A new reedit of "Skull"...

JerryKing

Member
I've come across this a while ago - a new fan-edit of the apocryphal movie, one that tries to turn it into a decent film:

http://fanedit.org/13190/

And, to some degree, it succeeds. The gophers have been excised, as have been the teenagers, the ants, the monkeys, the painted "warrior" stuntmen, the "psychic" ooga-booga, and the library. Best of all, the aliens are completely gone. Unfortunately, the cheap "cameo" of the ark has remained, Shia is still in, and so is the refrigerator - but their sections are heavily cut and consequently more tolerable (Harrison Ford is no longer gawking at the explosion to eat some yummy gamma candy, for instance).

The link itself is on fanedit.info.

In this version, it's still a bad film, but... considerably less bad than it used to be.
 
Last edited:

Indy's brother

New member
Huh. I tried to watch this, but when I open it, my mac immediately launches VLC and I get this message:

VLC can't recognize the input's format
The format of 'file:///Users/ericsheagren/Downloads/WRAITH_DR_JONES_SKM_MP4_MU.rar' cannot be detected. Have a look at the log for details.

If anyone knows how I should proceed, I'm all ears. I read the cut list in the review and it sounds like the movie is probably only 10 minutes long now, but I'd still like to see it.
 

The Man

Well-known member
Indy's brother said:
Huh. I tried to watch this, but when I open it, my mac immediately launches VLC and I get this message:



If anyone knows how I should proceed, I'm all ears. I read the cut list in the review and it sounds like the movie is probably only 10 minutes long now, but I'd still like to see it.

Can't get a gander either, but no Indy-Dovchenko fisticuffs? Someone's been a tad rapacious with the edit facility. That scene was fine-ish. And the opening credits had Spielberg's foot firmly on the flair pedal.

Having watched it again over Christmas, I went out and bought the bloody thing on Blu-Ray. Yeah. Hmmmm. Time and perspective may have been kind to Skull. I might - might - open a retrospective thread to counterbalance the savaging I gave it upon release.
 

Darth Vile

New member
The Man said:
Can't get a gander either, but no Indy-Dovchenko fisticuffs? Someone's been a tad rapacious with the edit facility. That scene was fine-ish. And the opening credits had Spielberg's foot firmly on the flair pedal.

Having watched it again over Christmas, I went out and bought the bloody thing on Blu-Ray. Yeah. Hmmmm. Time and perspective may have been kind to Skull. I might - might - open a retrospective thread to counterbalance the savaging I gave it upon release.

Hi TM. I'm intrigued to see which bits you've softened to and why... :)
 

The Man

Well-known member
Darth Vile said:
Hi TM. I'm intrigued to see which bits you've softened to and why... :)

Greetings to you, my most feared Sith buddy. I'll probably open a thread in the comings day to essentially review the film two-and-a-half years on. Ultimately, I've softened to the movie overall. Acceptance? Yes, that's the word!

My exhaustive analysis has left my pinky pointing at one gentleman*in particular...




*And no, it ain't Messiah LaBeouf...
 

Attila the Professor

Moderator
Staff member
Indy's brother said:
I read the cut list in the review and it sounds like the movie is probably only 10 minutes long now, but I'd still like to see it.

Indeed. Makes you wonder what exactly they like in the prior 3 films, or have they been cut to shreds too?
 
Softened

I knew after second viewing it wasn't as bad as I thought. I've essentially accepted the movie except for 4 major things: gophers, monkey swing, duck drive into the tree off the cliff, and no feeling of attachment to Mac. In Raiders, SS and company created an attachment and liking for Sallah in just a few passages of dialog after his introduction. Why couldn't they accomplish that with Mac???? Anyway, the rest is good to excellent, yes even the fridge. I would have made minor changes to that scene and a couple of others (exhausted in the thread: Simple things that would have made KotCS better, some of which I was skewered over). Anyway, the movie is not bad. My dad, who likes Indy, thought it flowed with the other movies.

I think the biggest flaw of the film was the over-the-top humor. I don't want an Indy parody. If that was the case, I would rewatch Allan Quatermain and the City of Gold!
 

kongisking

Active member
The Man said:
Can't get a gander either, but no Indy-Dovchenko fisticuffs? Someone's been a tad rapacious with the edit facility. That scene was fine-ish. And the opening credits had Spielberg's foot firmly on the flair pedal.

Having watched it again over Christmas, I went out and bought the bloody thing on Blu-Ray. Yeah. Hmmmm. Time and perspective may have been kind to Skull. I might - might - open a retrospective thread to counterbalance the savaging I gave it upon release.

Well, I must say that I'm very happy for you, The Man, for at least finding KOTCS a little better upon repeat viewings. For a while, you were one of the most, as you say, savage haters of the film, so if you can find merit in KOTCS, than any Anti can too. It's pretty encouraging for folks like me, actually, because with every new recruit to the Pro (or, at least, Semi-Pro) fold, we're more justified in our love of the flick.

And I totally disagree with removing bits from the Indy-Dovchenko fight. That was one of the best sequences in the whole frakin' movie, for crying out loud! :mad:
 

Stoo

Well-known member
JerryKing said:
I've come across this a while ago - a new fan-edit of the apocryphal movie, one that tries to turn it into a decent film:

And, to some degree, it succeeds. The gophers have been excised, as have been the teenagers, the ants, the monkeys, the painted "warrior" stuntmen, the "psychic" ooga-booga, and the library. Best of all, the aliens are completely gone. Unfortunately, the cheap "cameo" of the ark has remained, Shia is still in, and so is the refrigerator - but their sections are heavily cut and consequently more tolerable (Harrison Ford is no longer gawking at the explosion to eat some yummy gamma candy, for instance).
I'm assuming it's the finished product of what was mentioned in this September 2009 thread: Calling all video editors and effects artists. Did they follow through with the stupid idea of adding a 'dream sequence' when Indy stares into the skull?:sick:

Re. "cheap 'cameo' of the ark": Last Crusade also had an Ark cameo. Should that be taken out, too?

Re. "Shia is still in": Excluding him wouldn't leave much to watch...unless, of course, all you care to see is the opening sequence followed by a collection of random shots featuring Indy only.:rolleyes:
Indy's brother said:
I read the cut list in the review and it sounds like the movie is probably only 10 minutes long now,...
Bwa-ha!:D Sad, sad, sad. A certain "South Park" episode is coming to mind...
The Man said:
And the opening credits had Spielberg's foot firmly on the flair pedal.
Very well said and I emphatically agree!
Attlia the Professor said:
Makes you wonder what exactly they like in the prior 3 films, or have they been cut to shreds too?
A couple of the people who worked on this are/were members here. "Skull" wasn't a great film but these folks really do need to get a grip.
 

Indy's brother

New member
Yeah, the ant fight was a great scene in KOTCS for me. Rather than excise it completely, which seems like an extreme solution to the problems some fans had with it, I think a better approach would have been to digitally up the carnage in that scene. Show the soldier that gets dragged down by the ants being reduced to a half-eaten skeleton. Same with Dovenchenko. Of course, this could easily have been past the ability of the re-editing crew. Honestly, I don't really get the aversion to this scene. The ants were believable enough for me, I thought the effects in it looked great. My thinking is that if they were even more menacing, the fact that they were cgi ants might have been overlooked a little more if there was something else to get grossed out over besides just the fact that they are ants crawling on people. I could be way off on this, of course. The people that hated that scene would probably have gotten rid of the scene in TOD where the Willie dummy was rocking back and forth with the massive centipede crawling up the back of it's neck because it looked fake, too....

The one scene where Indy really beats someone down entirely excised? I haven't seen it this way, but I can't imagine how it fixes much of anything.

The ant fight is all water under the bridge now, with both the original and the fan edit. But a fun thing to do with it would have been to show Mutt getting clipped in the arm with a russian bullet, and keeping a bloody mark on his arm for the remainder of the edit. It would make it a little more believable, a little more violent, give the russians a little more teeth, and the Mutt haters could laugh.

I also think the rubber tree could've stayed in either version if it was just cut just short enough to tell what was happening, rather than to leave the whole drawn-out groan-worthy scene in as it was. The gag didn't work either because SS felt he needed to visually explain it in too much detail, or he simply didn't think it looked so bad when he cut it. If the latter was the case, then I guess he couldn't see the forest for the tree. I think the biggest problem with that one was that the camera stayed on it long enough to show us all just how preposterous it truly was.
 

Darth Vile

New member
Indy's brother said:
Yeah, the ant fight was a great scene in KOTCS for me. Rather than excise it completely, which seems like an extreme solution to the problems some fans had with it, I think a better approach would have been to digitally up the carnage in that scene. Show the soldier that gets dragged down by the ants being reduced to a half-eaten skeleton. Same with Dovenchenko. Of course, this could easily have been past the ability of the re-editing crew. Honestly, I don't really get the aversion to this scene. The ants were believable enough for me, I thought the effects in it looked great. My thinking is that if they were even more menacing, the fact that they were cgi ants might have been overlooked a little more if there was something else to get grossed out over besides just the fact that they are ants crawling on people. I could be way off on this, of course. The people that hated that scene would probably have gotten rid of the scene in TOD where the Willie dummy was rocking back and forth with the massive centipede crawling up the back of it's neck because it looked fake, too....


The one scene where Indy really beats someone down entirely excised? I haven't seen it this way, but I can't imagine how it fixes much of anything.

The ant fight is all water under the bridge now, with both the original and the fan edit. But a fun thing to do with it would have been to show Mutt getting clipped in the arm with a russian bullet, and keeping a bloody mark on his arm for the remainder of the edit. It would make it a little more believable, a little more violent, give the russians a little more teeth, and the Mutt haters could laugh.

I also think the rubber tree could've stayed in either version if it was just cut just short enough to tell what was happening, rather than to leave the whole drawn-out groan-worthy scene in as it was. The gag didn't work either because SS felt he needed to visually explain it in too much detail, or he simply didn't think it looked so bad when he cut it. If the latter was the case, then I guess he couldn't see the forest for the tree. I think the biggest problem with that one was that the camera stayed on it long enough to show us all just how preposterous it truly was.

Good ideas... and I agree with what you say. Perhaps the reason why Spielberg didn't show more grizzly ant carnage is that it perhaps would be too similar to the dung beetle/scarab scene in The Mummy? Re. the 'rubber tree'. Yep - I think the shot lingered a second too long. Also, the shot shouldn't have been as wide i.e. it should have been closer making it look less like CGI/ miniature work (IMHO).
 

indy4242

New member
Time and perspective will be kind to KOTCS, because when you take a step back it's still a competently made movie that has everything you'd want in Indiana Jones (except for shooting and with added silliness, but there are downsides to every IJ movie).

I don't think a re-edit will fix anything because the issues with the movie are in the script, not the editing. Re-edits work with the Prequels because the editing in those movies suck. (n)
 

Montana Smith

Active member
indy4242 said:
Time and perspective will be kind to KOTCS...

Time was kind to my perception with my second viewing: I liked it better second time round.

However, further viewings didn't improve my perception, but made KOTCS appear even more clumsy and laborious. It's a struggle to get through this film. It doesn't flow like the others, and gets bogged down with inane sillyness and dull characters. There's also the frustration that characters with more potential were under-employed.

I think you could safely edit out at least half the movie and some of the characters, such as Mutt and Mac. Condense it down to a one hour Indy special and call it, Indiana Jones: Silly Ideas That We Didn't Use In The First Three Movies.

Apart from Indy, there is too little to care about in KOTCS. It fails to engage. There are some bright sparks that remind us of '30s Indy, but they're diluted by all the heavy-handed ingredients. It looks like a group of poorly compiled episodes, rather than the slick progression that made Raiders such a success. It feels like a badly judged enterprise, where the creators were trying too hard to please a broad audience.

I'm left with the impression that the film is neither one thing, nor another. It's like the worst book in a series that you read quickly, just to get to the next one. Though I have no illusions about another one being any better.
 

Darth Vile

New member
Montana Smith said:
Time was kind to my perception with my second viewing: I liked it better second time round.

However, further viewings didn't improve my perception, but made KOTCS appear even more clumsy and laborious. It's a struggle to get through this film. It doesn't flow like the others, and gets bogged down with inane sillyness and dull characters. There's also the frustration that characters with more potential were under-employed.

I think you could safely edit out at least half the movie and some of the characters, such as Mutt and Mac. Condense it down to a one hour Indy special and call it, Indiana Jones: Silly Ideas That We Didn't Use In The First Three Movies.

Apart from Indy, there is too little to care about in KOTCS. It fails to engage. There are some bright sparks that remind us of '30s Indy, but they're diluted by all the heavy-handed ingredients. It looks like a group of poorly compiled episodes, rather than the slick progression that made Raiders such a success. It feels like a badly judged enterprise, where the creators were trying too hard to please a broad audience.

I'm left with the impression that the film is neither one thing, nor another. It's like the worst book in a series that you read quickly, just to get to the next one. Though I have no illusions about another one being any better.

Montana - KOTCS is indeed a flawed movie... However, its editing/pacing is pretty decent (well at least as decent as the other sequels). So if there are any issues, I think they lie elsewhere. As far as characters go, I agree, there is certainly at least one protagonist too many... but saying that TLC managed to rise above the underemployed Brody and Sallah.

Whilst I don't believe it to be the worst Indy movie, I agree that the movie seems to be neither one thing nor the other.
 

Montana Smith

Active member
Darth Vile said:
Montana - KOTCS is indeed a flawed movie... However, its editing/pacing is pretty decent (well at least as decent as the other sequels).

I'm thinking of scenes that were prolonged for too long, and scenes that are just out of place.

Such as the jungle chase that goes on and on. Extended even further by the totally out of place monkey swinging. Then the chase continues onto that rubber tree, and then three waterfalls. It was a clumsy overkill. Not to mention that the chase proceeded faster than the convoy moved with the aid of the jungle cutter.

The sandpit scene was like some bad sit-com from the '70s. It was corny and just held up the progression.

Whereas ROTLA, TOD and TLC progressed neatly, KOTCS would now have me watch it with my thumb on the fast forward dial.

After the post-fridge interrogation it was humdrum. Brief sparks of possibility weren't taken up - such as the skirmish in the great cemetery set.

The problem of the pacing is compounded by the characters that I have no time for. It wouldn't be so bad if those dull characters had something interesting to say.

The threat level throughout seemed to be aimed at a younger audience. There was nothing like the tension created by Toht holding the hot poker to Marion's face. While the original three movies had elements of cartoon violence, comedy and slapstick, KOTCS turned much of the film into a kid's cartoon, complete with token characters, whom even notable actors such as Ray Winstone and John Hurt couldn't make convincing. Seemingly uninspired by their roles and dialogue they resorted to hamming it up.

No matter how well edited a movie is, a lacklustre story and a lacklustre ensemble of characters can ruin the pacing, because it doesn't constantly hold your attention.

Some movies are riveting even when nothing appears to be happening, simply because the actors are engaging your attention, and you find yourself hanging onto every word. You just want to catch every moment of the development of a relationship between them. I didn't feel that at all with KOTCS. I didn't believe Mutt, Mac or Oxley, so I wasn't really interested in their dialogue.
 

michael

Well-known member
The Man said:
Greetings to you, my most feared Sith buddy. I'll probably open a thread in the comings day to essentially review the film two-and-a-half years on. Ultimately, I've softened to the movie overall. Acceptance? Yes, that's the word!

Still waiting for this....
 

kongisking

Active member
Montana Smith said:
I'm thinking of scenes that were prolonged for too long, and scenes that are just out of place.

Such as the jungle chase that goes on and on. Extended even further by the totally out of place monkey swinging. Then the chase continues onto that rubber tree, and then three waterfalls. It was a clumsy overkill. Not to mention that the chase proceeded faster than the convoy moved with the aid of the jungle cutter.

The sandpit scene was like some bad sit-com from the '70s. It was corny and just held up the progression.

Whereas ROTLA, TOD and TLC progressed neatly, KOTCS would now have me watch it with my thumb on the fast forward dial.

After the post-fridge interrogation it was humdrum. Brief sparks of possibility weren't taken up - such as the skirmish in the great cemetery set.

The problem of the pacing is compounded by the characters that I have no time for. It wouldn't be so bad if those dull characters had something interesting to say.

The threat level throughout seemed to be aimed at a younger audience. There was nothing like the tension created by Toht holding the hot poker to Marion's face. While the original three movies had elements of cartoon violence, comedy and slapstick, KOTCS turned much of the film into a kid's cartoon, complete with token characters, whom even notable actors such as Ray Winstone and John Hurt couldn't make convincing. Seemingly uninspired by their roles and dialogue they resorted to hamming it up.

No matter how well edited a movie is, a lacklustre story and a lacklustre ensemble of characters can ruin the pacing, because it doesn't constantly hold your attention.

Some movies are riveting even when nothing appears to be happening, simply because the actors are engaging your attention, and you find yourself hanging onto every word. You just want to catch every moment of the development of a relationship between them. I didn't feel that at all with KOTCS. I didn't believe Mutt, Mac or Oxley, so I wasn't really interested in their dialogue.

Well, I'll admit the film did crawl at points (sorry, Koepp, but too much exposition). But in my mind, the film's high points (the Hangar 51 teaser, Indy VS Dovchenko Round 1, the fridge escape, the motorcycle chase, "Part-time," the argument in the back of the truck, Mutt and Spalko's duel, the ants, Indy VS Dovchenko Round 2, the saucer's takeoff, the wedding and Indy snatching the fedora) are so damn cool that I'm willing to forgive its flaws and accept it for what it is: an entertaining adventure flick with an awesome Harrison Ford.
 

Montana Smith

Active member
kongisking said:
Well, I'll admit the film did crawl at points (sorry, Koepp, but too much exposition). But in my mind, the film's high points (the Hangar 51 teaser, Indy VS Dovchenko Round 1, the fridge escape, the motorcycle chase, "Part-time," the argument in the back of the truck, Mutt and Spalko's duel, the ants, Indy VS Dovchenko Round 2, the saucer's takeoff, the wedding and Indy snatching the fedora) are so damn cool that I'm willing to forgive its flaws and accept it for what it is: an entertaining adventure flick with an awesome Harrison Ford.

Some of those I definitely agree with. There are scenes that save KOTCS, and if you watch them in isolation you could point them out as being 'classic Indy'. It's frustrating now, when if I watch the movie in it's entirety, to see the points where the creators appeared to lose control of their material and it's potential.

I can forgive George's indulgent return to '50 hot rodders, because it's tempered by the Russians murdering the American soldiers at the gate. The exuberance of care-free youth is balanced by a callous slaughter.

The reveal of older Indy was brutal, as they threw him from the trunk onto the ground, and then his reveal in silhouette was a nod back to his appearance in The Raven.

The hangar action sequence was well handled, and the humour on the ball. ("I thought it was closer!") There is a great progression then to the first battle with Dovchenko (which is even better in the novel), which leads directly to Doom Town and the best paced sequence of the film.

The scrub down was a funny high point, followed by the interrogation where we realize that in this film Indy is onthe back foot: first captured by the Russians, then disebelieved by his fellow countrymen.

From this point on the film loses momentum for me. The high points are sporadic, and Indy is now almost constantly pushed against his will down a pre-set route.

In ROTLA Indy was a go-getter, initiating the action.

In TOD it was his change of heart that lead him to go to Pankot.

In TLC it was his concern for his father that spurred him on.

In KOTCS Indy is a victim: of the Russians; of McCarthy's paranoia; of his own more mature years; of Marion's reveal that he had a son and therefore a hitherto unknown responsibility; of Mac's double-crossing; of Oxley's inability to help; and finally when the skull spoke to him, he was compelled to follow it's instructions.

This is the movie that heaped everything onto the character. Indy under pressure was a great angle for exploring the limits of his character, though it was off-set by some mis-judged, overblown cliffhangers, that instead of helping to keep the thrill-rate up, help to raise the blood-pressure as I ask myself, "what the....?"

It looks like Lucas and Spielberg feared that the old gags and cliffhangers weren't enough to satisfy the youngsters of the day, so they made them bigger.

As you wrote, kong, there was too much exposition. Or rather, the exposition was poorly delivered.

KOTCS is like one of old Indy's tall-stories from The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles (like his halloween story about Dracula, which may or may not have happened as he told it). I could see KOTCS re-edited as a lower-key movie, with better dialogue and more engaging characters, and that would be what really happened to Indy. (Unfortunately we might also discover that he never took the fridge ride that he claimed - so that great Doom Town sequence would have to have a different cliffhanger ending).
 

Indy's brother

New member
Darth Vile said:
Perhaps the reason why Spielberg didn't show more grizzly ant carnage is that it perhaps would be too similar to the dung beetle/scarab scene in The Mummy?

I admit, it was the first visual to cross my mind, too. I would imagine that Spielberg's got plenty enough magic left in him to have made it better than The Mummy's scene, though. I mean, the guy that gets dragged down by the ants was awesome, his physical acting exuded true helpless panic. The high pitched screaming was a nice touch, too (wasn't that mentioned in Jaws?). A little blood-letting from the ants would have really brought the tone in line for me. Oh, but wait, then it would have been more violent than Spalko's death. So then her demise would have had to be more brutal. Oh, crap, then the whole movie's tone leading up to these events would have to be brought down from it's vaudevillian.....

So. Anyway. Has anyone here been able to view this edited version?
 

Darth Vile

New member
Montana Smith said:
I'm thinking of scenes that were prolonged for too long, and scenes that are just out of place.

Such as the jungle chase that goes on and on. Extended even further by the totally out of place monkey swinging. Then the chase continues onto that rubber tree, and then three waterfalls. It was a clumsy overkill. Not to mention that the chase proceeded faster than the convoy moved with the aid of the jungle cutter.

Montana ? Thanks for the reply.

Re. the above. I don?t think anyone would disagree with you that the monkey/vine swinging scene just doesn?t work? but my point was that the reason those moments are cringe worthy are more to do with bad execution of an idea (or misjudgment on Spielberg?s part) rather than editing/pacing of the movie per se.

Montana Smith said:
The sandpit scene was like some bad sit-com from the '70s. It was corny and just held up the progression.

I have to say that I quite like the sandpit scene. It?s not particularly clever, but it does have a measure of internal logic i.e. it?s the scene where we learn (or at least Indy does) about Mutt?s lineage, and it takes a near death moment for Marion to disclose the secret. I?m assuming that you?d prefer the moment to be contained within a more dramatic scene? Me too? however, I?m not sure that would be in keeping with the tonality of the movie (or any of the sequels to be frank).

Montana Smith said:
Whereas ROTLA, TOD and TLC progressed neatly, KOTCS would now have me watch it with my thumb on the fast forward dial.

Being honest, if/when watching KOTCS, I'd watch the first section (Warehouse/Doomtown) and then once back at Marshall college, I'd forward straight to the Oxley's prison cell scene... and watch from there on in.

When watching TOD, I fast forward through a lot more i.e. from "no parachutes" to the spike chamber. As much as I love TLC, I'll usually forward straight to Brunwald castle? because for me, the previous 30/45 mins is largely exposition (and mediocre action) until Sean Connery?s arrival. That said, I believe the 2nd half of TLC is as good as Indy movies get.

Montana Smith said:
The problem of the pacing is compounded by the characters that I have no time for. It wouldn't be so bad if those dull characters had something interesting to say.

As already mentioned, I agree? there is at least one protagonist too many. But as I say, that isn?t a killer blow in itself. It?s because the action scenes don?t quite hit the mark that we then pour over the script/dialogue or the amount of characters in the story. I.e. if the jungle chase or retracting staircase/interior temple scenes hit the ball out of the park (as far as action is concerned), the disposable dialogue, the amount of dirt on Indy's hat and various character relationships become less important in the scheme of things.

Montana Smith said:
The threat level throughout seemed to be aimed at a younger audience. There was nothing like the tension created by Toht holding the hot poker to Marion's face. While the original three movies had elements of cartoon violence, comedy and slapstick, KOTCS turned much of the film into a kid's cartoon, complete with token characters, whom even notable actors such as Ray Winstone and John Hurt couldn't make convincing. Seemingly uninspired by their roles and dialogue they resorted to hamming it up.

No matter how well edited a movie is, a lacklustre story and a lacklustre ensemble of characters can ruin the pacing, because it doesn't constantly hold your attention.

I find KOTCS to be no more aimed at younger audiences than the other 3 are. I believe Raiders has a more sophisticated script and is played straighter and TLC has the genuine rapport of Ford and Connery (and some great witty dialogue) which sets it apart from the others? but they don't appear to be any more ?adult? themed or tonally ?darker?.

Montana Smith said:
Some movies are riveting even when nothing appears to be happening, simply because the actors are engaging your attention, and you find yourself hanging onto every word. You just want to catch every moment of the development of a relationship between them. I didn't feel that at all with KOTCS. I didn't believe Mutt, Mac or Oxley, so I wasn't really interested in their dialogue.

Isn?t that very subjective though? I didn?t feel engaged/enthralled about the relationships between Indy and Willie/Shorty (TOD) or Brody/Sallah (TLC). I personally thought Mutt was a much better sidekick (and had better dialogue) than Short Round and I thought Mac (even if under used) was a better, more interesting character than Willie? but does that automatically make it a better movie or TOD inferior?

As I mentioned above, Indy movies are primarily about the action. If that doesn?t quite work, the rest is largely irrelevant. For example, as much as I think TOD is the more inferior Indy sequel, at the time of its release, there was still nothing else quite like it as far as polished and large scale ?action?/set pieces were concerned. It?s that where KOTCS falls short (IMHO). Instead of pushing the envelope on the execution of action/set pieces, as Raiders/TOD did (I exclude TLC from this), KOTCS was merely imitating the past whilst paying some lip service to more modern techniques. The net result is that the action/set pieces (whilst always imaginative and well executed) don't rise above what we deem to be standard/average, and appear somewhat stale compared to its predecessors. Therefore, even to someone who appreciates/enjoys the movie for what it is (i.e. me) the action scenes are a bit underwhelming... and without the "wow factor" of amazing action scenes what's Indy got left to offer in the 21st century?
 
Top