Cole
New member
You sound like two bitter old guys...ResidentAlien said:Cheers, Sharkey.
You sound like two bitter old guys...ResidentAlien said:Cheers, Sharkey.
Well-said......I still appreciated those aspects. I think they work particularly well because Indy always has been a distinctly human character (not a superhero). And humans age and loved ones die - it's part of life. So I did appreciate that angle, even if not everyone did.StoneTriple said:I don't think there's a generational battle going on, but I do think there are fundamental differences between older fans and younger fans. Those differences may sometimes come across as a battle.
I saw the films in their theatrical releases. While I don't know the character better than newer fans, I certainly have a much different insight into the character & the passage of time he struggles with in the film. When I saw Kingdom, I felt a different kind of connection and appreciation for the character.
There are quite a few younger fans here who - no matter how much they want to imagine it - simply cannot possibly understand aging to the extent that our hero has. When I saw him struggling with things or reacting differently, I understood it. I don't want the same character that I saw when I was sitting in the theater in 1981 - because I'm not the kid I was back then.
Many of the younger fans around here, who grew up with a video 3-pack, saw Kingdom and reacted with "he's slower, he didn't shoot anyone", etc. My reaction was - yeah, the years have been brutal and life is starting to take things away. My criticisms of the film have nothing to do with the character - they nailed it. My criticisms are minor things that I would have done differently (Tarzan, showing ship fully, etc). They have nothing to do with me having been on board since the beginning.
My life experiences are much different than yours Cole, that's why I don't "have to laugh at people who" don't view the character the way I do. They'll get where I am one day - and things will make much more sense to them.
.
.
.
Cole said:You sound like two bitter old guys...
ResidentAlien said:And yet you're the one that has his panties in a bunch over the fact that not everyone likes your ****ty beloved movie?
Dr.Jonesy said:I've never really had you say anything to me, but do you ever try to be somewhat diplomatic/nice or at least agreeable? To me it seems like you just try to **** people off. I'm actually surprised you're not banned or at least suspended yet.
He may have his panties in a bunch for something unreasonable, but discussing the public perception of this film is important to us fans of the entire series. I don't think Cole saying you guys sound like old men was in good taste, but you really look like a jerk by responding with profanity and snarkiness. You shouldn't feel he's worth replying to, so next time simply "Let it go..."
I really am surprised that you haven't been banned or suspended for your attitude towards other posters. I hardly believe I, Cole or Montanna could get away with half the crap you do and say. The Mods/Bouncers would've thrown us out of the Raven like a couple of drunks playing quarters.
You have to remember you are on the section for Indy IV, and this board contains the most whiners on here; whether it be haters who cry about the movie or people who cry that the film wasn't recieved in the manner they'd have liked. So if this isn't what you want to hear then don't let the door hit ya.
ResidentAlien said:I have nothing more to say on the matter
Attila the Professor said:...the character changes did resonate with me. I do think that Sharkey has a point, that he has become less physically vulnerable over time, and has had an entire superhero-like mythology added onto him as time has worn on, but the characterization was pretty on.
Montana Smith said:In ROTLA we accept that Indy is dragged over rough terrain behind a truck without serious injury or damage to his clothes. In KOTCS we have to accept the same unlikelihood, but just on a bigger scale.
Montana Smith said:My solution to the issue of Indy's virtual invulnerability in KOTCS is simply to view his life as protected by supernatural good luck...
... Each event in isolation is possible, though unlikely. Each event in sequence is possible, though extremely unlikely. Only a pulp hero could manage to call on that much luck.
Montana Smith said:It's all in the realm of possibility in Indy's world. He's survived these kinds of dangers before, but not on this scale.
In ROTLA we accept that Indy is dragged over rough terrain behind a truck without serious injury or damage to his clothes. In KOTCS we have to accept the same unlikelihood, but just on a bigger scale.
StoneTriple said:Good stuff Montana. I do have a slightly different view of your points, however.
But hasn't that always been the case with Indy? He's been a pulp hero from the very beginning. A much more believable pulp hero early on, but still a pulp hero none the less.
StoneTriple said:I think the scale has always been the same. The presentation in Raiders was less over-the-top, but being strapped to the periscope of a sub for about 500 miles is every bit as silly, it's just not in your face roller coaster silly. As far as "on a bigger scale", we were treated to that almost as soon as Temple got up to speed. Crusade had it's share as well, they just came across as silly, more than preposterous.
That supernatural good luck has been Indy's companion since 1981. I would agree, however, that they leaned on it a bit more in Kingdom.
Thank God his parents (Spielberg & Ford) tell him no. To me, that's THE difference between Star Wars & Indiana Jones. George is kept in check with Indy.Montana Smith said:I've remarked elsewhere that Lucas seems to me like a kid in a candystore. He wants one of everything on the shelf...
Here's hoping for just that, if they go again.Montana Smith said:More excitement and involvement could have been attained by creating more suspense, more mystery, and spending more time with the more interesting characters. The challenges need not have been so grand, and could still have been exciting, while being easier to accept.
StoneTriple said:Thank God his parents (Spielberg & Ford) tell him no. To me, that's THE difference between Star Wars & Indiana Jones. George is kept in check with Indy.
StoneTriple said:Here's hoping for just that, if they go again.
"You are right at ground zero," said Darwin Morgan, a spokesman for the National Nuclear Security Administration in Las Vegas. "What you are seeing right here is where an atmospheric test went off in May off 1955.
"Not everything was destroyed. A lot of people think everything gets vaporized, but they don't."
That's why people come here -- to see what's left
Not according to Skull's DVD extras...StoneTriple said:George is kept in check with Indy.
Cole said:So maybe the biggest question is withstanding injuries caused by a fridge propelled by a shockwave travelling speeds perhaps near 1,000 mph.
But it's the same guy who could be dragged under a truck at speeds around 50 mph, and his clothes don't rip, his hat stays on, no injuries.
I'm not making the argument that it's a better scene than the one in 'Raiders of the Lost Ark'...........that whole truck scene is probably one of the greatest action scenes ever IMO, and the real stunt indeed makes it a thrill.Gabeed said:A key difference being that a stuntman actually did get dragged under the truck in Raiders, whereas that is obviously not the case with the atomic blast (nor, indeed, the leap from the plane in Temple of Doom). We see that at least someone is doing the things that Indy is doing in the truck scene, rather than, in the atomic blast scene, we have a CGI deus ex machina escape from a scene made mostly to hammer it into us that we're in the 50's. Again, Temple of Doom's plane jump is just about as silly, but . . . I dunno. I guess being at the site of a nuclear blast has a special certainty of death about it that lends its improbable escape a greater degree of incredulity.
Cole said:I'm not making the argument that it's a better scene than the one in 'Raiders of the Lost Ark'...........that whole truck scene is probably one of the greatest action scenes ever IMO, and the real stunt indeed makes it a thrill.
What I'm saying is it's in the spirit of the pulp serials, just like the refrigerator.
It's not the actual flying of the fridge that's exciting.......it's the intense build-up and wondering how Indy's gonna get out of this one.
I do think Crystal Skull features some great physical stunts - chief among them perhaps Indy jumping from a moving car onto the back of a moving motorcycle.
Cole said:I'm not making the argument that it's a better scene than the one in 'Raiders of the Lost Ark'...........that whole truck scene is probably one of the greatest action scenes ever IMO, and the real stunt indeed makes it a thrill.
What I'm saying is it's in the spirit of the pulp serials, just like the refrigerator.
It's not the actual flying of the fridge that's exciting.......it's the intense build-up and wondering how Indy's gonna get out of this one.
I do think Crystal Skull features some great physical stunts - chief among them perhaps Indy jumping from a moving car onto the back of a moving motorcycle.