Who would win in a fight between...

oki9Sedo

New member
1ord3vil said:
He could've done what he did out of a need to show off for his friends

There's nobody else around.

1ord3vil said:
to test his fistfighting skills

By fighting someone half his bodyweight and three inches shorter then him? Thats a great way to test your skills. Why don't you test your mathematical skills by adding 2 and 2?

1ord3vil said:
to see how hard he could beat someone up with his worked-out muscles

Then why does he stroll up so confidently, acting like he KNOWS he could beat up Indy with his worked-out muscles and is there to prove it?

, or for no particular reason other than being mentally unstable or angry

You're reaching with that one, and I think you know it.

Look, since this is an Indiana Jones film, the simplest explanation is almost certainly the right one: he's an a sshole having a boring day, sees some guy in a hat trying to steal the plane he's working on and uses it as an opportunity to have some fun.
 

1ord3vil

New member
oki9Sedo said:
Why don't you test your mathematical skills by adding 2 and 2?
You're really reaching with stuff like this, and you know it.
Look, since this is an Indiana Jones film, the simplest explanation is almost certainly the right one: he's an a sshole having a boring day, sees some guy in a hat trying to steal the plane he's working on and uses it as an opportunity to have some fun.
Nah, he just got really pissed off at the sight of someone trying to steal the plane and wanted to beat him up for no other reason whatsoever.
 

oki9Sedo

New member
1ord3vil said:
You're really reaching with stuff like this, and you know it.

You didn't actually counteract what I said, you just resorted to using childish tactics of repeating something I said to mock me.

What next, "you're a big smelly poo-face"?

Like I said, testing your boxing skills by fighting someone half your weight and size is pointless. It'd be like testing your fitness by picking up a pencil.

1ord3vil said:
Nah, he just got really pissed off at the sight of someone trying to steal the plane and wanted to beat him up for no other reason whatsoever.

He didn't look pissed at all. He grins as soon as he sees Indy, as if to say "Ah, this is gonna be fun!". He laughs and mocks Indy, and bullies him throughout the fight by taunting him and jabbing him with half-effort punches.

The only time he ever gets pissed is when Indy bites his arm, and overwhelms him with those four punches at the end. But thats the same anger you have if you're picking up a spider to throw out the window and he bites you.
 

1ord3vil

New member
oki9Sedo said:
What next, "you're a big smelly poo-face"?
Actually, you're the only one resorting to the use of extremely childish language here. I was merely pointing out what you were doing.
The only time he ever gets pissed is when Indy bites his arm, and overwhelms him with those four punches at the end. But thats the same anger you have if you're picking up a spider to throw out the window and he bites you.
Feel free. I'll take a different pick tho. Nothing stops the character from displaying a mischevious grin even though he's, for example, angry.
 

oki9Sedo

New member
1ord3vil said:
Actually, you're the only one resorting to the use of extremely childish language here. I was merely pointing out what you were doing.

Again, you didn't actually counteract what I said about improving your boxing skills by fighting someone much smaller and lighter than you.

1ord3vil said:
Nothing stops the character from displaying a mischevious grin even though he's, for example, angry.

Why would he be angry? Its not his plane, he's just a mechanic paid to work on it.
 

ReggieSnake

New member
1ord3vil said:
Sure, the scriptwriters' motivations. The motivations of the characters are whatever you happen to think they are.
Are you a relativist? In that case arguing with you would be pointless.;)

Why not go with the simple motivation that would seem readily apparent? Why suppose that a car moves because the ground is moving out from underneath it, rather than the simple explanation that the car itself moves?
Besides this expanation:
Oki9sedo said:
Look, since this is an Indiana Jones film, the simplest explanation is almost certainly the right one: he's an a sshole having a boring day, sees some guy in a hat trying to steal the plane he's working on and uses it as an opportunity to have some fun.
seems more fun than this explanation:
1ord3vil said:
He could've done what he did out of a need to show off for his friends, to test his fistfighting skills, to see how hard he could beat someone up with his worked-out muscles, or for no particular reason other than being mentally unstable or angry etc, etc.
By which I mean, that you seem to be complicating the seemingly obvious motives of the character.
 

1ord3vil

New member
oki9Sedo said:
Again, you didn't actually counteract what I said about improving your boxing skills by fighting someone much smaller and lighter than you.
In terms of raw strength it's a no-brainer of course, but it depends on how big and strong you are versus how good your skill and technique is.
Why would he be angry? Its not his plane, he's just a mechanic paid to work on it.
Sure, that's possible, but why wouldn't he be angry? He's a mechanic working in the Luftwaffe and could have a strong sense of loyalty and passion for the equipment he's working with.
 

oki9Sedo

New member
ReggieSnake said:
By which I mean, that you seem to be complicating the seemingly obvious motives of the character.

Thats exactly it. If this were an Jean-Luc Godard 1960s French New Wave film, I'd happily accept that there are many alternatives to whats most obvious.

But this is Indiana Jones. If something's obvious, you can almost certain thats what it is.
 

1ord3vil

New member
ReggieSnake said:
Are you a relativist? In that case arguing with you would be pointless.;)
The more we distance ourselves from fairy tales and the more we approach thoughts and principles applying to the real world, my answer will increasingly have to be "no". :)
 
Last edited:

oki9Sedo

New member
1ord3vil said:
He's a mechanic working in the Luftwaffe and could have a strong sense of loyalty and passion for the equipment he's working with.

If that were the reason, he would come across as angry - he comes across as enjoying the whole thing.

This is a simple film, so like I said, the most obvious answer is almost certainly the right one.

Not to mention that my reason is better and more fun than yours.
 

1ord3vil

New member
oki9Sedo said:
But this is Indiana Jones. If something's obvious, you can almost certain thats what it is.
Certainly. But he was obviously angry.

To digress somewhat with regards to your other thoughts: Part of why I'm arguing the way I do is that opting for the simplest and the most widely accepted interpretation sometimes just kills the imagination, even though opting for that "things are obviously what they are" will be the most overwhelmingly obvious choice in lot of given settings. I've heard the fairytales of Brothers Grimm so many times that most of them just bore me by now, even though they worked to spark off vivid dreams, fantasies and imagery for me a long time ago. So it's much funner to imagine these simple stories and characters in a more complex setting, in which, for example, Rose Red is not a sleeping princess, but rather a radical socialist extremist who blows her enemies' brains out with a sniper rifle, with the Big Bad Wolf, now a sheriff and detective, being high on her list.
 

1ord3vil

New member
oki9Sedo said:
If that were the reason, he would come across as angry - he comes across as enjoying the whole thing.
Sure. My personal perception of the scene is mostly in agreement, though there has always been a certain element of aggression and anger in there for me too.
Not to mention that my reason is better and more fun than yours.
But how would you know? I didn't state my own interpretation of the scene until just now. In any case, I think my slight variation of his motives is better.
 

1ord3vil

New member
ReggieSnake said:
Why not go with the simple motivation that would seem readily apparent?
In a straightforward fairlytale movie like Raiders, that's what I do as well. Even as a mere kid though I thought the mechanic's motives for the fight were slightly more than just "fun". YMMV. Let the speculation continue!
 
Last edited:

Attila the Professor

Moderator
Staff member
That's not such a ridiculously simple motive though, I would argue, 1ord3vil. I raise this point because one of the things I've always enjoyed about the character of Colonel Vogel in Last Crusade is that I think he's a well-drawn portrait of a good soldier who's taken all his promotions with pleasure and honor but who really looks forward the parts of soldiering where he gets to get his hands dirty, as in the tank sequence as elsewhere. He's much, much different than Col. Dietrich in Raiders for this reason, and makes his double-duty as the military functionary and major enemy who enjoys beating the pulp out of Indy along the lines of the German mechanic and the head Thuggee guard work extremely well.

Then consider the closest analogue to the mechanic within Raiders itself, the tough sergeant during the truck chase. He's a hardened soldier, a slightly older man, who does what he does with grim determination but no particular joy, even when punching Indy in the arm. There may be the slightest of smiles as he's speeding up to crush Indy under the truck, but only the slightest, by my lights. He has nothing to show off, he has no real streak of sadism, if he's angry about anything it's about the loss of his men, but really, he's just trying to do his job.

There's nothing like that in the mechanic. The very first expression on his face when he emerges from his hut is a smile. He walks over, he swings his arms jauntily, he laughs, he taunts...one would imagine he doesn't have that much excitement in his life. He's a mechanic, he presumably keeps in shape, and that's probably about it. I don't see him being much for dissipation of either the sexual or alcoholic variety, although this speculation is quite unsubstantiated, of course. He likes the diversion. Right before he's sliced by the blade, Indy's on the ground - the easiest thing in the world would be to kick him, but instead it's "come on, get up" or something along those lines. He's not even that brutal; it's vaguely sportsmanlike. He's in it for the fun.
 

oki9Sedo

New member
Attila the Professor said:
That's not such a ridiculously simple motive though, I would argue, 1ord3vil. I raise this point because one of the things I've always enjoyed about the character of Colonel Vogel in Last Crusade is that I think he's a well-drawn portrait of a good soldier who's taken all his promotions with pleasure and honor but who really looks forward the parts of soldiering where he gets to get his hands dirty, as in the tank sequence as elsewhere. He's much, much different than Col. Dietrich in Raiders for this reason, and makes his double-duty as the military functionary and major enemy who enjoys beating the pulp out of Indy along the lines of the German mechanic and the head Thuggee guard work extremely well.

Thats a very interesting way of looking on him. I never looked on him as sadistic, just a ruthless, efficient man who gets the job done.

Attila the Professor said:
Then consider the closest analogue to the mechanic within Raiders itself, the tough sergeant during the truck chase. He's a hardened soldier, a slightly older man, who does what he does with grim determination but no particular joy, even when punching Indy in the arm. There may be the slightest of smiles as he's speeding up to crush Indy under the truck, but only the slightest, by my lights. He has nothing to show off, he has no real streak of sadism, if he's angry about anything it's about the loss of his men, but really, he's just trying to do his job.

I agree totally. I do think he was getting a little satisfaction out of punching Indy in the arm though.....not because he's sadistic, but because he was angry at him and because he was a serious threat who had to be quashed.
 
Last edited:

ReggieSnake

New member
Attila the Professor said:
That's not such a ridiculously simple motive though, I would argue, 1ord3vil. I raise this point because one of the things I've always enjoyed about the character of Colonel Vogel in Last Crusade is that I think he's a well-drawn portrait of a good soldier who's taken all his promotions with pleasure and honor but who really looks forward the parts of soldiering where he gets to get his hands dirty, as in the tank sequence as elsewhere. He's much, much different than Col. Dietrich in Raiders for this reason, and makes his double-duty as the military functionary and major enemy who enjoys beating the pulp out of Indy along the lines of the German mechanic and the head Thuggee guard work extremely well.

Then consider the closest analogue to the mechanic within Raiders itself, the tough sergeant during the truck chase. He's a hardened soldier, a slightly older man, who does what he does with grim determination but no particular joy, even when punching Indy in the arm. There may be the slightest of smiles as he's speeding up to crush Indy under the truck, but only the slightest, by my lights. He has nothing to show off, he has no real streak of sadism, if he's angry about anything it's about the loss of his men, but really, he's just trying to do his job.

There's nothing like that in the mechanic. The very first expression on his face when he emerges from his hut is a smile. He walks over, he swings his arms jauntily, he laughs, he taunts...one would imagine he doesn't have that much excitement in his life. He's a mechanic, he presumably keeps in shape, and that's probably about it. I don't see him being much for dissipation of either the sexual or alcoholic variety, although this speculation is quite unsubstantiated, of course. He likes the diversion. Right before he's sliced by the blade, Indy's on the ground - the easiest thing in the world would be to kick him, but instead it's "come on, get up" or something along those lines. He's not even that brutal; it's vaguely sportsmanlike. He's in it for the fun.
Very well thought out and presented. I applaud you.:hat:

I've always found Vogel to be a interesting character for the same reason.
 

1ord3vil

New member
oki9Sedo said:
Back that up with proof, as I've tried to do.
Now to get things straight, you haven't provided any proof as such, but you have provided a perfectly reasonable and qualified opinion, and I can provide a similarly qualified opinion for my own point of view of course.

As the mechanic emerges from the hut, he sees Indy fighting another mechanic by the plane. The expression forming on his face as his upper teeth meet his lower lip to form a mischevious grin suggests both some anger and aggression as well as some very solid confidence. As he throws off his cap, removes his jacket and proceeds to move towads Indy, it's becoming than abundantly clear that this isn't the smile and body language of a guy who is going to shake hands and invite someone in for a drink. He sees a thug in his place, messing around with his friends and his things, it pisses him off and now he's going to walk over there and teach Indy a lesson or two about who's the real boss around here. This is pretty much what I saw when I first watched the movie back as a young kid, and that's still what I think about it.
Attila the Professor said:
That's not such a ridiculously simple motive though, I would argue, 1ord3vil.
I completely agree with this. But the motives I described above is not too complex for the situation, because Raiders isn't such a ridicilously simple story either.

To exaggerate, what I'm getting at is that if you on one hand compare the depth of the story, people and drama in Raiders to that of The Godfather, Raiders comes off as little more than two-dimensional pulp whereas most people will agree that The Godfather rings more true at the true depths of the human condition. On the other hand, if you compare it to a much simpler fairytale like The Three Little Pigs, the vast complexity of the incredible world portrayed in Raiders blows you away as you hold it up to the charming cartoonish fairytale. It's not at all fair to compare them directly by any means of course, but looking at them side by side, you can appreciate the vastly different orders of magnitute in terms of story depth and complexity they provide and the different levels of maturity required to fully appreciate them.

The world in Raiders is portrayed at various levels of complexity and the depth of the unfolding story amounts to more than the bare minimum you'd otherwise expect from a simple fairy tale written over just a mere few pages for example. So even though Raiders isn't terribly advanced in terms of complexity, it is still head and shoulders above the type of simpler cardboard cut-out adventure stories we've all seen portrayed on too many other occasions. So in Raiders, there is more than enough room for more-than-minimum and different interpretations, for example such as the one I have provided for the mechanic's motives above.
 

oki9Sedo

New member
1ord3vil said:
Now to get things straight, you haven't provided any proof as such, but you have provided a perfectly reasonable and qualified opinion, and I can provide a similarly qualified opinion for my own point of view of course.

As the mechanic emerges from the hut, he sees Indy fighting another mechanic by the plane. The expression forming on his face as his upper teeth meet his lower lip to form a mischevious grin suggests both some anger and aggression as well as some very solid confidence. As he throws off his cap, removes his jacket and proceeds to move towads Indy, it's becoming than abundantly clear that this isn't the smile and body language of a guy who is going to shake hands and invite someone in for a drink. He sees a thug in his place, messing around with his friends and his things, it pisses him off and now he's going to walk over there and teach Indy a lesson or two about who's the real boss around here. This is pretty much what I saw when I first watched the movie back as a young kid, and that's still what I think about it.

Well at least now that you've actually bothered your arse to back up your opinions I can actually understand them.

I still disagree though, I don't get any sense of anger from him. The part where he smiles and bits his lower lip was more suggestive of him thinking "Oh ho ho, this is gonna be fun!" to me.

I certainly didn't get the impression that he disliked Indy, just that he saw him as a good excuse to get into a fight. He's probably that sort, who if he sees a fight happening he's happy to get in there.

1ord3vil said:
I completely agree with this. But the motives I described above is not too complex for the situation, because Raiders isn't such a ridicilously simple story either.

To exaggerate, what I'm getting at is that if you on one hand compare the depth of the story, people and drama in Raiders to that of The Godfather, Raiders comes off as little more than two-dimensional pulp whereas most people will agree that The Godfather rings more true at the true depths of the human condition. On the other hand, if you compare it to a much simpler fairytale like The Three Little Pigs, the vast complexity of the incredible world portrayed in Raiders blows you away as you hold it up to the charming cartoonish fairytale. It's not at all fair to compare them directly by any means of course, but looking at them side by side, you can appreciate the vastly different orders of magnitute in terms of story depth and complexity they provide and the different levels of maturity required to fully appreciate them.

The world in Raiders is portrayed at various levels of complexity and the depth of the unfolding story amounts to more than the bare minimum you'd otherwise expect from a simple fairy tale written over just a mere few pages for example. So even though Raiders isn't terribly advanced in terms of complexity, it is still head and shoulders above the type of simpler cardboard cut-out adventure stories we've all seen portrayed on too many other occasions. So in Raiders, there is more than enough room for more-than-minimum and different interpretations, for example such as the one I have provided for the mechanic's motives above.

It does have much greater levels of complexity and depth than a simple fairy-tale, but its still the kind of film where the majority of things should be "taken at face value", to quote Indy.

If a villain laughs in an evil way, its because he's evil, not because there's some underlying Freudian psychology going on there.

Last Crusade is more complicated and grown up than Raiders, and Temple of Doom is less.
 

1ord3vil

New member
oki9Sedo said:
Well at least now that you've actually bothered your arse to back up your opinions I can actually understand them.
The above is from the guy who also complained about childish language, but oh well. :)
I still disagree though
I don't care.
It does have much greater levels of complexity and depth than a simple fairy-tale, but its still the kind of film where the majority of things should be "taken at face value", to quote Indy.
That's literally what I did, given my interpretation of the scene. It just so happens that it is different from yours.
Last Crusade is more complicated and grown up than Raiders, and Temple of Doom is less.
I can't be bothered to watch the other two films from beginning to end anymore and I think they're both inferior to Raiders in most ways. Both of them contain certain scenes I appreciate though.
 
Top