of reshoots after terrible test screenings. Now James Mangold will tell you there wasn't a single reshoot, but John Williams, the famous composer, stated he had to rescore some music because of the reshoots. Also there is no way they spent $300 million without a hell of a lot of reshooting, the CGI wouldn't have cost that much, not when you compare it to an MCU movie that usually come in under $200 million.
Williams confirmed he was mistaken and that his quote was taken out of context. There was also zero test screenings done for this film; that has been backed up by several sources. This movie cost $300 million because of location shoots, ton of CGI, a delay in filming due to Ford injuring himself, and COVID restrictions. GOTG3 cost $250 million and Ant-Man was $200 million.
Don’t be an idiot
No dude, the reason Indy 5 is failing is because fans are tired of Kathleen Kennedy purposely destroying the iconic male hero characters that many of us grew up with and trying to replace them with hollow Mary Sue female girl boss lead characters. KK needs to be gone.
Excellent breakdown!
Films released in 1987:
Predator
RoboCop
Lethal Weapon
The Lost Boys
Full Metal Jacket
The Princess Bride
HellRaiser
InnerSpace
The Running Man
Evil Dead 2
Empire of the Sun
Beverly Hills Cop 2
The Untouchables
Trains, Planes and automobiles
The Witches of Eastwick
Good Morning Vietnam
Creepshow 2
Harry and the Hendersons
The Gate
Batteries not included
Hamburger Hill
Dirty Dancing
Masters of the Universe
- & over 3,787 additional films released internationally that year..
Contrast...
That's gotta be my favorite yr for film, hands down
It really comes down to one reason: Phoebe Waller-Bridge. That's it. Her character was leaked over a year ago and how she was going to ruin the film. This already turned off a lot more hardcore Indy fans.
Then it opened in Cannes. The RT 🍅 scores were horrible. Some of the audience were said to be looking bored. So then the early reviews come in from some of the core Indy fans and it was all true. That's why nobody ran out to watch this film.
This was a year-long process of "lowering" expectations from those leaks because Kathleen Kennedy inserted herself into this film. Emasculate another iconic character after turning into an old man.
Luke Skywalker, Obi-Wan Kenobi, Han Solo, Willow, and Indiana Jones all broken down old men. Han and Indy were separated from their wives. And only Pete 'Maverick' Mitchell and Johnny Lawrence got the finale they deserved.
Top comment
Only massive online dorks saw an issue with any of these things. Like 20% of box office earnings come from hardcore fans. The rest has to be filled by the general public and they don't care abt "emasculation" or whatever else u incel keyboard warriors cry abt. No one cares abt Indiana anymore and creating a 5th movie after the 4th properly wrapped up the series makes no sense. The only people that care abt seeing this movie are folks in their 50s.
Dude, Johnny Lawrence got the most epic conclusion ever. He grows up, becomes a better man, and gets a second shot at being a father. He then goes into Iron Eagle ass-kicking overdrive when he sees the sonogram photo of his child and its the best scene of any 80's legacy character ever made (with Danny LaRusso crane kicking Terry Silver a close second). Cobra Kai f*cking rules. THAT'S how you tell stories with legacy characters.
If you can't tell an Indy 5 story that leaves the audience pumping their fists and and cheering at the credits...DON'T MAKE IT.
Maybe to you incels it is… I will admit that her character isn’t well written but that doesn’t change the fact that this film is a generic CGI fuck fest devoid of any character
Even without considering the revenue potential, you have to question why so much more money needed to be spent. If they can make Raiders for 80million in today's money, then double that should have been plenty. Less CGI, more practical techniques, clever decisions and letting the script take more responsibility to engage the audience, would saved them a fortune and made a film that probably would have brought in a lot more too.
great video 🎉
These movies honestly need to be catered to getting new audiences
What's the point this is supposed to be the final movie
That would mean they will be horrible cringy video game like crap
And then people will call it woke...even people already called this one woke
Seemed like a feminist picture where they brought Indi to simply play second fiddle and make her look good. I’d rather stick to having good memories than watching that type of nonsense
The film wasnt meant to cost that much money. The price tag that was greanlit was closer to half the budget, with $200m be the absolute max after marketing and advertising.
The budget blew up because, first off, the de-aging cgi had to be fixed and worked with a few times to get it looking decent.
As you can tell, they didnt de-age Harrison's voice.
The ending had to be reshot. Fleabag was going to take Indy's place as he dies in the ancient past. We would have seen Fleabag doing past Indy adventures in his place. All that was changed.
Since the ending was changed, the moments leading up to that crap ending had to all be re-edited.
All this costed tons & tons of money. Then advertising and marketing? Money thrown at this "hand over fist".
(
I thought it was alright but I don't like how they did the whole deconstruct the character and make them a sad old man like they did with Han and Luke. I'm also one of the few that likes Kingdom of the Crystal Skull so to kill Mutt off screen and have Marrion and Indy divorced wasn't great in my opinion.
2:33 I think the reason is twofold: One Disney tends to spend too much on their movies nowadays. (which you discussed on Sean Chandler Plus). Two this isn't the first time Kathleen Kennedy has increased the budget much higher than it should have been (I.E. Solo and Rise of Skywalker.)
3:17 Let's just settle this inflation issue here and now in today's money: Raiders of The Lost Ark cost: $60,223,168.32 and its Domestic Opening was: $27,789,054.25
Temple of Doom cost: $81,959,153.03 and its Domestic Opening was: $74,164,574.14
Last Crusade cost: $117,726,580.65 and its Domestic Opening was: $71,997,213.48
And Kingdom of the Crystal Skull cost: $261,322,392.16 and its domestic opening was: $141,450,046.42
Meanwhile Dial of Destiny cost: $300,000,000 and its domestic opening was $60,368,101
Pretty easy to see how this film cost way too much and earned way too little.
4:30 Sleep with one eye open Sean because you didn't include either Kotor games on the wall of Star Wars games you just projected so better stay vigilant of people that see them get snubbed and will make it so that you better triple-check the locks on your doors at night.
Great video Sean! I have loved this style of videos on your main channel
I died when you said grandpa vibes 😂 which is true even though I love the man and he has brought so much greatness to film. Only thing I would add is the unnecessary nature of the movie. Even though the last one was not popular among the fans, it seemed to end on a finality. I guess the same thing could be said for Last Crusade and Star Wars, but Harrison is 80! There is no compelling story to tell there
I think people just dont care about going to movie theaters because the food is so pricy.
Can we stop labeling things a bomb when it’s only been out for five days?? Like seriously, Marvel opening weekend numbers have taken the nuance out of box office analytics.
Here was the reason I haven’t wanted to see it. I don’t wanna watch a movie where the main character is belittled and replaced by some generic strong female lead. Why do I gotta watch a great character get told how to be the character he is…
5:03 I have to disagree here. Top Gun: Maverick. Top Gun was a movie for its time. I was in High School when it came out. It never became a franchise, it is chocked full of what people call anachronistic attitudes. It had been over forty years since it was in theaters, yet Maverick's global box office was 1.4 billion. Maverick was not a character that was beloved like Indiana Jones was. I simply don't think that age of the films, or even age of the main character is the issue. It is because it is a deconstruction, just like Last Jedi. It is a Kathleen Kennedy self-insert, again, and it features a terrible woman in Phoebe Waller-Bridge. It insulted the fans, where as Tom Cruise courted and praised, and thanked the fans. Nobody trusts Disney after the spate of other films doing the same thing.
I just don’t think that average, everyday people were interested in watching this movie. The audiences that rush out to watch movies in their opening weekend aren’t people who are terribly interested in the Indiana Jones franchise. So, that means that the opening weekend isn’t going to be great.
I'm interested in indiana jones, I am not interested in an 80 year old Indiana jones however or one that is made by Disney. Just let the franchise rest in piece
But these "average people" were interested to see top gun maverick which is from a way less popular franchise
@@vitalizhdanov1397 There’s some truth to that. But here are some reasons why I don’t think those movies are a one to one comparison.
1. Tom Cruise is 20 years younger than Harrison Ford
2. Tom Cruise is currently a much bigger movie star than Harrison Ford
3. Top Gun: Maverick has incredibly broad appeal that Dial of Destiny doesn’t have
4. Top Gun: Maverick’s a movie that was absolutely worth the theatrical experience, while Dial of Destiny doesn’t have anything like that
5. Top Gun: Maverick is a significantly more liked movie than Dial of Destiny
The leaks were real lol. That “segment” of YT was spot on.
I love how it’s been exciting to go to the theaters virtually every week since March. Hence THANK GOD FOR REGAL UNLIMITED.
I’m 19 and I’ve always loved Indiana Jones ever since I was around 4 to 5 years old so it’s sad how not a lot of people around my age aren’t interested in these movies or this character
Since so many movies failed this year, I don't think there is one universal answer to why? And we have different studios - Disney/Pixar/Marvel, WB/DC, and such. But most of them have streaming services, which have gotten the audience's money and trained people that the movies will show up in 45, 60 , or 90 days.
I am 39 and have no desire to see this movie simply because the last movie was so awful. I just refuse to have that feeling again. Plus an 80 year old Indiana Jones just sounds sad.
Your breakdown analysis for reasons is spot on brother
My thoughts on the film now that I've seen it. No spoilers, actually.
1) His age. You knew how old Ford was walking in the door, so you can't slam the movie for that. That's a non issue. They even address it in dialogue in a few places where Indy was talking about how everything hurts when he's doing things.
2) The de-aged Harrison Ford looked like what I remember him looking like in the mid 80s'. There might have been one or two small bits where it was kind of noticeable, but I had no issues. The de-aged stuff was 100% in the first action segment which took the first 10 mins of the movie or so. After that it was current Ford.
3) They definitely date the movie by having a neighbor of Indy's playing Beatles music.
4) A tad too long at 2.5 hours I thought. It dragged a bit in the non action sequences once you're about 2/3 of the way in, but it's not THAT bad, really.
5) Phoebe Waller Bridge's character worked well for me. I kept thinking she was both a friend and a foe at the same time, so that's a good unknown.
6) There was one scene towards the end of the movie that I won't ruin, but felt WRONG to me. Like "We're doing this? For real?" I didn't care for this scene, much in the same way the alien ship taking off at the end of 4 made me go "Really?"
But beyond that last one I had a good time. Did I enjoy it? Yes. Was it necessary? No, not really.
It was also an ending to the series as well.
No post credit scene.
Excellent breakdown and presentation. You got a new subscriber. Only suggestion: look up synonyms for skeptical and use them. (You said skeptical way too many times.)
Well It also gave one of my favorite movie characters an unsatisfying send off so it's understandable
We’ll always have Crusade for that 👍 Kingdom too if you like the wedding scene.
Indiana jones dial of disaster is the real name now
The movie Indy 5 suppose to make me escape into another reality to make me happy and hopeful. I already can get that same reality from watching documentaries from TV. I left the theater feeling sad and depressed.
I would've definitely seen it, if I ever watched an Indiana Jones movie.
The problem is they flat out could have made this amazing with getting short round, maybe cgi Sean Connery, and Shia back at the end or something but they wanted to focus on Helena who’s by far the worst side kick.
I agree. They should have gotten short round and have Salah more to do.
Ugh.. So glad you don't make movies. CGI actors are the worst. Just let them go.
Shia is being investigate for sexual abuse and sexual battery Disney will never ever use him
And Harrison Ford hates Shia Lebouf
A lot of June movies have bombed HARD! It’s because of Oppenheimer😂
Why can't they explore aging with beloved heroes they create? Because Disney hasn't created a beloved hero that isn't based on established media in over 20 years? Exactly. I appreciate you looking for extra reasons for this film's failure. Some were interesting to think about. But the core is that Kathleen is an abysmal producer that has no clue what fans want and will pay for yet still spends $100s of millions on movies that no one wants to see. And Disney is a failing company. You don't need to look deeper than that.
Obsessive craftsmanship wins the box office; not lazy filmmaking. Therefore John Wick 4 > Indy 5; Top Gun Maverick > Indy 5. James Cameron > Indy 5.
Don’t overspend and underdeliver. Movie goers are not as forgiving as they used to.
Hollywood needs to go back to basics. Focus on stories, authenticity, and originality. Movie goers want to see obsessive craftsmanship not lazy use of CGI. That’s why James Cameron and Tom Cruise are rewarded by movie-goers, while The Flash and Dial of Destiny are rejected by them.
I don't think it's about audiences getting bored or whatever, I think it's about attention being split. People just saw Guardians 3 and Across the Spider-Verse, and now Indiana is out against the latter plus Elemental, Transformers, etc. It's alot of big movies in a short time period
what are you even talking about. Guardians 3 came out in may. everyone who wanted to see it, saw it 1-2 months ago...
Across the Spider-Verse came out 1st of June. that's now over a month old. Everyone who wanted to see it had 4 weeks. that's like an aeon in the movie industry LEL
Not a single person didn't go watch Indiana 5 because he didn't saw Guardians 3 or Across the Spider-Verse yet. If you waited that long, you didn't care about those in the first place. so if you would want to watch one of those now and Indi 5 would be good, you would just watch it because that's what people talk about now.
It's a quality issue. More people are looking at disney's track record with these IPs and saying "Nah, not this time. Pass."
@@mike91mdk45 i mean it made 60 million domestic. For a movie aimed at older audiences from an IP that isn't exactly relevant starring an 80 year old, that's impressive. It just as a budget that's way too big, and strong competition
@@Noqtis dude, movies stick around for 4th 5th and 6th weekends because people are still seeing them for the first time. Not everyone is up to date
@@owenmenning3878 yes but >most< people watch a movie around the release and not 4-6 weeks later.
No one said people watch movies only in the first week they release but >the most< people watch a movie when it's fresh. There will never be more people watching than in the first week.
If the movie doesn't get enough people to watch it in the first week, it's over. There is no comeback from this.
Crowded movies is definitely a big reason. I also feel like it’s too much time commitment to watch all of these movies even if you do have the money
Fantastic analysis. I don't disagree with anything you said. Spot on! Well done. I love your movie content.
Awesome job with this video!
Reasons Indy bombed...
#1 Kathleen Kennedy
#2 Kathleen Kennedy
#3 Kathleen Kennedy
#4 Kathleen Kennedy
#5 Kathleen Kennedy
#6 Kathleen Kennedy
#7 Kathleen Kennedy
#8 Kathleen Kennedy
#9 Kathleen Kennedy
I'm starting to see a pattern here 🤔
Or you’re just a sexist wacko who allows Kennedy to live rent free in your head? You people act like Kennedy killed your entire family. Seriously, it’s pathetic