Montana Smith
Active member
Rocket Surgeon said:
...or the incontinence that caused him to shoot the Cairo swordsman?
Crystal Skull hatred knows no bounds
- Thread starter seasider
- Start date
...or the incontinence that caused him to shoot the Cairo swordsman?
Rocket Surgeon
Guest
Exactly what I meant!Montana Smith said:...or the incontinence that caused him to shoot the Cairo swordsman?
Cole
New member
No......he just "almost died of typhus" looking for it in this one.Rocket Surgeon said:
Perhaps more accurately what I'm trying to say - Indy still feels like he's as passionate about knowledge, archeology, and adventure as ever.
lol, So what'd you expect? Indy as a one-man army killing all the Russians in the warehouse? The fact that Indy was able to escape this impossible situation - being held captive by the Russians - was very Indy to me (not to mention he does it in very Indy-like fashion).
There's plenty of action and adventure - he didn't need to actually kill anyone for me to feel like it was Indy or to be entertained.
Cole said:
That claim's beneath you and you know it...the sentence following is "I don't think it exists," and he "almost died of typhus" years prior.
Matt deMille
New member
teampunk said:
Well, I think the audience "buying it" isn't the issue. These same movies expect us to "buy" surviving a nuke in a fridge. Indy's maturing as a family man just isn't part of the action-adventure genre . . . for me. I'd much rather have had more Crystal Skull screen time dedicated to Indy either crawling around in the temple at the end (which felt very rushed to me) and less time talking to Mutt and Marion.
As for the violence . . . maybe Indy's "soft" because he's an older man. It would have been neat to have his punches not do as much damage, but still have him be willing to do nasty things. It would have been cool, in the ants scene, to see Indy losing the fistfight -- have multiple Russians around -- then just start knocking them back into the ants with the intention of letting the ants do his dirty work for him.
And trying to save Mac at the end . . . that was proof positive he'd gone soft. I think this scene was done much, much better in The Mummy when Bennie got left in the dark. Sure, even then, O'Connel tried to save Bennie (when he shouldn't have), but he really didn't try very hard. Indy was pretty much willing to die (and get everyone else killed too) to save Mac's butt. What Indy should have done was stop on the steps, say "Mac, let's get out of here", and when Mac ignores him, Indy just realizes he's doomed and hauls ass outta there! Like O'Connel did: "Goodbye, Bennie" and then he ran! In this case, "Goodbye" translates to "F'-you, ya little weasel!" As he should have.
Cole said:
No, because that's assuming that his attitude towards it is somehow unchanging. The fact that he's resolved himself to the position that it doesn't exist seems to indicate rather clearly that his attitude <I>has</I> changed over time.
Lance Quazar
Well-known member
Cole said:
My memory of the film is (thankfully) a bit hazy, but wasn't he talking more about searching for El Dorado/Akator rather than specifically the skull?
Montana Smith
Active member
Lance Quazar said:
Yes, he was talking about Akator, but had since resigned himself to thinking it didn't exist:
KOTCS script said:
Deckard, a part of me wants to disagree with you, but the smarter part of me mostly agrees.
Cole, I know you differ with me on a few points, but your counter arguments fail to win me over. But that's not a matter of fault on anyone's part and I respect your different views.
Cole, I know you differ with me on a few points, but your counter arguments fail to win me over. But that's not a matter of fault on anyone's part and I respect your different views.
Forbidden Eye
Well-known member
Deckard said:
Woah! Thank you SO much for your original though-provoking posts!
Cole
New member
I think it merely conveys his skepticism for dramatic purposes - remember, he's quite the skeptic in 'Raiders of the Lost Ark' too.Attila the Professor said:
But I think Ox's findings clearly reignite Indy's earlier passions about the skulls and Akator - which again, comes back to the point I was making, because the argument was made Indy didn't seem as ambitous.
Matt deMille
New member
Indy never really said WHEN he went looking for Akator. Maybe it was one of his younger adventures, pre-Raiders. So, maybe by the time of Crystal Skull he is indeed winding down, not as hungry for the chase. Just because he spoke of his search for Akator in this movie doesn't mean he had his search for it between this movie and LC.
Lance Quazar
Well-known member
Darth Vile said:
Personally, I don't think seeing the same character the exact same way across several films is particularly interesting.
I see nothing wrong with changing up the character, showing new dimensions or having the character grow across (or even between) the films.
It wouldn't have made any sense to see the "Raiders" Indy in a sequel set more than twenty years later.
However, I agree with Matt deMille's suggestion that the softening of Indy in KOTCS was due more to a stylistic choice by the filmmakers.
It's not really Indy that's gone soft in KOTCS (and, to a lesser extent, LC), it's the movies themselves that are softer - much less gritty, bloody and suspenseful.
The tone of LC was much lighter than its predecessors, with much more comedy and with less intense action sequences. I think LC is very enjoyable with a lot of good qualities, but, as an action movie, it's tonally different than its predecessors and is, at least partially, lacking the earlier films sense of urgency and danger.
Unfortunately, those cartoonish qualities were amplified tenfold in KOTCS, which is an utterly bloodless affair. Indy doesn't kill anyone. He only really gets into one serious fight. There was - for me, anyway - NO sense of actual threat or suspense anywhere in the movie. Russian soldiers fire machine guns at our heroes when they're five feet away and hit nothing but leaves. Indy - Indy in his fifties, mind you - crashes through glass and metal comfortably, without skipping a beat. None of the other films were that deliberately preposterous.
I don't think the movie actually bothered exploring in any meaningful way what it would REALLY be like to be Indiana Jones fast approaching 60. What was endearing about the original "Raiders" Indy was his fallibility. Sure, he was heroic and tough and relentless, but he was far from a superman.
With the exception of a few seconds in that aforementioned Dovchenko fight, I never felt Indy was in any real danger in KOTCS and I never felt like he was up against odds he couldn't handle. In the first two movies, we see Indy barely struggling to stay ahead of the game.
It would have been great if Indy's age and weaknesses were made a part of his character arc. If we did see a changed Indy in mind and body and if those implications were explored in the film's story and action sequences. What better way to make Indy sympathetic than have him be an old guy who isn't quite up to the challenge like he used to be.
Other movies have flirted with similar themes - and have also failed to deliver. In "Lethal Weapon 4", Riggs is faced with the prospect of getting old for the first time and worries he's no match for the incredibly young and powerful Jet Li. That is, until the very end, when he manages to win the fight, anyway.
In the James Bond film, "The World is Not Enough", the filmmakers set up a potentially amazing dynamic between an injured Bond - who has to bluff his way back into active duty - and a villain who can feel no pain. Unfortunately, that wonderful concept was all but forgotten by the film's end.
Ultimately, KOTCS does definitely continues and greatly expands on the light tone introduced in LC, but it comes from behind the camera. Despite a few quips like "not as easy as it used to be," Indy's age and physicality isn't mined for any character-based or thematic resonance. If anything, Indy is too capable, too competent in the film. It's only the age of the filmmakers that slows him down.
kongisking
Active member
Deckard said:
Remember: This is YOUR opinion.
Doesn't Indy go to South America mainly because he was fired from his job and to help rescue Ox because "they're gonna kill him"? He sounded resigned to the myth of Akator being a myth. Even when he found the skull he was more mystified than anything: "What is this thing?" He thought there might be something more to it, but he didn't know at that stage. So, he wasn't treasure hunting. In fact, in the beginning he is introduced to us with his bits of pottery from Mexico. At this stage in life he seems to be leading a normal, quiet professorial life of teaching and going on digs to find artifacts that might be important in the classroom, but which could not be used as an object of pursuit in another movie. Or maybe they can? - Indiana Jones and the Academically Important Pottery Pieces of Mexico!