Cole said:
Insulting is a pretty harsh word of choice.
What else could we see it as? You bring a film series back after nineteen years, and one of its central characters back after after twenty-seven, and you don't bother to make their character interactions credible, or to treat them with much in the way of sincerity or humanity?
Cole said:
There are plenty of laughs in the film up to this point.....I disagree it's out-of-place within the tone of the film.
You misunderstand me. I'm not saying there weren't jokes previously. What I'm saying is that this is the first place what should be treated as a serious character moment - as Mac's betrayal is, as Indy's dejected state in the Stanforth scenes - is seen as an opportunity for laughs. After all, twentysome years of resentment are funny, right? It's insulting because it's denying an audience any opportunity to take these characters seriously as human beings, something that Raiders excelled at, that Last Crusade was darned good at, and that even Temple of Doom managed fairly well at times. And, yes, Crystal Skull does so from time to time, but it <I>doesn't</I> with the one relationship revived from a prior film in which both participants are still alive.
Cole said:
Certainly. Even the way she stands, with her hands on her hips saying "Indiana Jones..." is clearly an "homage" if you will to her first scene in 'Raiders.' I don't see it as a criticism though.
It's a point for criticism because it's a mythology gag, the sort of thing that takes us out of the film and disallows our suspension of disbelief.
Cole said:
Just happy to be in the film? I don't agree with this at all. She's a professional. Her part is fairly small, but I think her performance is fine. I think it's more fair to say any criticisms are rooted within the script and the direction they took her character than her performance.
Look, I'm quite sympathetic to the plight of the older actress. There simply <I>aren't</I> parts written for them. Sadly, Marion Ravenwood, KotCS edition <I>was</I> one of them, but just barely. Perhaps Kasdan wrote it. Maybe it was all Koepp. They can write it in their scripts, a woman can smile, and smile, and thus not seem quite human. Yes, yes, of course she's <I>human</I>, but she's not treated with any sort of seriousness.
Let me ask you straight: do you think the scene at the camp, and the film at the whole, would have been better if the dialogue between Indy and Marion had been, despite the same words, been acted in a manner more similar to the dialogue at the Raven? Do you think you'd still have to make apologies for the film's characterizations on the basis of how small they are? Or would that added bit of sincerity have sold the relationship better, and thus improved the film?
Cole said:
I don't have issues with the humor involving Marion and the fencing; it's all relative lighthearted humor to me and it feels within the tone of the film's humor (the humor is based on Marion's over-enthusiastic attitude, as most parents are when it comes to their kids)...
<I>Precisely.</I> It's a cheap gag based on how most parents are said to be. That's not characterization, that's treating Marion as a type.
Cole said:
...perhaps the scene could've benefitted from more intense action involving Indy, similar to how the tank scene in 'Last Crusade' balances humor between Marcus and Henry Sr. and intense action involving Indy.
Perhaps. Just as likely it would have benefitted from fewer monkey gags, crotch gags, and dumb "soccer mom" gags. Good humor is rooted in character. There's even a little of it in that sequence, in Indy and Mac's interactions, in the "I don't think he plans that far ahead" exchange, and even in Oxley's sudden comprehension of who "Henry Jones Junior" is once he pulls his bazooka trick. Those have something to do with character. Those other bits don't.
Cole said:
But it's still not a bad scene....it's extremely well-filmed by Spielberg and I think it still has a furious momentum (a staple of all the pinnacle Indy "chase" scenes). Indy taking control of vehicles, punching Russians and almost getting rammed off a massive cliff is still entertaining. But the ants scene is probably the best part of the whole sequence - probably because it involves Indy.
I quite agree. But a good scene can still have bad elements that keep it from greatness.
Cole said:
Is Marion's involvement fulfilling or substantial? Ya, I think it is; there's a whole arch to the film that deals with family. Like I mentioned before - Indy is a lost character in the beginning. Mutt is character who is a little lost himself - he has no father, he has quit school, has an attitude. The end of the movie is about them finding each other. The film itself is a family film, and the content is a celebration of family.
Yeah, it's sort of about family. It's also sort of about knowledge, its pursuit, power, use, and misuse, as I often say. But that it is about these things doesn't make it <I>good</I>. I'd further argue that all this bit about knowledge is threaded throughout the film pretty effectively, even if the "knowledge was their treasure" line is a rather hackneyed thematic signpost.
Mutt and Indy have a somewhat interesting relationship, but nothing that's interesting about it is dependent on Mutt actually being Indy's son. It's using a revealed fact as drama, rather than any sort of character conflict. It's why I keep coming back to a variant on the script in which Mutt is just some kid - a student, or a street tough with a prep school background - who is pulled between Oxley's, Indy's, and Mac's divergent approaches to treasure hunting. Then we aren't forced to deal with their lackadaisical approach to Marion's return.
I also disagree that Indy is a lost character at the beginning. He could have been presented as such, and it would have been compelling; he is much more strongly presented as an exile. Rejected by his country, fired by his university, and ready to go to Communist Leipzig to continue his profession. He's out of place, not lost. That's the point of the suburbs and the atomic bomb moments, not just to be cool.