It’s surprising how well the action scenes in the Indiana Jones movies hold up. Many old action movies struggle with pacing and the action isn’t very intense anymore, but those hold remarkably well.
2 Likes
The first one did hold up very well… good pacing in the story, the actionscenes (apart from the last one when they open the ark) held up great. And, the best part compared to “modern” movies, is that the action seems more believable than modern cgi action sceenes that often are way over the top and drags out for too long 
1 Like
The 70s wonder woman is on HBOMAX and must say watching the tv series, entertaining AF.
2 down 1 to go…
Indiana Jones and the temple of doom was perhaps a bit darker than i remember, and perhaps quite not as funny as i remembered it to be, but still a pretty good movie. Raiders of the lost ark nudges it over all, but still worth the re-watch. As with the first one, the temple of doom has good pacing and never a dull moment. Kate Capshaw is no Karen Allen though 
Yeah, that one is still a good movie but not as good as an Indiana Jones movie. It is very dark and quite disturbing thematically. And yes, Kate Capshaw’s character basically just screams her ass off the whole movie.
And i prefer the more capable brunett/dark haired love interest 
just finished The Midnight Sky. everyone is panning it…but I quite enjoyed it.
Finished off my Indiana Jones adventure with the last crusade.
Pretty good this one too, and the one i remembered the least from when i first watched it (the first 2 movies i’ve seen more times, and i feel i have seen part of them on TV but can’t remember seeing the Last Crusade ever on TV). Raiders of the lost ark still would be my favourite, but hard to pick between Temple of Doom and Last Crusade. Also, the female lead is a step back from Karen Allen but better than what we got in the Temple of Doom.
As for the fourth instalment, the “crystal skull” i think i might pass, if memory serves me right it was a huge disappointment when i saw it in the cinemas.
1 Like
Avatar 2010 but I streamed it off a friends Plex and it didn’t take the Surround Sound. That movie would probably sound great. Also it needs to be 2.35:1, I hate 16:9 on movies
The aspect ratio of avatar was chosen for Imax.
The 12 tasks of Asterix. Ahh child hood memories.
TENET
I enjoy some good action with some theoretical physics
Satisfies both the primitive and higher level brain 
2 Likes
Season 5 of The Expanse has been the best yet and we’re only half way through.
3 Likes
Its been great so far…
He might be talking about “The Last Airbender”, which came out in 2010, later than James Cameron’s “Avatar”, which was a winter 2009 release. (Remember those ancient times? * sigh * Also, remember how we used to think a sequel was ever coming out in our lifetimes? )
I’m watching season one of Away.
honestly that is even worse. My projector had it at 84" on my ultrawide screen and and I felt so claustrophobic. I imagine on a 120’ screen it would just be brain chaos.
When I saw it in IMAX when it released it was brain melting for the time.
I mean I always wanted a 150 inch 16:9 screen because I watch a very wide variety of media, a lot of older films including a few of my all time favorites, are 1.33 to 1.35 or 1.66. And that historically there is a huge variety of aspect ratios people experimented with or invented over the years, but space is a factor where I live currently. (cool fact 1.85/16:9 was popularized around the same time, early to mid 50s, as 2.35 simply as a means of creating a way to make themselves bigger and better than 4:3 tv)
If I have to physically move my head to look at the entire screen. It’s too large or I’m too close. Or tilt my neck up. Screens should be at EYE LEVEL people! lol
1 Like