Shia LaBeouf says he dropped the ball on indiana Jones 4

Jstas

http://marquee.blogs.cnn.com/2010/05/18/shia-labeouf-admits-he-dropped-the-ball-on-indiana-jones/?hpt=T2

From The Marquee Blogs at CNN:

May 18, 2010
Shia LaBeouf admits he dropped the ball on 'Indiana Jones'
Posted: 01:26 PM ET

If anything, Shia LaBeouf is honest.

The 23-year-old told reporters at the Cannes International Film Festival that the last time he starred in a sequel, 2008’s “Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull,” he dropped the ball.

True, the flick earned $787 million worldwide, a blockbuster by studio standards, but there were problems with it, LaBeouf said, and that challenged him when he took on another popular film sequel, this year’s “Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps.”

“I feel like I dropped the ball on the legacy that people loved and cherished,” LaBeouf told the newspaper. “If I was going to do it twice, my career was over. So this was fight-or-flight for me.”

He said that he didn’t think the film fooled anyone, and he blamed his acting skills – not the writers or director Steven Spielberg.

“You get to monkey-swinging and things like that and you can blame it on the writer and you can blame it on Steven. But the actor’s job is to make it come alive and make it work, and I couldn’t do it. So that’s my fault,” he said. “I think the audience is pretty intelligent. I think they know when you’ve made ... . And I think if you don't acknowledge it, then why do they trust you the next time you're promoting a movie.”

He also said Harrison Ford wasn’t too happy with the film.

“We need to be able to satiate the appetite,” he said. “I think we just misinterpreted what we were trying to satiate.”

But will saying any of this get him in trouble with Spielberg?

“I’ll probably get a call. But he needs to hear this. I love him. I love Steven. I have a relationship with Steven that supersedes our business work. And believe me, I talk to him often enough to know that I’m not out of line," the actor said. "I would never disrespect the man...He’s done so much great work that there’s no need for him to feel vulnerable about one film. But when you drop the ball you drop the ball.”

Posted by: Kelley L. Carter -- Special to CNN

I can respect that. I don't think he's that bad of an actor, he's still maturing but that statement shows some character. Takes some stones to man up like that when the industry standard is to play nicey nice.

Face

The greatest acting the world couldn't have fixed that story line.

Jstas

Well, honestly, the story line had some basis in reality. The crystal skulls, they are real. As to what the purpose is behind them and who made them, that's open to interpretation. Some believe aliens, some believe divine sources, others believe it was L. Ron. Who knows.

The rest of the movie was typical over-the-top Indiana Jones fare. I thought it was a fun movie. Admittedly not up to par with the others but it was a fairly good time.

zombie boy 2000

From all accounts, most of the blame should be placed squarely on Lucas. It's my understanding that this ended up being his vision (after many creative arguments with Spielberg).

That being said... the movie was a ****. And a boring **** at that.

Jstas

Let me clarify before someone jumps my stuff here. There are numerous large crystal skulls that have been debunked as hoaxes of being "authentic" and pre-Columbian. Actual pre-Columbian crystal skulls are usually quite small, strung like beads and carved out of such crystals as obsidian, quartz and other gemstones. However, those that have been found in excavations have not had the documentation peer reviewed and remain unauthenticated. There are several large skulls with which forensic examination has shown are hoaxes and not of pre-Columbian origin.

Many New Age weenies claim that all the skulls "real" and the fakers alike have mystical, paranormal and other-worldly origins and powers. None of it is substantiated of course.

All Spielberg and company did was pick up on a story of an artifact with dubious distinction and ran with a story. The same was done with the other flicks. No one has yet found the Ark of the Covenant, the Holy Grail or the weird cults in India around those stones...or the stones for that matter. But they are all archaeological legends that can stand up to history with a dubious distinction. They cannot be proven to not exist until they are found. Indiana Jones just happens to find them but then, through some series of unfortunate circumstances and often life-threatening events, he loses them once he finds them. Kind of a sucktastic archaeologist if you think about it.

nooshinjohn

Jstas wrote: »

Let me clarify before someone jumps my stuff here. There are numerous large crystal skulls that have been debunked as hoaxes of being "authentic" and pre-Columbian. Actual pre-Columbian crystal skulls are usually quite small, strung like beads and carved out of such crystals as obsidian, quartz and other gemstones. However, those that have been found in excavations have not had the documentation peer reviewed and remain unauthenticated. There are several large skulls with which forensic examination has shown are hoaxes and not of pre-Columbian origin.

Many New Age weenies claim that all the skulls "real" and the fakers alike have mystical, paranormal and other-worldly origins and powers. None of it is substantiated of course.

All Spielberg and company did was pick up on a story of an artifact with dubious distinction and ran with a story. The same was done with the other flicks. No one has yet found the Ark of the Covenant, the Holy Grail or the weird cults in India around those stones...or the stones for that matter. But they are all archaeological legends that can stand up to history with a dubious distinction. They cannot be proven to not exist until they are found. Indiana Jones just happens to find them but then, through some series of unfortunate circumstances and often life-threatening events, he loses them once he finds them. Kind of a sucktastic archaeologist if you think about it.

Agreed with all the above John. I was about to point out the numerous fakes that have surfaced over the years. Seeing as thought Indiana Jones always chases after mythical artifacts, maybe the next one could be finding Atlantis.:p:)

halo71

Does CP not have an official review of this film?

Fongolio

My son and I watched it at a drive in theater and we both fell asleep.

Ron-P

Oh, the crystal skulls are real, I have one, it's filled with vodka and signed by Dan Aykroyd.

Oh, and as far as Labeouf....pffffft, whatever! Publicity stunt of some kind I'm sure, Indy 5 anyone?

On3s&Z3r0s

There was one thing wrong with that movie, and that thing's name is George Lucas.

wingnut4772

On3s&Z3r0s wrote: »

There was one thing wrong with that movie, and that thing's name is George Lucas.

Amen!

kuntasensei

I didn't mind Shia in the movie. I didn't even mind the story they went with. But it just didn't FEEL like an Indiana Jones movie to me, and that's a problem.

shawn474

Seems to be his M.O. lately. For some reason he feels the need to tell the world that the latest movies he's been in have fallen short of expectations. As if he was the main attraction in either. He said the same of Transformers 2.

http://www.reelmovienews.com/2010/05/shia-labeouf-promises-transformers-3-will-be-better/

He is a mediocre actor that has had the fortune of acting in two of the most successful franchises with some of the biggest legends in cinematic hiostory. This arrogant punk needs to keep is mouth shut and keep collecting paycecks before he finds himself making Ziploc commercials.

kuntasensei

I don't think it's arrogance... I just think the kid's being honest, which is kinda' refreshing. And in fairness, he's right on both counts. Indy 4 was kind of a mess, and Transformers 2... let's not even start. And hey, at least he's not running around yapping about politics like some of these other know-nothing assclowns.