But back on topic, I agree that one of KOTCS's flaws was that it didn't go into enough detail with the whole corrupt government subplot. This was a plot department that Darabont's script absolutely kicked ass in.
Another area where they dropped the ball, no doubt.
Paranoia was a BIG theme that wasn't mined, and a shame it wasn't.
A character who saw conspiracies everywhere could have been fun to play with.
Location: In the Map Room playing with a laser pointer
Posts: 2,923
The only thing wrong with it is that we actually saw the alien. That was the step too far. We didn't see god when the ark was opened, we didn't see shiva when the sankara stones lit up, we didn't see jesus when the grail worked it's magic, but we saw a fully fleshed out alien at the end of KOTCS. Leaving it to the imagination would have been better. Other than that, the only reason people have a problem with aliens is because it doesn't fit the traditional confines of religious belief for the western world. I thought that it was a fine idea. No more or less ridiculous than any of the others. Less, actually because it's not a true deity. Just another mortal(ish) sentient being like us. Perhaps that's another spot that people have a hang up with. At any rate, I thought it was a bold and interesting idea. Besides, I don't care what anyone thinks, the crystal skull is the coolest-looking quest item yet, imho.
Would it make a difference? (Labour and Conservative are pretty interchangeable here. The BNP look like a bunch of thugs).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Indy's brother
The only thing wrong with it is that we actually saw the alien. That was the step too far. We didn't see god when the ark was opened, we didn't see shiva when the sankara stones lit up, we didn't see jesus when the grail worked it's magic, but we saw a fully fleshed out alien at the end of KOTCS. Leaving it to the imagination would have been better. Other than that, the only reason people have a problem with aliens is because it doesn't fit the traditional confines of religious belief for the western world. I thought that it was a fine idea. No more or less ridiculous than any of the others. Less, actually because it's not a true deity. Just another mortal(ish) sentient being like us. Perhaps that's another spot that people have a hang up with. At any rate, I thought it was a bold and interesting idea. Besides, I don't care what anyone thinks, the crystal skull is the coolest-looking quest item yet, imho.
The problem is that the myths they're based on are too recent. There's nothing archaic about the aliens. They're defined by mid-Twentieth century charlatans. It's suddenly a whole new world for Indy.
...Other than that, the only reason people have a problem with aliens is because it doesn't fit the traditional confines of religious belief for the western world.
Huh?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Montana Smith
The problem is that the myths they're based on are too recent. There's nothing archaic about the aliens. They're defined by mid-Twentieth century charlatans. It's suddenly a whole new world for Indy.
Yes...or in other words:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocket Surgeon
In keeping with why aliens are just plain wong, I agree, the pop culture revisionist history regarding ancient aliens is too contemporary to hold any real allure. All Crystal Skull did was take a hokey reimagining and cheapen Indy by having him simply explain it away/endorse it.
It holds no appreciable link to anything remotely historical or romantically "lost in the sands of time."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Montana Smith
Would it make a difference? (Labour and Conservative are pretty interchangeable here. The BNP look like a bunch of thugs)..
Sounds like the Alien was either a Labour or BNP supporter...
But the interesting facet is at they were there at the inception. They wouldn't have seemed so out of place if Lucas had chosen that possible path for ROTLA.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocket Surgeon
Sounds like the Alien was either a Labour or BNP supporter...
Location: In the Map Room playing with a laser pointer
Posts: 2,923
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocket Surgeon
Huh?
The most popular entries to the series have been those concerning Judeo-Christian macguffins/lore. TOD and KOTCS, not so much. KOTCS goes even further than TOD's Kali and Shiva by going for a "god" that is not a deity at all, which is something that western, i.e., "christian" sensibilities don't have anything in common with at all. It's not comfortable enough of a concept for an audience that has seemingly proven to prefer a more biblical slant towards the supernatural.
The most popular entries to the series have been those concerning Judeo-Christian macguffins/lore. TOD and KOTCS, not so much. KOTCS goes even further than TOD's Kali and Shiva by going for a "god" that is not a deity at all, which is something that western, i.e., "christian" sensibilities don't have anything in common with at all. It's not comfortable enough of a concept for an audience that has seemingly proven to prefer a more biblical slant towards the supernatural.
If Aliens are good enough for Cowboy's there good enough for Indy
Okay, I have to jump in here . . .
"Cowboys and Aliens" worked becuase the aliens were used as a parallel and it was designed to be a genre bending story.
The aliens were taking over planets, the same way cowboys were conquering the Western frontier. This point was drilled into your head in the comic book, it was way more subtle in the movie.
I'm sorry I had to do that, but I am the only person defending that movie.
i didnt mind the aliens because of the way it was handled. the movie felt like an indy movie through and through. there was still a kind of mystery at the end of the movie about the interdementional beings. i think i just had alot of questions at the end of the movie as to the setup of them. like, why did they come here? why did they choose to teach the ugha about farming? do they farm in there dimension? also, why didnt they just take off in the ufo, why split into 13 seperate beings and then wait 3000 years for another alien to return the missing skull? it doesnt quite make sense to me. this indy movie was more complicated then the others.
i didnt mind the aliens because of the way it was handled. the movie felt like an indy movie through and through. there was still a kind of mystery at the end of the movie about the interdementional beings. i think i just had alot of questions at the end of the movie as to the setup of them. like, why did they come here? why did they choose to teach the ugha about farming? do they farm in there dimension? also, why didnt they just take off in the ufo, why split into 13 seperate beings and then wait 3000 years for another alien to return the missing skull? it doesnt quite make sense to me. this indy movie was more complicated then the others.
Upon first viewing i was pissed that they put aliens in it. After several more viewings I have pin-pointed my dislike of this movie to two things: the fridge flying 100s of feet and Indy coming fine and the fact that they had a freakin flying saucer take off at the end. I can deal with the acient alien theme, just not actually finding acient aliens.
The alien theme can work I think in Indy, but they didn't go right about it, it was a bit too obvious with the alien exposed and the saucer. In fate of atlantis, the indiana game, there are alien references and so forth. At the end, the Germans attempt to make themselves like gods and they become strange scary looking beings of light, which eventually become deformed and die as a result. We don't see any aliens, but we see deformed bones and hints maybe the technology was from above.
I don't mind the ending with the alien in KOTCS, but, they should have made the death of Spalko a little more harrowing. I thought the alien when it leaned forward has quite a cold scary look in its eyes, actually. I think the scene where the bodys slide together does look good to be honest.
They could have had the alien figure somewhat darkened in shadow and not expose the full mystery of its apperance.
But, I think what would have been best would be like the comic. Irina's eyes should have burned out but she is still having knowledge poured in to her so she is still "seeing", whislt this occurs the skeletons (even if from camera trickery) appear to be closing in on her, until the beams set her on fire from the inside out. In this case, we'd never see the actual aliens but simply a sample of the power.
OR they could have made it so when she alien appears before her, it is clear she is seeing the skeletons as they would have appeared in the past in their full form, since she is being given the overpowering knowledge.
I'm not sure why the Ark was there but I'll admit that I did have a giddy fanboy moment when that happened. Mind you the movie was still good at the point.
I'm glad there are those who liked aliens, but I think it broke the pattern set from other films, and if Aliens had to be done it could have been so much better. There should have been less answers given and much more mystery to them. Instead we see a typical Grey alien (albeit 14 feet tall and an elongated skull, oooh!) and the most unoriginal looking ship ever.
Spielberg went from this (Close Encounters OT3K):
To this uninspired silver disk:
Oh, and a couple hundred peices of rock faithfully rendered by ILM.
Being inspired partly by '50s culture, the alien craft was unlikely to be anything other than disc-shaped.
For example, George Adamski had published his Flying Saucers Have Landed in 1953:
And Inside The Space Ships in 1955:
(I have an old copy of that wacky book!)
Though it's alleged the 'saucer' shape was a misinterpretation. Originally the UFOs were described as flying like a spinning saucer, not shaped like one.
Just Kidding
