Forbidden Eye said:
Ghost Town, maybe. I don't know.
He should have asked him about the film's (love interest/father or artifact!) climax. I really missed that part.
Shia and Koepp forced to adress the two major pseudo-complaints of KOTCS
- Thread starter torao
- Start date
Ghost Town, maybe. I don't know.
He should have asked him about the film's (love interest/father or artifact!) climax. I really missed that part.
Darth Vile said:
Not true, i just showed Raiders to a group of my friends and they said it was 10 of CS.
Your dwelling to deep into it. It comes down to CS at some points of the film was treated as a joke. They made it a kids film.
How do i know they meant it to be a kids film and not for all ages like before? No shooting!
agentsands77
New member
Well, you miss the point. Darth Vile wasn't talking about CRYSTAL SKULL in relation to RAIDERS, he was talking about CRYSTAL SKULL in relation to TEMPLE and CRUSADE.IndyFan89 said:
And yes, there is a world of difference between RAIDERS and TEMPLE/CRUSADE.
I really like the fact that the makers know that the majority of Indyfans think that "Skull" is the worst Indyfilm.
AND I have to say: I'm very proud of the Indyfandom. We are not like these lousy "Star Wars GL Fan Boys". We don't "pretend" we like Indy 4. We say "We are Fans but this movie is lousy against the trilogy!" That's really good! Only true Fans are critical...
We can't blame Shia for this lousy movie. We have to blame Spielberg, Ford and Lucas!
AND I have to say: I'm very proud of the Indyfandom. We are not like these lousy "Star Wars GL Fan Boys". We don't "pretend" we like Indy 4. We say "We are Fans but this movie is lousy against the trilogy!" That's really good! Only true Fans are critical...
We can't blame Shia for this lousy movie. We have to blame Spielberg, Ford and Lucas!
David Koepp said:
Anyone else reminded of the whole knowledge=treasure construction in these two sentences?
Indy's brother
New member
knowledge wasn't their treasure, it was family ticket sales. Family ticket sales was their treasure.
Bvance
New member
Indy's brother said:
Haha, very true.
I find this entire occurrence laughable. Apparently all of us disappointed fans have been loud enough to deserve responses from the screenwriter and an actor in the movie.
Regarding the two scenes in question, I can almost see how the initial good idea turned sour. With the vine swinging escapade, clearly an homage to Tarzan, drawing on elements of fifties TV culture as the whole movie does.............
SEVERAL MINUTES LATER Ok well, I wanted to back up my statement with facts and in my research I found that the Tarzan TV series didn't even air till 1966, almost 10 years after KOTCS took place.
I was a casual defender of the scene because I felt that, if Mutt were real, he might have watched Tarzan on TV and maybe had the vine swinging idea from that, or that simply SS and GL were drawing on Tarzan because it was popular during that time period, but NO! NOW I MUST THROW MY HANDS UP AND ADMIT THE INSANITY OF THIS SCENE!!! NO RHYME OR REASON FOR IT!!!
The character Tarzan has been around since 1912, but why use it now! I find no rationale for it at all, and the way it resolves itself with the fighting monkeys makes me shudder.
And this post doesn't even include the Nuke the fridge scene.
Bvance
New member
S@#T!!! Damn, Wikipedia. Anyway, in the early 50's there was a Tarzan radio show, and there was a Tarzan movie which was released in 1958, a year later than the events in KOTCS.
But still I bet I know when SS and GL thought of the swinging scene that they were thinking of the TV show in the 60's that they watched and probably loved as kids, and that my friends is why they threw it in there. It would be like me putting He Man, Ghostbusters or Ninja Turtles in an Indiana Jones movie if I were making one. Does it make sense.
NO!!!
But still I bet I know when SS and GL thought of the swinging scene that they were thinking of the TV show in the 60's that they watched and probably loved as kids, and that my friends is why they threw it in there. It would be like me putting He Man, Ghostbusters or Ninja Turtles in an Indiana Jones movie if I were making one. Does it make sense.
NO!!!
You are WAY OVER THINKING THIS Bvance. You are also VERY, VERY WRONG!
Spielberg was 20 years old when that tv series first aired. Lucas was 22 and already in college. Most likely they saw older Tarzan films on tv during their teen years in the 1950s. Or saw those older films rerun in theaters. Back then this was done a lot. Which is how they saw 30s movie serials which were made before they were born. Plus the fact that new Tarzan films starring Gordon Scott and Lex Barker, among others, were continuing to be made through out the 1950s. A kid of Mutt's generation would known exactly who Tarzan was. My father was a greaser and grew up on Tarzan films.
Spielberg was 20 years old when that tv series first aired. Lucas was 22 and already in college. Most likely they saw older Tarzan films on tv during their teen years in the 1950s. Or saw those older films rerun in theaters. Back then this was done a lot. Which is how they saw 30s movie serials which were made before they were born. Plus the fact that new Tarzan films starring Gordon Scott and Lex Barker, among others, were continuing to be made through out the 1950s. A kid of Mutt's generation would known exactly who Tarzan was. My father was a greaser and grew up on Tarzan films.
This is exactly the point Koepp was getting at. How many young Raiders fans had ever seen a real movie serial? I am sure some had in 1981 but I bet of the young audience it was a very small percentage. Yet those fans were able to except a tribute to old movies they knew nothing about. Because we were young enough to not know any better or even to care.
Did Indy need to watch Zorro serials to try the truck chase sequence in RAIDERS? The same serials from which that sequence was copied from!!! But as kids we did not know any better. All you knew about was Indy doing it.
Did Indy need to watch Zorro serials to try the truck chase sequence in RAIDERS? The same serials from which that sequence was copied from!!! But as kids we did not know any better. All you knew about was Indy doing it.
Last edited:
To add to what I said earlier about my Dad.
He is exact same age as Mutt is based on "The Ultimate Guide". Born in July of 1938. He is my personal reference source for 1950s pop culture. Like Mutt he was a Greaser. But there is another connection I had never thought of until now. My Dad's two biggest movie heroes growing up were Tarzan, his favorite was Johnny Weissmuller, and Errol Flynn, as Robin Hood and his other swashbuckler roles.
As hard as it is for us to imagine now he could not watch his favorite movies whenever he wanted to....NO DVD players....or even VCR....SHOCKING!!!
But movies did get revival screenings at second run theaters. Often on Saturdays. Also there was not much original programing in the early days of TV.
So old serials and movies were shown. Of course it was a big event if you could actually see a movie you liked after it left theaters.... Just think about how different it is. Love or hate a new movie we know we will be able to watch them other and other again whenever we want. Maybe even spending the rest of our lives obsessing and complaining about the most minor details....
Anyways...where am I going with this...
Mutt seemed to have the same heroes. You can tell because he emulated them both. Sure he was emulating Brando in "The Wild One". But that was not a heroic character, he was a outlaw, a rebel. Our ideals of heroism go back to our childhoods. It makes perfect sense that Mutt would have been an Errol Flynn fan( as well as Tarzan). It very likely inspired him to learn fencing. As much as Tarzan has been used as the inspiration for the vine swinging that is right out of Robin Hood out as well.
Indy emulated the style of western heroes that he read about as a kid. While Mutt emulated the swashbuckler heroes he saw in the movies.
He is exact same age as Mutt is based on "The Ultimate Guide". Born in July of 1938. He is my personal reference source for 1950s pop culture. Like Mutt he was a Greaser. But there is another connection I had never thought of until now. My Dad's two biggest movie heroes growing up were Tarzan, his favorite was Johnny Weissmuller, and Errol Flynn, as Robin Hood and his other swashbuckler roles.
As hard as it is for us to imagine now he could not watch his favorite movies whenever he wanted to....NO DVD players....or even VCR....SHOCKING!!!
But movies did get revival screenings at second run theaters. Often on Saturdays. Also there was not much original programing in the early days of TV.
So old serials and movies were shown. Of course it was a big event if you could actually see a movie you liked after it left theaters.... Just think about how different it is. Love or hate a new movie we know we will be able to watch them other and other again whenever we want. Maybe even spending the rest of our lives obsessing and complaining about the most minor details....
Anyways...where am I going with this...
Mutt seemed to have the same heroes. You can tell because he emulated them both. Sure he was emulating Brando in "The Wild One". But that was not a heroic character, he was a outlaw, a rebel. Our ideals of heroism go back to our childhoods. It makes perfect sense that Mutt would have been an Errol Flynn fan( as well as Tarzan). It very likely inspired him to learn fencing. As much as Tarzan has been used as the inspiration for the vine swinging that is right out of Robin Hood out as well.
Indy emulated the style of western heroes that he read about as a kid. While Mutt emulated the swashbuckler heroes he saw in the movies.
Last edited:
Darth Vile
New member
Avilos said:
Good and valid points Avilos.
I'm old enough to have seen both Star Wars and Raiders in the cinema, and prior to my exposure to those movies, I can categorically remember Saturday morning TV re-runs of black and white 'Flash Gordon' and 'King of the Rocket Men' (and ole? Star Trek). So when first seeing Luke Skywalker and Indiana Jones on the big screen, I was already bought into that pulp type of fiction (even though I wouldn't be able to understand/articulate it at the time).
The point is that whilst most adults can understand what Star Wars and Indiana Jones harkens back to, they can?t really appreciate that element unless they have certain nostalgia for those types of old shows/movies themselves. Of course that doesn?t make the movies good/bad or indifferent, but it does colour perception.
So there will be a generation of new movie-goers out there who will turn onto something because it reminds them of Star Wars or Indiana Jones (as opposed to Flash Gordon or Zorro))? There will be some older movie goers who still appreciate the nostalgic element that Star Wars and Indiana Jones brings, and there will be those who remember the originals with fondness, but firmly believe it no longer aligns to their intellectual requirements i.e. they have out grown it.
Benraianajones
New member
It is true fantastical stuff happened in the originals, but within reason. The only part I can think of out of reason was the dingy/cliff drop, that was it.
CS has the fridge, waterfalls and the monkey swing. The fridge I can live with - it is just a "Big bang" to finish up the first part of the movie like the dingy incident. The waterfall scene shoud have had the cast fight for their life and not just sit there, but at least it was part of the plot they had to follow 3 drops. The fridge and the waterfall scene somewhat have an Indiana Jones gritty action feel to them.
The monkey swing just wasn't needed and feels too polished and cartoony, and I'd have been fine with monkeys attacking Spalko if she had just smashed in to a tree of them and they attacked her out of rage,as opposed to the monkeys suddenly for no reason boding with Mutt and swinging down with him. Also why the vines dragged him up in to the tree is a mystery.
I did like Irina and Mutt as they had a sword fight, it felt cartoony, but it was generally within the realms of Indiana Jones more than the money swing. I wish Indy had a go at battling Irina, but at least we saw him shove her out of her jeep at the start.
I want George to be asked the questions Shia was, and to be given the quote concerning where Indy is not viewed as a super-man.
Shia is talking rubbish about the audience being jaded. I can live with fantastical moments, but sometimes things go too far. To make it worse though, the monkey swinging section didn't even involve Indy, so it distances it from the Indy world even further.
CS has the fridge, waterfalls and the monkey swing. The fridge I can live with - it is just a "Big bang" to finish up the first part of the movie like the dingy incident. The waterfall scene shoud have had the cast fight for their life and not just sit there, but at least it was part of the plot they had to follow 3 drops. The fridge and the waterfall scene somewhat have an Indiana Jones gritty action feel to them.
The monkey swing just wasn't needed and feels too polished and cartoony, and I'd have been fine with monkeys attacking Spalko if she had just smashed in to a tree of them and they attacked her out of rage,as opposed to the monkeys suddenly for no reason boding with Mutt and swinging down with him. Also why the vines dragged him up in to the tree is a mystery.
I did like Irina and Mutt as they had a sword fight, it felt cartoony, but it was generally within the realms of Indiana Jones more than the money swing. I wish Indy had a go at battling Irina, but at least we saw him shove her out of her jeep at the start.
I want George to be asked the questions Shia was, and to be given the quote concerning where Indy is not viewed as a super-man.
Shia is talking rubbish about the audience being jaded. I can live with fantastical moments, but sometimes things go too far. To make it worse though, the monkey swinging section didn't even involve Indy, so it distances it from the Indy world even further.
Bvance
New member
I am greatly impressed at the level people will sink, to defend the Tarzan scene. I am equally impressed with the extent people go to say how retarded it is. Since my comments about when Tarzan was popular seemed to be incorrect, sorry I wasn't alive in the 50's. I am going to describe the scene exactly how it is, I just watched it again.
1st: Mutt is caught by a vine which apparently was made out of rubber because he is clipped at about 8ft. high and ends up in the canopy about 30+ft off of the ground.
2nd: It appears that Mutt knows exactly what he is doing, it takes him a few seconds to figure out how to swing on vines with little effort.
3rd: He is such a good swinger that he can catch up with a convoy of Humvee's that are traveling AT LEAST 40 miles per hour, even though their course appears to be parabolic, Mutt's velocity must be initially faster than the cars are traveling to reach them. That's freaking fast.
4th: Once Mutt makes it into the car, the band of monkeys for no other reason than because he was swinging with them, begin to attack Spalko and Co. allowing for Mutt to steal the Crystal Skull and safely return to Indy's vehicle.
This scene had NO place in the film, GL and SS took a shoe horn and forced it in there regardless of how it played out on screen.
In all fairness however, I knew about this scene when going into the film so it didn't bother me, but when I saw the scene where Marion drives off of the cliff onto the rubber tree and it springs back and smacks the Russians, I seriously felt like I had been slapped in the face.
1st: Mutt is caught by a vine which apparently was made out of rubber because he is clipped at about 8ft. high and ends up in the canopy about 30+ft off of the ground.
2nd: It appears that Mutt knows exactly what he is doing, it takes him a few seconds to figure out how to swing on vines with little effort.
3rd: He is such a good swinger that he can catch up with a convoy of Humvee's that are traveling AT LEAST 40 miles per hour, even though their course appears to be parabolic, Mutt's velocity must be initially faster than the cars are traveling to reach them. That's freaking fast.
4th: Once Mutt makes it into the car, the band of monkeys for no other reason than because he was swinging with them, begin to attack Spalko and Co. allowing for Mutt to steal the Crystal Skull and safely return to Indy's vehicle.
This scene had NO place in the film, GL and SS took a shoe horn and forced it in there regardless of how it played out on screen.
In all fairness however, I knew about this scene when going into the film so it didn't bother me, but when I saw the scene where Marion drives off of the cliff onto the rubber tree and it springs back and smacks the Russians, I seriously felt like I had been slapped in the face.
Darth Vile
New member
Benraianajones said:
Really? What about angles/demons, brimstone and fire pouring from the Ark? Voodoo dolls, the black sleep of Kali, hearts being ripped out, molten pits and runaway mine carts that can make impossible turns and leaps? What about meschersmits in tunnels, ancient Grail Knights and cups that can age one to death or restore perfect health to those dying??? I must have been watching different movies all these years?
Benraianajones said:
Jaded? Not sure. Cynical? I think so. Over-analytical? Absolutely.
ninepinejones
Member
The way I took the monkey tarzan scene was that the crystal skull has an effect on not only humans but animals and insects,for example when the ants avoided the skull,they moved away from who ever was holding it. When I first saw the monkey scene I thought that the monkeys were influenced or under the spell of the skulls mysterious powers. The swinging on the vine scene was an obvious attempt from Lucas to give homage to the 1950's tarzan movies. It came off as being cheesy but those tarzan movies back in the day were certainly cheesy,swiss.... if I may.