Montana Smith
Active member
Rocket Surgeon said:As I mentioned I see the films made after Raiders as pale imitations, fun, enjoyable but not made with the same sensibilities as Raiders was.
You see them as a whole, a "series".
Now, I see where you're coming from, Rocket. Raiders is more down to earth, apart from the opening of the Ark and the light trap in the Chachapoyan temple, which is set up as an unexplained event.
Yet, the four films are a series - they are the vision that Lucas sanctioned. I agree that it would be better to divorce certain films from their series, and forget they were ever made (such as Star Wars Episodes I-III which are, to use you words, "pale imitations, fun, enjoyable, but not made with the same sensibilities as" Star Wars was). For better or worse, the six Star Wars films make up a connected series. Same goes for Indy, and we have George to thank or (hate) for that.
If Raiders had been the only Indiana Jones film, would it still command the attention that it gains now? It would enter film history as another 'Secrets of the Incas', or 'High Road to China'. The other films kept it alive all these years - they still star Harrison Ford as a character we can still recognize. The story is the one Lucas sanctioned, and it spans four movies. Starts in Peru and finds it climax in Peru. The inter-dimensional beings go some way to explain the supernatural and unexplained elements in all four movies.
As such, I can't see these as four unrelated films, which then leads me to find arguments to explain the absurdities that will enable the complete storyto remain true to the character we first saw in Raiders.
If we look at Raiders from an historical perspective, we have to overlook anachronisms such as the weaponry and the flying wing, and the fact that in 1936 Nepal was closed to foreigners - and no way could a foreign bar such as The Raven have existed there, catering for mountaineers who would not have been permitted to enter the country. Germans in uniform are digging up British-controlled Egypt. So, we know we're not dealing with an historical 1936
Indy cheats death in Raiders with either superhuman skill or superhuman luck: all the darts in the temple miss him; the Hovitos cannot catch Indy, even though they're on home ground; Marion didn't break her neck (or Indy's) when she was thrown into the Well of Souls; the statue in the Well of Souls was loose enough to push over; the propellers on the flying wing came to Indy's aid at the perfect moment; Indy wasn't ripped to shreds in the truck chase...
These are all plot devices that rely upon the acceptance of luck. Sometimes it's extreme luck. The cliffhanger was a staple part of the stories shown in cinemas every week. It was a simple device to make viewers come back next week. With Indy the cliffhanger is like a running gag (as with his 'supernaturally ever-returning fedora').
On the same score I have to accept that luck factored in the fridge escape. Even at Hiroshima and Nagasaki there were walls and trees that remained standing. It wasn't a complete obliteration.