This quote from another
thread) got me to thinking. . .
?It?s the opening scene of the movie,? Ms. Dunn burbled excitedly. ?[Indiana Jones] is teaching a class and he hears some noise outside, which turns out to be an anti-Communist rally, and he goes out to investigate and he recognizes one of his old rivals from one of the other movies and he jumps on a motorcycle and ends up being chased by some guys in a car.?
The Indiana Jones serial format dicates that the opening sequence not have a direct bearing on the film's main plot. True to the old serial format -- where the adventures overlap from installment-to-installment -- the opening sequence is typically used to resolve the prior installment's story and transition to the new story:
(1)
Raiders winds down the Fertility Idol story but introduces Belloq.
(2)
Temple of Doom ends the Yurhachi/Diamond storyline but introduces Willie (and Shortround) and accounts for how Indy gets dumped in India.
(3)
Last Crusade sets the stage for the father/son story and gives us the resolution of a storyline set in Indy's youth.
Last Crusade's opening was additionally notably because of the role that it played in supposedly help end the series: we see Indy succeed in obtaining the relic and handing it off to Marcus -- thereby making up for his failure to get the relic in
Raiders.
This is all old news -- so what does it have to do with this thread, which deals with the prospect of Indy IV being the beginning of a mult-film project?
All the openings in the prior films dealt with
resolutions. Indy either gets -- or come close to getting -- an object and then the film transitions on to the film's main story. What intrigues me about the Yale/Marshall opening is that I don't think we'll see another resolution -- because the key to Indy IV (after the character having been dormant for so long) is to have the perfect catalyst to thrust him back into action. In other words, since the audience feels that the character has been 'idle' for so long, it just won't feel right to have a resolution right at the start. So, I'm assuming, the powers-that-be will attempt something different. How about the opening sequence have the initial catalyst (an old foe) but have the initial catalyst slip away (and leave this old-foe storyline unresolved, leaving the audience wanting more)? By having Indy fail to catch his quarry, Indy is up and running -- there's some transition to the main storyline for the present film, and the audience is re-engaged with the character.
I just don't think the powers-that-be will be so unimaginative and linear as to start the film's opening sequence with same subject matter as the main story. And to use the opening sequence to start -- rather than resolve -- a story would be the perfect teaser to generate interest for a later film. The scant support I have for this point is how Spielberg gushed over Koepp's script. That's why I don't think the opening and fourth film will be unimaginative or linear. I also think the upcoming video games link to Lao Che is compelling. I think there may be larger plans afoot for the franchise (think of Pirates II and how they planned the third film if the second was a success). I just don't think Hollywood re-starts a franchise like Indiana Jones for a one-shot deal. . . .