Id have to say that the Phantom Menace is a good comparison in terms of damage done to both sagas.
But it is the better film.
Anakin didn't survive a nuke in a fridge, and Jar Jar wins over the Gophers and Monkees, as his inclusion in the films was more subtley done and his character did actually have something even vaguely connected to the plot.
Both films were highly anticipated with quasi-religious zeal and a feeling of letdown dogs both, but 1st watches wise, Menace owned Indy 4.
But we had Lightsabres, A glaxy to explore, the force, Darth Maul, young Kenobi, Young Palpatine and all that awesome shit.
Whereas in Indy 4, only 2 characters from the originals survive and 1 and a half of those suck in this movie, serving the purpose of cynically being there to pass the torch or just guardianise the new more inferior Jones.
TPM was a beginning.
The movies that followed TPM got better.
The same can not be said for the beginning factor,
and the sequel factor in this new leg of the franchise is weak looking judging on what we have seen and detracted more from the original films than it reinforced in any positive way, imo.
__________________
"Van Zan is the Pinocchio of feces." - Lestov16
Last edited by Sadako of Girth on May 24th, 2008 at 01:48 PM
I think they should have killed off one of the good guys, to give us a little more emotional pull, like have the Soviets kill off Oxley in the alien chamber cause he doesnt want to let them put the skull back, or something. All through the movie, the good guys always came out without a scratch.
I totally agree. I actually like most of Episode I though. Except for the obvious things in it most others hate. But I didn't let that ruin a good movie.
It's true though you knew once he survived a nuke blast and found out mutt was his son apart from the alien coming back to life and flying off that the story was going to be a bland rip off of Raiders.
It's still a extremely cheesy feel good kind of movie though. It's not as if it is the worse movie to come into existance you can still really enjoy it.
Even though I agree with everything you said about TPM, I still somehow got the feeling that Indy IV ends up as slightly better movie... can't really say what it is, maybe that Indy IV is somehow closure for the franchise, while TPM began a new trilogy that got heavily criticized by fans and Critics alike..... or maybe it's just Harrison Ford that completely saves the movie, he is old but still manages to work the character, aside from the beginning, when we are reminded constantly (as if we needed) of the character's age, I still saw him as the same Indy I remember.
everything that happens in between it's what belittles the movie (gophers, monkeys, sentient alien bones, the ants climbing on top of each other, the friggin fridge and Indy's lecture during a motorcycle chase, to name some...)
"I got a bad feeling about this"
Even though I thought it was a bit odd to hear him say that (not why he said it, but when he said it) I still got a chuckle out of that line...
Memories work all around the movie, and some say that's why you get a good feling out of this movie: Nostalgia
__________________
"When Gotham is ashes, you have my permission to die." -BANE
Last edited by S_D_J on May 24th, 2008 at 04:58 PM
Ford is good in Indy 4... plus the lines are better. In TPM everything is wooden, both the lines as well as the acting. plus it's more presumtuous than Indy 4... I prefer the latest Indy film myself, given the choice.
Indy 4 had much stronger acting and dialogue than TPM. But i loved both anyway. I'm not a critical, nit-picky nerd - it's all entertainment and having a good time to me.
Seriously. There was no gain from the actual adventure.
Raiders: The Ark is gained, though the government spirits it away.
Temple: The Sankara stone is returned to its rightful place, as well as the children.
Crusade: Though it was slightly shoehorned in, Indy "gained" his father through the Grail.
In this? The Skull is returned to its rightful place, but it, the "throne room", the ship, all of the archaeological wonders, even the temple are all lost. And before someone argues that knowledge was what was gained, no, because nobody would believe the group anyway.
Once the ship activates, the film just kind of grinds to a halt, then the marriage scene is tacked on.
I'm a scifi fan. I love aliens and space and spaceships. But it didn't feel right here. Perhaps if the thirteen skulls and their skeletons had been said to be carved as a monument to their "gods", leaving it up to the viewer to decide if they had been actual alien skeletons or something more earthly, I could have stomached it. I even would have believed them being some sort of compendium of knowledge then. But resurrecting an alien and then having that alien serve no real purpose didn't sit well with me.
__________________
WARNING: The above post may contain sarcasm and/or sophisticated satire. Any psychological damage sustained is purely your fault.
Overall though, it was a satisfiing ending for me. I accept KotCS as part of the franchise - however bold it was, it didnt shy away from anything, and i admired that aspect - even if it wasnt typical of Indiana Jones, it still delivered in a profound way.
And not to mention the only good thing about the prequals that was done right was the cgi for the different locations, The battles and saber fights
as for the ending imo it does fit in with all the other movies, Its still
archaeology and all that but they've gone done the path of the Mayan and Inca and their gods how they were apparantly aliens all that sort of thing.
KMC Community Forums
May 24th, 2008 01:44 PM
