What was your experience seeing KOTCS in the theater like?

StoneTriple

New member
Agent Z said:
The general audiences I watched the film with seemed to be either enjoying it enough and into it...

That was the way it was for the four times I saw it. Capacity (or near) crowds that seemed to really enjoy it.
 
some people laughed. we all applauded at the end (it deserved it) but this one dude was really abnoxious he kept bursting out saying "come on Indy" or "he's Behind you!!" just crap like tht stuff we're all thinking but are intelligent enough not to say out loud:gun:
 

Crack that whip

New member
I saw it seven times in theaters, at various points from one of the opening midnight showings to one in its last week or so at a local discount theater, shortly before it went to video. I mostly remember my own reaction, but I do think I can safely say the audience response at the opening midnight show was positive although muted, not much like the initial Raiders of the Lost Ark experience back in the day, but certainly a favorable response.

My second show was an opening evening one, the day after the midnight showing I saw first, and that experience was most disappointing, though I'd peg that mainly on the wholly unsatisfactory sound in the theater I saw it at. I regret not leaving the auditorium to ask that they do something about the muffled sound, but of course I didn't want to miss a moment, so... :(
 

Zealot

New member
caats said:
opposed to leaving their things and staying?

Hehe, good point. What I am trying to say is that there was nothing spectacular about the audience reaction. No applaud, no laughing, no crying, no guys dressed as Indy etc.
 

deckard24

New member
First time around at the midnight show the crowd reacted indifferently! It was very similar to the crowd at the midnight show of The Phantom Menace. The audience was pretty much all teens and adults, and I really don't think there was a single kid in the seats. There was only one guy dressed as Indy in the crowd, but that was about it for major displays of fandom.

The second time around it was a much more enthusiastic crowd, with a more diverse audience. There were plenty of cheers, screams in terror(at the ants and scorpions), laughs, and applause at the end.

Third and fourth time the audience was indifferrent again, a few laughs and screams but that was about it.

Overall the crowd reacted pretty blase about the whole thing with some minor excitement here and there. Not at all what I was expecting! What was most fun about the whole experience was seeing how diverse the crowd could be! You had senior citizens sitting next to teenagers, and little kids with their late 30 something parents who most likely grew up with the old films. I remember as a kid how into Last Crusade the crowd was, and this was nothing like that at all! Back then people laughed at all the jokes, and they were hard laughs not chuckles, and there were tons of cheers and screams at all the right moments. With KOTCS it was like people felt they had to laugh, but really weren't inclined to.
 

metalinvader

Well-known member
Midnight showing for me was loads of fun.People laughed,Cheered (Yes,Cheered!) and clapped at the end.

I did hear a few complaints walking out,One being from my brother but other then that people were pretty pleased. I know I was.
 

Udvarnoky

Well-known member
Dr Bones said:
So you paid to see a movie you were disappointed with several times, but in the end it was the infectious reactions of an appreciative audience (not made up solely of Indy fans) made it more enjoyable?

I paid to see the movie several times because it's an Indiana Jones movie, and I'm an Indiana Jones fan. That makes it a special movie for me, and it's also a movie that, more than any other in recent memory, I've had a really hard time trying to figure out how I feel about it.

And regarding the kids showing: an appreciative audience did not make the film any better, but rather made that particular experience more enjoyable for me. Most escapist movies are like that - an engaged and participant audience makes the experience more fun. It's nothing really to do with the quality of the movie, which of course isn't variable, but helps explain why something like Snakes on a Plane is ten times more fun in a crowded, rowdy theater than it is on DVD in an empty home. I'm also not sure what you mean by "in the end."

Agent Z said:
Isn't this the epitome of overhype though? You aren't taking the film on its own merits, but rather expecting it to be already above a predetermined mark in your mind.

So me expecting (what I would deem to be) an Indiana Jones movie out of an Indiana Jones movie is not only overhype, but the epitome of it? I also don't see why you assume I expected the movie to be "above" a predetermined mark in my mind. I would have been more than happy with it merely meeting it. How do you know how high or low my expectations were that you would call them the epitome of overhype?

And sure, I had expectations. Everyone has expectations going into a movie, no matter how big or small, no matter how deep-rooted or carefree. Anyone who says otherwise is a liar. That's why I reacted strongly to Dr Bones' comment that people with "whatever expectations" disliked the movie, and everyone else did because they had an open mind. (The offensive implication being that only open minded people could enjoy the movie.) And people can have expectations without them being unreasonable, by the way, just like they can have expectations while still taking a film on its own merits. It's called viewing a movie objectively, or as objectively as a person can.

Agent Z said:
Kingdom continues that approach and doesn't seem to have the pretensions to be something it isn't, other than a pulpy fun ride.

Neither did the other movies. So, from my perspective, the only logical conclusion I can draw, knowing that all four films have the same approach, is that Kingdom is simply a worse movie.

(Hopefully I didn't **** all over this thread too bad.)
 
Last edited:

Indy's brother

New member
I must say that hearing the entire audience clap at the end took me by surprise. That audience was in Naperville, Ill. The only other time that I've seen a theater audience do this was when I saw a 30yr anniversary showing of "Taxi Driver" at the Music Box Theater in chicago. Oh, and at the other two viewings of KOTCS that I took in on separate days (also in Naperville). The crowds that I saw Indy 4 with seemed to really enjoy this film, even laughing out loud at all the parts that we Raveners are so divided over. It's ironic that casual film goers were able to enjoy this Indy installment more freely than the fans who wanted to enjoy it the most. Of course I realize that this is because an casual viewer has less of an emotional investment in these films, but that doesn't take away the irony.
 

Dr. Gonzo

New member
At the midnight showing in Long Beach California about a third of the audience applauded at the end. I was conflicted at the time. The parts that always got a response the few times I saw it were always "Why the hell didn't you make him finish school?!" and when Mutt picks the hat up and Ford grabs it out of his hand as the march rises. The hat thing always got that "yess!" reaction. Even now I am still conflicted about what was delivered to us on May 22nd 2008. Don't hate it, but definately don't love it.
 

Agent Z

Active member
Udvarnoky said:
I also don't see why you assume I expected the movie to be "above" a predetermined mark in my mind.


Udvarnoky said:
I did not expect a movie that would be anywhere near Raiders, but I did not expect a movie that was relentlessly average, either. I don't go to a film with Indiana Jones in the title to see an average action adventure movie, because it's not an average franchise and it's not made by average talent.

So, going in, the film already has to be an above average action adventure movie...because it's not an "average" franchise..and it's not made by "average" talent?

And that's just to "meet" your expectations. We haven't even gotten to surpassing them...

You are, in effect, branding the film because it's an "Indiana Jones film". You are putting the franchise and its makers on a level above the average action adventure movie.

Hey, fine by me, but it's still hype. We can bounce back and forth between the shades of gray between "semihype", "hype", "overhype" and "ludicroushype" on another day....


Udvarnoky said:
That's why I reacted strongly to Dr Bones' comment that people with "whatever expectations" disliked the movie, and everyone else did because they had an open mind. (The offensive implication being that only open minded people could enjoy the movie.)

I know, I can tell. Still. *LOL*

Udvarnoky said:
(Hopefully I didn't **** all over this thread too bad.)

You ruined the new year! ;)
 
Last edited:

Darth Vile

New member
Udvarnoky said:
I paid to see the movie several times because it's an Indiana Jones movie, and I'm an Indiana Jones fan. That makes it a special movie for me.

Udvarnoky said:
So me expecting (what I would deem to be) an Indiana Jones movie out of an Indiana Jones movie is not only overhype, but the epitome of it? I also don't see why you assume I expected the movie to be "above" a predetermined mark in my mind. I would have been more than happy with it merely meeting it. How do you know how high or low my expectations were that you would call them the epitome of overhype?

And sure, I had expectations. Everyone has expectations going into a movie, no matter how big or small, no matter how deep-rooted or carefree. Anyone who says otherwise is a liar. And people can have expectations without them being unreasonable, by the way, just like they can have expectations while still taking a film on its own merits. It's called viewing a movie objectively, or as objectively as a person can.


This general conversation is really interesting? as it touches upon something that I find fascinating on both a sociological and physiological level i.e. ?interpretation?.

Playing the Devils Advocate on this one? Perception is everything. Movies (or indeed art) don?t exist in a vacuum. Interpretation can be influenced by the conditions one is exposed to during the viewing/performance - it helps form/solidify and re-affirms our opinions. Therefore, one could posit that conditions shape and determine aesthetic values just as much as ?technical? merit.

There are no rules for what really constitutes art, other that what is defined by society in general? and ?art? itself is merely a social construct. Therefore, mass interpretation is a good a way as any to define something?s merits i.e. if audience participation improves the aesthetic experience; it improves the piece of art. How good would the Mona Lisa be if everyone thought it were rubbish right?

Again playing the Devils Advocate? it seems like many an Indiana Jones fan; you have a strong emotional connection to the character and movies (just like me). Therefore, I?d suggest that we?re really the last people who can have a truly objective debate/view about the movies. That?s not to say our views are unimportant, uninteresting or uninformed, but that they are not emotionally detached from the subject matter (something true objectivity needs).

I can understand that my perception of Indiana Jones (and Star Wars for that matter) can be skewed (both in the positive and negative), because of that strong resonance that emotional connection creates. I strongly believe you to be the same (and that is not a criticism). Indeed, one could argue that we are strongly biased, whatever side of the fence we sit? which in turn leads to the sometimes passionate debates/arguments. This is ultimately not borne out of logic and objectivity, but rather emotion/attachment for the subject matter.
 

Agent Z

Active member
Darth Vile said:
This general conversation is really interesting… as it touches upon something that I find fascinating on both a sociological and physiological level i.e. ‘interpretation’.

Playing the Devils Advocate on this one… Perception is everything. Movies (or indeed art) don’t exist in a vacuum. Interpretation can be influenced by the conditions one is exposed to during the viewing/performance - it helps form/solidify and re-affirms our opinions. Therefore, one could posit that conditions shape and determine aesthetic values just as much as ‘technical’ merit.

There are no rules for what really constitutes art, other that what is defined by society in general… and ‘art’ itself is merely a social construct. Therefore, mass interpretation is a good a way as any to define something’s merits i.e. if audience participation improves the aesthetic experience; it improves the piece of art. How good would the Mona Lisa be if everyone thought it were rubbish right?

Again playing the Devils Advocate… it seems like many an Indiana Jones fan; you have a strong emotional connection to the character and movies (just like me). Therefore, I’d suggest that we’re really the last people who can have a truly objective debate/view about the movies. That’s not to say our views are unimportant, uninteresting or uninformed, but that they are not emotionally detached from the subject matter (something true objectivity needs).

I can understand that my perception of Indiana Jones (and Star Wars for that matter) can be skewed (both in the positive and negative), because of that strong resonance that emotional connection creates. I strongly believe you to be the same (and that is not a criticism). Indeed, one could argue that we are strongly biased, whatever side of the fence we sit… which in turn leads to the sometimes passionate debates/arguments. This is ultimately not borne out of logic and objectivity, but rather emotion/attachment for the subject matter.

On that same note, how can one be totally objective when it comes to art?

Ultimately, the only opinion that matters is that of the viewer. We can question, qualify, and quantify tastes, expectations, knowledge, and countless other factors all we want, but a film will hit each person in a way that is totally unique....just like any other experience in life.

Think about that. You and I may love the same film, but never totally in the same way....not down to the nth degree.

That is why art is so great. It touches each of us on a personal level, and even when we can step back and objectively see a film for being rather average or below average, there might still be factors in the film that hit a chord with us and make us love the film, in spite of the flaws we recognize from the get-go.

It's why one person can hate Independence Day (me), another person can love it, and still another person can like it and forget about it altogether while they drive home from the showing.




Darth Vile said:
How good would the Mona Lisa be if everyone thought it were rubbish right?

That's a great question.

If I saw the Mona Lisa on my own, with no history or expectations, I could see myself liking it.

Going further, if I had heard about the Mona Lisa being rubbish from the get-go and I then saw it....would I be already be searching for the flaws over the positives?

I would like to think that I wouldn't. I know, ultimately, once one is away from the hype and influence of others, and alone with the art, that is when they can be most objective. I would appreciate the Mona Lisa in time, but initially, I am not sure if I would have been able to appreciate..or judge it fairly enough...with expectations already in place.
 
Last edited:

Inbanana

New member
The theater I went to was packed, and while looking around for a seat, I noticed maybe one person wearing a fedora. However, when leaving I did notice a couple dressed up as Henry Sr. and Marion in the lobby (must have been waiting for Indy to come out of the bathroom).

During the movie, there was applause when the Paramount logo first came up, and also a smattering at the end credits. In between there were some laughs, and maybe even a couple of moans... but, in general, everyone seemed to be into the movie... or at least trying to be.

The reaction walking out of the theater though seemed a bit more mixed... there were a couple negative comments I overheard , which, actually felt reassuring, as it meant that I wasn't completely loosing my mind. Yes, I know, I tried to keep an open mind... I tried to keep my expectations low... but I was still disappointed... even embarrassed... as everyone who knew me knew how exited I was that there was a new Indiana Jones movie coming out, especially my poor wife who I drug to the midnight showing and had to endure listening to the Raiders march countless times over the past year or so... only to have to sit through this... but ironically, she actually really enjoyed it... go figure.
 
Last edited:

RaideroftheArk

New member
Wow...I can't believe how many of you reported no reaction what so ever. I thought just because I lived in NJ that people here are drips and don't respond to anything.

The 1st time I saw it nobody reacted to anything...I laughed at stuff but everyone was pretty silent except for an elderly gentleman that was hard of hearing that had to inform the entire row he was sitting with "HE DON'T LIKE SNAKES" when Mutt threw him the snake.

I left thinking to myself "was that a good movie?" I really don't think I was prepared for what I saw. I disputed and nit picked over many things until I saw it again...and again...

The 2nd time everyone was laughing at all the funny stuff and it was generally taken a little lighter.

The 3rd time about the same except I got a few people to applause at the very end when I stood and and said "ALRIGHT!" :: CLAP, CLAP, CLAP ::
 

Indy's brother

New member
Inbanana said:
everyone who knew me knew how exited I was that there was a new Indiana Jones movie coming out, especially my poor wife... only to have to sit through this... but ironically, she actually really enjoyed it... go figure.

I hear you on that. My missus liked it a lot more than I did. But then again, her favorite movie is "Bring It On". :sick:
 

Udvarnoky

Well-known member
Agent Z said:
So, going in, the film already has to be an above average action adventure movie...because it's not an "average" franchise..and it's not made by "average" talent?

For me to not be disappointed? Correct. Obviously, my version of what above average is can easily be different from yours. Maybe you thought, for example, that Temple of Doom and Last Crusade were not above average action adventure movies. The only thing that's really important is that whatever my standards for an Indiana Jones movie is, Indy4 didn't meet them.

Agent Z said:
And that's just to "meet" your expectations. We haven't even gotten to surpassing them...

Who's to say they needed to be surpassed? You?

Agent Z said:
You are, in effect, branding the film because it's an "Indiana Jones film". You are putting the franchise and its makers on a level above the average action adventure movie.

Absolutely, I don't deny that. Indiana Jones movies have/had a deserved reputation for being the cream of the crop of adventure movies. If you consider the other Indiana Jones movies to be average or less, then obviously it's a lot easier for Indy4 to meet your standards for the franchise. The real "branding" of the movie as an Indiana Jones movie is done by the film makers, not by me. As a member of the audience, I'm simply determining whether or not I feel it's of the same level as its predecessors.

Agent Z said:
Hey, fine by me, but it's still hype. We can bounce back and forth between the shades of gray between "semihype", "hype", "overhype" and "ludicroushype" on another day....

The point was you were clearly defining my "hype" for the move using only the most excessive terms, despite the fact that you don't and can't know such a thing. Despite what you say about shades of grey, there is a reason that instead of using "hype" you used terms like "overhype" and "epitome." Calling my wife "beautiful" as opposed to "not unattractive" will yield two very different results, I assure you.
 

WrathofGod

New member
I don't remember an energetic vibe as we exited. I was left wondering "what was that?!" My mate asked me what i thought,...i just looked at him and said ..."That was bad". I couldn't believe those words were coming out of my mouth after having just seen an Indy movie, it was a phantom menace moment.:(
 

Morning Bell

New member
Most of the showings I went to here in Nashville were very enthusiastic and fun. A couple of the showings were full and people were laughing and gasping at certain parts and there was even some applause at the end. I had a blast and I was glad to see people of all ages enjoying themselves, which is what Indy is all about.:)
 

IndyJr

New member
They clapped through out and at the end, It was my entire school viewing it.

Being known as the Indy fan at my school, people kept coming up to me and saying "That was an awesome as movie!" or something along those lines.
 

DocWhiskey

Well-known member
I seen KotCS 4 times in theaters and the responses were all very similar. People seemed to enjoy themselves. They clapped and laughed at all the same parts. Everyone seemed to really get a kick out of the motorcycle chase when Indy climbs out of the Russian's window and onto Mutt's bike. There were always gasps when Marion tells Indy that Mutt's his son. When the film was over, I'd stand in the lobby listening to peoples reactions. What I heard most of the time was "Why Aliens?". But other then that everyone seemed to like it.

I will say this though, out of all the summer blockbusters like Dark Knight, Iron Man, Incredible Hulk, and Hellboy II no crowd seemed to enjoy themselves more then watching Indy 4. Everyone seemed to have a smile on before and after the film. Whether they were laughing because they had a great time or how bad the film was is beyond me :p
 
Top