Hey Scottzilla,

He made it seem like those who were anticipating the film wouldn't be disappointed, but it doesn't sound like it's going to revolutionize the genre. Then again, I guess all we can truly ask for is a well crafted piece of cinema (that is hopefully better than the second one).

-Sam

A cursory look at the major reviews of the movie results in a mixed bag. Here's The Hollywood Reporter's take on the movie, courtesy of Kirk Honeycutt. Didn't love it. I didn't like Temple of Doom much either, but check out its IMDB page -- rates a 7.4, much higher than I expected.

Hey there, Scott.

GREAT move setting up a blog. Your legion of ex-students are like ex-Pats looking for a country named Scottania -- and finally, your flag goes up. (Word is, "Scotland" was already taken).

Anyway, on to this blog. This is one of those rare review-proof movies, so a good review merely buoys my hopes for a good time rather than a lousy time at the theater. But if this film came out a couple years after the third film, and the reviews weren't hot, I'd probably skip it after being burned. Like with the final Rush Hour and Matrix films.

Congrats on figuring out how to survive on 2 hours sleep to support all your projects. You're a sleep clinic specimen.

Tom

Hey, Tom, glad you found the place. I agree with you re the new Indiana Jones movie -- it should do huge business. In fact, here's the Daily Variety's take on potential B.O. -- and DV thinks we're talking lots and lots of $$$.