Udvarnoky said:Wait, because of theme itself, or because you thought it was "subtle?"
Udvarnoky said:Come on man, I'm hoping you know me well enough by now to know that "having everything explained" is not even close to how I would have preferred the film to have handled it.
Udvarnoky said:Why ignore my point about getting rid of the scene, instead of pretending like you agree with me? Also, I think at this point your example scenes from the previous movies to show how alike Indy4 really is with them are getting kind of desperate. Abner's relationship with Indy under-explored or not, he was an unseen character, and it's not comparable in any obvious way (at least not to me) with what we're talking about.
The scope (form a geographical sense) is derived from the fact they are in Peru. I understand the desire to show some of the journey, as far as the cemetery is concerned, but I disagree that it?s a necessary requirement. Otherwise the movie would risk becoming even more stop, start and ?episodic?.Udvarnoky said:The practicality of Indy getting to the cemetery is not my point. We of course see how Indy got there when the movie shows Mutt hiding his motorcycle behind the branches. My desire to show some of the journey is not to satisfy some logistical itch, but to give a sense of scope the film lacks.
Udvarnoky said:The "convenience" is not in question here, at least not by me. Again, you're giving vaguely similar examples from the previous movie for no reason. The little "X marks the spot" puzzle worked because it was simple, fun, and we could actual understand what was going on. In addition to that, it served as a punchline to a joke and never made out to be more than it was. I really don't see how Ox's riddle compares.
The logic that led Indy to travel to Nazca was never once brought up. Beyond that, the two of us agree to disagree.
Udvarnoky said:I do not, and think you're just really confused about how I feel, whether it's my fault or yours.
You're being extraordinarily vague here. You've got to tell me what you mean by this. What is "pacing" to you, and what do you mean by "purpose" in this case?
Udvarnoky said:"Serving a similar purpose" is I guess not something I disagree with, but it's also incredibly vague and I'm not sure how it's relevant, since the purpose that the scenes in question serve are not really my issue so much as execution. I say the mystery behind the cemetery stuff is needlessly convoluted and you agree, and then point out that scenes in other movies "serve a similar purpose." So what? We're on needlessly convoluted right now. That it bothered me and not you is fine, but don't act like arguing something completely separate somehow bolsters your standpoint.
Darth Vile said:I wasn?t. I like the interrogation scene; it underlines Indy sense of disillusionment and obviously helps explain why the college comes under pressure to oust Indy from his post.
Darth Vile said:there are numerous sub text/plots in all the Indy movies that are not fully explored, nor require further exploration.
Darth Vile said:The scope (form a geographical sense) is derived from the fact they are in Peru.
Darth Vile said:To be objective, I think it?s a matter of you disagreeing with me rather than not understanding. Having a Knight of the First Crusade entombed beneath a library in Venice is overworked and convoluted too.
Darth Vile said:I personally didn?t struggle to understand what was going on in that section of TLC or KOTCS. I also found the logic of the applicable scene in KOTCS to be sound i.e. Indy looking for Ox, follows the trail to Peru, finds a marker to the cemetery, uncovers Orellana?s resting place and the Crystal Skull.
Darth Vile said:What do I mean by ?pace?? Velocity of speed (or lack of) in getting from point A to point B.
Darth Vile said:What do I mean by ?purpose?? A rationale behind any given scenario or plot point e.g. Indy goes to Nazca on the back of the cryptic letter from Ox.
Darth Vile said:I?m fine with the fact that the cemetery scene didn?t cut it for you. My point is that I found it no more convoluted or confusing than the Venice catacombs scene, and in fact, found it a little more interesting because of various factors I found enjoyable e.g. the banter between Indy and Mutt, the lighting, Indy in archaeologist/adventurer mode etc. etc.
Udvarnoky said:Since we're all such fans of subtlety around here, why do we need a scene that underlines a message we can already infer from the scenes immediately following it? And why is it OK for with for Abner relationship to remain only hinted at, but Indy's federal problems needs a three minute, in-your-face explanation?
Disagree for the points already raised.Udvarnoky said:Yes, there are. This isn't one of them.
Too vague for a full response.Udvarnoky said:But scope is about more than geography.
Udvarnoky said:Not within the context of an Indiana Jones movie. It's a romanticized and exaggerated concept, sure, but there are catacombs beneath Italy. In fact, I don't see what's so convoluted about it. It's not very plausible, but that is not the same thing.
Udvarnoky said:The storytelling in that whole sequence is spotty, and you're jumping to conclusions when you suggest that logic is my central issue with it. The movie simply has too much too say at one moment, and even after you unravel it in your head there's no obvious reason why the info was presented in the way that it was. Indy's conclusion in the crypt about how the Spaniards wound up there, how the skull wound up with them, and that Oxley found the skull, took it somewhere, and then brought it back later felt like an overlong explanation to something that wouldn't have required so much effort if it was better handled in the first place.
Udvarnoky said:So how is the pacing similar in the cemetery scene to the catacombs scene? Did Indy grind the movie to a halt with a "I've gotta account for these plot holes so we can move on!" explanation when he was with Elsa that I'm forgetting about?
Udvarnoky said:And I'm fine with the fact that you found the catacombs scene equally convoluted. The difference is, I'm saying why I feel the way I do, and you aren't. You haven't once attempted to explain why the catacombs sequences is so similar other than simply saying that it is, as if that's all that I need to know.
But couldn't you lump in the entire chase to Akator with the "last section" of KOTS and equal or trump Raiders? If we're comparing the true last sections we'd begin at the Ark opening ceremony, in which Indy stares at s***.Crusade>Raiders said:Last section of Raiders Indy sneaks into a secret Nazi Island, beats up some dudes, and holds everybody up with a RPG.
Crusade>Raiders said:Last section of Temple, well what DIDNT Indy do? Beat up Thugees, swing around, minecart chase, confrantation with swordsmen, and the whole bridge scene.
Crusade>Raiders said:Last section of Last Crusade, he goes through the three trials and finds the Holy Grail.
Crusade>Raiders said:Last section of Kingdom? He's just staring at ****. Theres some drawings, some running from natives for all of 30 seconds, some puzzle thing that Ox already figured out, the worst booby trap EVER, some more staring at stuff, Spalko comes and he's still just staring at stuff. They jump through some gate and literraly WALK out of what could have been a cool escape scene. *sigh*
Darth Vile said:You can?t have it all ways? You talk about convoluted plot points and ask for more subtlety, yet you require the opposite elsewhere.
Darth Vile said:The interrogation scene served a central purpose for me. Removing it would simply risk more of what you criticize KOTCS for? e.g. people would be confused and scratching heads saying, ?How come Indy has been sacked? He was fighting the Russians two minutes ago?.
Darth Vile said:Too vague for a full response.
Darth Vile said:Again I think you are simply imbuing movies you prefer with things that are not necessarily there. I don?t really see that much of a difference between the Venice catacombs scene and the Nazca cemetery scene. They serve a similar narrative purpose e.g. expositional/sub-quest related to the main Macuffin (with a piece of action tagged on the front/end).
Darth Vile said:In my opinion the Venice library/catacombs scene cuts too fast, is too convenient and has the potential to confuse e.g. What was the initial clue to determine that the Knight was under the library? Why did Elsa not find the clues hidden in the library (or was she pretending to get Indy to lead the way)? Why does Indy remove the pages from his diary at that particular moment (does he not trust Elsa)? Why do the Brothers of the Cruciform sword allow Indy/Elsa to enter the tomb? Why do they not try and kill Marcus, but try and kill Indy/Elsa? How do Indy/Elsa escape the fiery catacombs? How the Brothers of the Cruciform Sword know Indy and Elsa have escaped the inferno?
Darth Vile said:You are pushing against an open door. I’ve already stated that I think the scene tries too hard to be mysterious, which in turn results in unnecessary complexity. However, I like the scene. And as already mentioned, I prefer the cemetery scene to the Venice library/catacombs scene (which is the most similar/appropriate scene from the other movies to compare/contrast against).
Darth Vile said:Oh it does. The majority of the library/catacombs scene is expositional… and up until the dropped match, it’s pretty slow wouldn’t you agree?
Darth Vile said:In fact, I think it suffers more than the cemetery scene for not having a “booby trap”… as the moment Elsa and Indy drop through the hole; the expectation is that they will encounter something more deadly… At least in the cemetery scene they had hidden levers/secret doors and pivoting floors to fathom. Which is intrinsically more “Indy” wouldn't you say?
Mainly because I don’t have any desire to pick holes in a movie I really like… but I think I’ve outlined a couple of things above that wouldn’t hold up to the scrutiny placed on KOTCS.
Avilos said:While Oxley never would have gotten into the throne room on his own.Indy was deciphering Oxley. The same way he would decipher a map or ancient text. Yet some how this has been used to make Indy seem useless. Indiana Jones was the only one who could return the Skull.
Crusade>Raiders said:You can write the last section of Kingdom as boring, but I have the DVD and I can actually watch it. The last 30 mins is DULL. Akator is suppose to be this lost city with amazing technology and ****, and yet all we see are a couple of cool pyramids and natives that inexplicably pop out of statues and chase Indy/Mutt/superfluous characters for all of 30 seconds.
I feel like I'm just repeating myself, but I still stand by my point. Indiana Jones, the greatest character in cinema history, is reduced to an old travel guide with Mutt and Friends. There's no suspense and wonderment of the last 30 mins like Raiders/Last Crusade. There's no well-paced action thrills of the last 30 mins of Temple.
Its just the most generic looking aliens ever and Indy starring @ the big CGI UFO flies away into space.
Oh, I mean the space between space.
Yes, I have jumped on the Kingdom hate-train. I watched it again last night, and so many flaws jump at @ me
Udvarnoky said:I hear you. But in the end I appreciate what the cemetery scene was trying to do rather than what it actually did. The "secret door" stuff seemed very perfunctory to me, like they were saying "Wait, this is an Indiana Jones movie, we need him to pull a lever at some point and uncover a secret passage!" It just didn't feel like it fit. Like any related Indy sequence, the Venice scene is filled with contrivances and obstacles that are presented more for entertainment than because they make sense, but you know, there are rats in sewers and skeletons in catacombs. Indy4 just wanted to put a Temple of Doom type bit in there to force-feed us a cliche Indy moment without even trying to put any reason behind it. True, it's no more sensible than the random spike chamber in Temple of Doom, but compare the two scenes in terms of excitement, and I think you'll see why the scene in Temple earns its existence.
Obviously though, I'd be lying if I said I didn't enjoy the cemetery sequence. But I'm an Indiana Jones fan, I'm going to watch anything Spielberg and the writers can think up. But that's exactly what the scene felt like - anything they could think up. Like I say, I like the whole cemetery sequence in a self-contained sort of way. But I know in my heart it wasn't what it should have been, and so while the fan will eat this stuff up in all of the hundred times I will watch this movie, the objective side of me will come complain about it on the internet.
It’s not like we’re discussing some work by Chekhov or Tolstoy where we can peel back layer after layer…Udvarnoky said:Erm...I dunno about that. I mean, I guess it's expositional in the sense that Indy is explaining to Elsa (and by extension the audience) where they are and some history behind it, but it is nothing on the same level as the cemetery scene once that skull is found. I wish I could see where you're coming from when you think it's so similar in the way the scene plays out, even if they're both "A scene where Indy and a sidekick go into an Indiana Jones like location to find an artifact."
Udvarnoky said:Speaking of the dropped match, that gets me thinking that where the cemetery really needed a random thrill moment, it was at the very end. Usually the formula of an Indy scene is that he gets from one mess into a worse one. When Indy gets the idol the ball starts rolling, when he escapes from the plane he falls off a cliff, when he gets to the tablet the whole damn sewer becomes a fiery inferno. I'm thinking a kind of last second moment of "Uh-oh!" to punctuate the exposition about the Skull would have helped the scene. (And yes, I say this knowing there's a deleted scene of just such a nature. I probably would have cut the secret door before that. )
Udvarnoky said:It definitely is intrinsically more Indy, but that's the problem, it felt like a ready made, prepackaged Indy idea - it's forced. The amount of rats as well as the other contrivances in the Venice are what they are, but the fact is that encountering rats in sewers and skeletons in catacombs is reasonable enough. The stuff in the cemetery was more like, "We better put a secret door because we need a secret door somewhere in the movie." Why is it there? Yes, you can ask the exact same questions about the booby traps and passages at the beginning of Raiders and in the middle of Doom and the end of Crusade, but the difference is they were thrilling. Indy4 was like, "This is an Indiana Jones movie, so here's your goddamn secret door and whimsical pivoting stone circle." I felt more like a checklist was being completed than I did like the movie was really trying engage me.
Agreed.Udvarnoky said:I do not scrutinize Indy4 any more than I've scrutinized the other sequels. Maybe someday you can believe that. Until then, let the (I must say really enlightening) arguments continue!
Darth Vile said:Ultimately it comes down to a preference for one over another. I don’t dislike any of the scenes mentioned… and the bottom line is that they are all playing on the riff of the original ‘Idol Temple’ scene in Raiders.
Darth Vile said:I’d understand your resistance to the comparison if I were comparing the cemetery scene to the Raven bar scene in Raiders, or the tank chase in TLC… but these are simply generic templates within an Indiana Jones movie e.g. vehicle chase scene, fist fight scene, dank cave/tunnel expositional scene. I think the scenes either work for the viewer or they don’t.
Darth Vile said:I’m not sure if it’s an age thing… but the only Indy movie I found to be truly “thrilling” (in the sense I think you mean) and where there was a real sense of “tension” and “peril” was Raiders. The other three I find more to be about spectacle. For example, (discussed in another thread too), I find the tank chase from TLC to be the best action sequence from any Indy movie (as well as one of the best action sequences in modern cinema), but it never “thrilled” me or made me “tense”… I just loved (and still love) the spectacle and imagination involved in getting that idea on the big screen. I never thought Indy was in any sense of danger… but I enjoyed the contrivances immensely because they were fun… and because it was relatively clever. I don't think any action scene in KOTCS matches or exceeds that one TLC, but it aspires to it.