Are/were the Batman fans responsible for a lot of the hate?

Stoo · Apr 25, 2011

=WillKill4Food said:
Do you think Cosby show fans are responsible for the term "jumping the shark"?

1) I never said that "Dark Klown" fans were responsible for the term, "nuking the fridge". What I said was that the general public is not aware of it. Outside of super-hero/sci-fi/fantasy film geek circles, who uses that phrase?

2) This is a very, poor analogy because "Happy Days" ended before "The Cosby Show" began. Fonzie jumped a shark *7* years before "The Cosby Show". Personally, I had never heard the phrase until the early '90s, some 15 years after the actual episode (and I'm a fan of "Happy Days"). "Nuke the Fridge" was coined and for sale on a T-shirt within a month or two of Indy 4's release.

WillKill4Food said:
Right, right. If I prefer Stephanie Meyer to William Faulkner, well, taste is taste, in a vacuum separate from the intellectual value of the subject, eh?

So, not only do people who dislike The Clown Movie have an inferior taste in film but they are intellectually vacuous, too? Thanks for enlightening me!

WillKill4Food said:
If I were a member of a Batman forum circa 1997, I imagine that I would criticize the camp of Batman and Robin, yes. I would have every reason to. And if there was an off-topic session, I may talk about Indiana Jones.

However, I would make a point of not childishly whining about Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal MacMuffin because other members chose to talk about the films that interest them in the appropriate forum for doing so.

Erm...1997?

I was talking about 2008, a time when the Batman stuff was not confined to only the 'Films' section of The Raven. People were comparing "Skull" to The Clown Movie in the Indy 4 forum, starting Batman games in the 'Games' section, posting pictures of themselves dressed as the Joker, etc.

WillKill4Food said:
Accusing Nolan fans of churning the KotCS hatred seems ridiculous. They're two completely different movies, and I don't know why that your opinion of one would necessarily be connected to your opinion of the other,

Neither you nor I understand it but a large number of people did connect the 2 movies. If you had a time machine, you go could back to 2008 to ask all the fly-by-night folks who posted at The Raven and made the comparisons. Rest assured, Indy 4 WASN'T being compared to "Iron Man", "Hancock", "Quantam of Solace" or "Kung Fu Panda".

WillKill4Food said:
Listen to this dude criticizing KotCS!

Must be a Dark Knight fanboy...

In Raiders112390567308's defence: Don't confuse criticism with hatred because they are not the same.

Obviously, not every "Dark Knight" fan is a "Skull" hater but it's a good bet that the most "Skull" HATERS are "Dark Knight" lovers.

Montana Smith · Apr 25, 2011

We might be able to break this down to some sort of analogy.

If you were a fan of Batman as he appeared in the '80s or '90s comics, then you would probably have appreciated Nolan's harder take on the character.

If you were a fan of Indy as he appeared in Raiders then you might not have appreciated Lucas and Spielberg's take on the character in KOTCS.

It could simply be a case of one director hitting the right note with a character and his environment, and another missing it. Personally, The Dark Knight captures my imagination better than KOTCS. The former was more completely in tune with my idea of where the main character, his companions and his enemies should be. Even the stunts were more impressive. It could have been Indy swinging out of the way of a truck flipping end over end, rather than dropping over three waterfalls.

WillKill4Food · Apr 25, 2011

Stoo said:
What I said was that the general public is not aware of it.

Really? With the ellipses and all, I mistook that for sarcasm. I thought it was a pretty common phrase. I've heard non-geeky friends use it (but at the university I attend, maybe it would be disingenuous to say that anyone I know isn't at least a little geeky).

Stoo said:
2) This is a very, poor analogy because "Happy Days" ended before "The Cosby Show" began. Fonzie jumped a shark *7* years before "The Cosby Show".

They're both sitcoms and both were aired on Nick-At-Nite and TV Land around the same time when I was growing up in the early nineties. The point was that it's ridiculous to accuse fans of one show for the criticism of another.

Stoo said:
So, not only do people who dislike The Clown Movie have an inferior taste in film but they are intellectually vacuous, too? Thanks for enlightening me!

I was comparing these two very different films to two very different authors. You don't have to love TDK to be intelligent, and Lord knows I don't like all of Faulkner's work. The point was that taste is not just taste. Surely you don't think that tweens who read Twilight have an equally valid taste in literature as those on the Nobel committee?
Also, you have yet to give your reasons for hating TDK. What merits of the film do you find inferior? If you just don't like superhero movies, then your criticism is probably irrelevant. I don't like rom-coms or rap music, so I don't criticize either when people bring them up in conversation.

Stoo Pigeon said:
Erm...1997? I was talking about 2008, a time when the Batman stuff was not confined to only the 'Films' section of The Raven.

Yeah, I had to go a decade back to find a crappy Batman film. The point was that if I was a member of a Batman fan site and the newest Batman film sucked, I would say it sucked. And if an Indiana Jones film came out that bested it, I would have no problem with people talking about that Indiana Jones film if it was in the Off Topic section.

Stoo said:
People were comparing "Skull" to The Clown Movie in the Indy 4 forum, starting Batman games in the 'Games' section, posting pictures of themselves dressed as the Joker, etc.

So what??? Is this jealousy on your part? I for one am not a fan of threads like "Can we get Indy around the globe?" but if others enjoy it, why would I complain? Oh, but it's about Indy, at least, you'll say.

Well so what? Why do we have an Off Topic section in the first place? I for one like to hear what people who like Indiana Jones think about other movies.

Stew said:
Neither you nor I understand it but a large number of people did connect the 2 movies. If you had a time machine, you go could back to 2008 to ask all the fly-by-night folks who posted at The Raven and made the comparisons. Rest assured, Indy 4 WASN'T being compared to "Iron Man", "Hancock", "Quantam of Solace" or "Kung Fu Panda".

Because TDK was a big film that year. Both of them focus on adventurers (of a sort, this would more of an Alan Moore application of the word) who help people and face bizarre villains. I can see the James Bond similarities as well, and I bet people compared those. I doubt that many people posted on here just to criticize Indy 4 and gush about TDK. Find one example of someone who did this.

My biggest issue is with this claim:

Raiders1123905673081231823801283916723710273123 said:
They seemed to want to destroy IJ even before KOTCS came out.

That's ridiculous. Until KotCS, it seemed like everyone loved Indiana Jones. Last Crusade, which is a lot of Raveners' least favorites, is on IMDB's top 250 somewhere around 100, I believe. KotCS received the shellacking after people saw it. Not before.

Stoo said:
In Raiders112390567308's defence: Don't confuse criticism with hatred because they are not the same.

He's allowed to conflate the two, so why can't I?

Stoo said:
Obviously, not every "Dark Knight" fan is a "Skull" hater but it's a good bet that the most "Skull" HATERS are "Dark Knight" lovers.

That's unfair. KotCS haters and Dark Knight fans are both far more common than KotCS lovers and Dark Knight haters.

I bet most Twilight fans have never even picked up Absalom, Absalom!

Darth Vile · Apr 26, 2011

WillKill4Food said:
I was comparing these two very different films to two very different authors. You don't have to love TDK to be intelligent, and Lord knows I don't like all of Faulkner's work. The point was that taste is not just taste. Surely you don't think that tweens who read Twilight have an equally valid taste in literature as those on the Nobel committee?

Not sure what your point is here Will??? Are you stating that ?taste? is an attribute only available to an intellectual few? I have many friends who think that the Batman (yes- including TDK) and Indiana Jones movies are fine examples of ?low brow? culture made to be consumed by the feckless masses. Are they right? Does that mean, by default, we have no taste for liking Indiana Jones and Batman movies?

WillKill4Food said:
Also, you have yet to give your reasons for hating TDK. What merits of the film do you find inferior? If you just don't like superhero movies, then your criticism is probably irrelevant. I don't like rom-coms or rap music, so I don't criticize either when people bring them up in conversation.

I personally found TDK to be overblown, pompous and emotionally un-engaging. I appreciated it (although I much prefer Batman Begins by the way) and I think Nolan is a very talented director? However, in my opinion, I find Tim Burton?s Batman and Batman Returns to be more inspired, imaginative, and a better example of how a comic book character (in this case Batman) can be translated to the big screen.

WillKill4Food said:
Because TDK was a big film that year. Both of them focus on adventurers (of a sort, this would more of an Alan Moore application of the word) who help people and face bizarre villains. I can see the James Bond similarities as well, and I bet people compared those. I doubt that many people posted on here just to criticize Indy 4 and gush about TDK. Find one example of someone who did this.

Whilst TDK and KOTCS are completely different movies, they are contemporary to each other... and involve a fair bit of 'action'. I think the comparisons are natural, even if unhelpful in determining which is the better movie.

WillKill4Food said:
That's ridiculous. Until KotCS, it seemed like everyone loved Indiana Jones. Last Crusade, which is a lot of Raveners' least favorites, is on IMDB's top 250 somewhere around 100, I believe. KotCS received the shellacking after people saw it. Not before.

Firstly, I?m not sure how true that is. Even here, in some sections, the criticisms started way before the movie was released. I remember arguments/debates about Indy?s hat and jacket looking too clean in publicity shots? etc. etc. That was a good indication of the level of minutiae that was to be examined over the following weeks/months. Secondly, I?d be wary of IMDB and Empire Magazine rankings. It?s a bit like asking McDonalds to poll their customers for opinions on the world?s best cuisine.

Also - seemed to me that the ?shellacking? came from a minority who had both genuine and misplaced gripes. However, (as I posted on a TOD topic) a couple of years after the event, even the BBC is putting KOTCS on par with TOD (of course whether that?s positive depends on your opinion of TOD).

Stoo · Apr 26, 2011

WillKill4Food said:
Really? With the ellipses and all, I mistook that for sarcasm. I thought it was a pretty common phrase. I've heard non-geeky friends use it (but at the university I attend, maybe it would be disingenuous to say that anyone I know isn't at least a little geeky).

Your link is to a 2008 fluff article about that year's buzzwords. Tomorrow, go stop an average man/woman or guy/girl on the street and ask him/her if they know what "nuking the fridge" is supposed to mean.

WillKill4Food said:
Also, you have yet to give your reasons for hating TDK. What merits of the film do you find inferior? If you just don't like superhero movies, then your criticism is probably irrelevant.

I won't bother posting my reasons for not liking The Clown Movie because it would lead the topic astray (and would be a bigger waste of time than commenting on this thread has already been).

WillKill4Food said:
Yeah, I had to go a decade back to find a crappy Batman film. The point was that if I was a member of a Batman fan site and the newest Batman film sucked, I would say it sucked. And if an Indiana Jones film came out that bested it, I would have no problem with people talking about that Indiana Jones film if it was in the Off Topic section.

You don't need to go back a decade to find a crappy Batman film because they are all terrible. In 2008, how many Indy fans joined BATMAN FORUMS and compared "Dark Knight" to "Skull", posted photos of themselves dressed as Spalko or Dovchenko, started Indy games, etc.?

WillKill4Food said:
So what??? Is this jealousy on your part? I for one am not a fan of threads like "Can we get Indy around the globe?" but if others enjoy it, why would I complain? Oh, but it's about Indy, at least, you'll say.

"Jealousy"? No, sorry.

(The "Indy around the globe" has ZERO relevance to this conversation.)

WillKill4Food said:
Well so what? Why do we have an Off Topic section in the first place? I for one like to hear what people who like Indiana Jones think about other movies.

You're avoiding the point. In 2008, many termites came out of the woodwork to join The Raven in order to say that "Skull" was garbage but "Dark Knight" was the best film ever made. (Spielberg should have taken lessons from Nolan, etc.)

WillKill4Food said:
Because TDK was a big film that year. Both of them focus on adventurers (of a sort, this would more of an Alan Moore application of the word) who help people and face bizarre villains.

FLIP-FLOP! According to you: "They're two completely different movies". Now, you're attempting to show how they are similar...

WillKill4Food said:
I doubt that many people posted on here just to criticize Indy 4 and gush about TDK. Find one example of someone who did this.

LOADS of people did. (Off the top of my head: Agent Spalko, The Man and a plethora of forgettable chumps.) If you want more examples, go look for yourself.

WillKill4Food said:
KotCS haters and Dark Knight fans are both far more common than KotCS lovers and Dark Knight haters.

D'uh! You basically repeated what I wrote.

Congratulations, WillKill! You've proven the original point of Raiders1123905673081231823801283916723710273123! :hat:

JP Jones · Apr 26, 2011

Montana Smith said:
If you were a fan of Indy as he appeared in Raiders then you might not have appreciated Lucas and Spielberg's take on the character in KOTCS.

Why do you say that? Lucas and Spielberg made the character of Indy excatly the same as in all the other movies. If your going to praise the movie for anything, the Indy character is it.

kongisking · Apr 26, 2011

Montana Smith said:
We could make it stop.

I think all it would take is for one of us to post a picture of a scantily clad Amy Adams...

That'll do it.

Back on topic though, I'm going to just go ahead and say it, because it has to be said: there should be a rule that people who use derogatory nicknames for films they don't like (i.e. Stoo's usage of the incredibly asinine phrase 'Duh Dark Klown') are being incredibly immature.

Sorry, Stoo old buddy, but I needed to make that point.

Montana Smith · Apr 26, 2011

JP Jones said:
Why do you say that? Lucas and Spielberg made the character of Indy excatly the same as in all the other movies. If your going to praise the movie for anything, the Indy character is it.

That's not exactly what I meant, since I've consistently defended Indy's character as being at least one thing in the favour of KOTCS.

What I meant was the difference between Raiders and KOTCS in general - the situations and the extreme cliffhangers that Indy faced in the latter. While Indy is the same man, albeit older, he was downtrodden by circumstances, and upstaged by extreme spectacles, not to mention misplaced humour and uninteresting companions.

Compared with Raiders, KOTCS is a letdown.

On the other hand, a fan of Batman who read some of the darker, more serious stories that appeared in the '80s and '90s, may be much more impressed by Nolan's interpretation. (A big improvement over the camp post-Burton efforts).

Darth Vile · Apr 26, 2011

Montana Smith said:
Compared with Raiders, KOTCS is a letdown.

On the other hand, a fan of Batman who read some of the darker, more serious stories that appeared in the '80s and '90s, may be much more impressed by Nolan's interpretation. (A big improvement over the camp post-Burton efforts).

Compared to Raiders they are all a let down...

As far as Batman is concerned, from a personal perspective, I have some friends who are serious Batman aficionados... and they are not the biggest fans of TDK. Their criticism is that it strays too far from the original source material and is too aligned to the Frank Miller comics of the late 80's (as you rightly allude to). Not all Batman fans want something as dour as TDK it appears.

Stoo · Apr 26, 2011

Stoo said:
D'uh! You basically repeated what I wrote. Congratulations, WillKill! You've proven the original point of Raiders1123905673081231823801283916723710273123!

I'd like to retract this statement because WillKill did not repeat what I wrote. Sorry, Will.

kongisking said:
Back on topic though, I'm going to just go ahead and say it, because it has to be said: there should be a rule that people who use derogatory nicknames for films they don't like (i.e. Stoo's usage of the incredibly asinine phrase 'Duh Dark Klown') are being incredibly immature.

Sorry, Stoo old buddy, but I needed to make that point.

It's about as asinine as a movie where a guy's voice changes the minute he dresses up like a bat.

Anyway, don't take it personally, Kong. It's just a movie. (I guess you didn't like it when Resident Alien would refer to "Skull" as KOCKS?)

WillKill4Food · Apr 26, 2011

Darth Vile said:
As far as Batman is concerned, from a personal perspective, I have some friends who are serious Batman aficionados... and they are not the biggest fans of TDK. Their criticism is that it strays too far from the original source material and is too aligned to the Frank Miller comics of the late 80's (as you rightly allude to). Not all Batman fans want something as dour as TDK it appears.

Good for them. I hate Temple of Doom for similar reasons, but I don't speak for all Indy fans on the matter.

Darth Vile said:
I have many friends who think that the Batman (yes- including TDK) and Indiana Jones movies are fine examples of ?low brow? culture made to be consumed by the feckless masses. Are they right? Does that mean, by default, we have no taste for liking Indiana Jones and Batman movies?

People said that kind of thing about Charles Dickens, too. And he wrote for the masses and the paycheck.
I'm not saying that TDK is the best film ever or a work of art that we should all love and study. But if you say that there is no such thing as "good taste" and "bad taste," you'll have to justify the popularity of Stephanie Meyer.

Darth Vile said:
Firstly, I?m not sure how true that is. Even here, in some sections, the criticisms started way before the movie was released. I remember arguments/debates about Indy?s hat and jacket looking too clean in publicity shots? etc. etc.

What do you mean even here? This would be the number one place to expect that kind of thing. I remember an episode of Bill Maher's talk show when he started criticizing America to three Brits and they all told him he was being to hard on his country. Friends (and by extension, fans) are the harshest critics.

Darth Vile said:
Secondly, I?d be wary of IMDB and Empire Magazine rankings.

I was using IMDB to gauge popularity. There's nothing wrong with such an application.

Darth Vile said:
Are you stating that ?taste? is an attribute only available to an intellectual few?
...
It?s a bit like asking McDonalds to poll their customers for opinions on the world?s best cuisine.

Are you saying that 'taste' is an attribute only available to an intellectual few? Is there is such a thing as good taste and bad taste?

Stoo said:
Your link is to a 2008 fluff article about that year's buzzwords.

1.) It's a TIME article about the most popular things that year.
2.) All of the other buzzwords on that list were popular... The association should be clear.

Stoo said:
Tomorrow, go stop an average man/woman or guy/girl on the street and ask him/her if they know what "nuking the fridge" is supposed to mean.

His response: "Wasn't that something that happened in that ****ing Indiana Jones movie that came out two or three years ago?"

Stoo said:
You don't need to go back a decade to find a crappy Batman film because they are all terrible.

Ah-ha! You're biased. If you don't like superhero films that's fine, but as superhero films go, TDK is pretty good. As films go, it's not on par with a lot of other dramas, but as superhero films go, it's among the best.

Stoo said:
In 2008, how many Indy fans joined BATMAN FORUMS and compared "Dark Knight" to "Skull", posted photos of themselves dressed as Spalko or Dovchenko, started Indy games, etc.?

I don't know, but you have yet to show that a single person joined this forum just to talk about TDK. A lot of people on this board talk about religion; does that mean people just join to talk about religion? Or does it mean that that sort of things interests Indy fans?

Stoo said:
(The "Indy around the globe" has ZERO relevance to this conversation.)

Uh-huh. Both threads are pointless.

Stoo said:
You're avoiding the point. In 2008, many termites came out of the woodwork to join The Raven in order to say that "Skull" was garbage but "Dark Knight" was the best film ever made. (Spielberg should have taken lessons from Nolan, etc.)

Find one "termite" who joined just to do that. Just one. Refer to my previous post.

Stoo said:
FLIP-FLOP! According to you: "They're two completely different movies". Now, you're attempting to show how they are similar...

They fall into different genres. Indy's status as a "superhero" is debatable. TDK is a darker drama-action-thriller-whatever. KotCS is campy fun (or tries to be). You don't leave one film feeling the same way as you leave the other film. There are similarities between them, just like there are similarities between Apocalypse Now and Tropic Thunder, but they are completely different films thematically.

Stoo said:
LOADS of people did. (Off the top of my head: Agent Spalko, The Man and a plethora of forgettable chumps.) If you want more examples, go look for yourself.

Now that's bullsh!t. The Man still posts last time I checked; Agent Spalko was banned for some unknown reason. And neither of them joined just to talk about The Dark Knight. They joined to talk about Indy, like everyone else.
Also, ResidentAlien was a Ravener for years and he was also one of KotCS's harshest critics (like you and your batmuffins).

Stoo said:
It's about as asinine as a movie where a guy's voice changes the minute he dresses up like a bat.

Your voice changes when you get on the phone with your mom, probably. People change their voices all the time depending on the social situation. Changing his voice is a part of how Wayne hides his identity in the Nolan films...

Stoo said:
D'uh! You basically repeated what I wrote. Congratulations, WillKill! You've proven the original point of Raiders1123905673081231823801283916723710273123!

[/QUOTE]

Stoo said:
I'd like to retract this statement because WillKill did not repeat what I wrote. Sorry, Will.

Yes, you misread what I was saying (I should have used 'or' instead of 'and').
There are a lot of TDK fans.
There are a lot of KotCS detractors.
There are fewer KotCS fans.
There are fewer TDK detractors.
How's that?
So of course there will be more overlap over the first two because there are more people who fit into those categories.

Stoo · Apr 26, 2011

WillKill4Food said:
1.) It's a TIME article about the most popular things that year.

A fluff article in TIME magazine.

WillKill4Food said:
Ah-ha! You're biased. If you don't like superhero films that's fine, but as superhero films go, TDK is pretty good. As films go, it's not on par with a lot of other dramas, but as superhero films go, it's among the best.

No, I'm not biased against superhero movies because I like "Iron Man", "Spiderman", the Ed Norton Hulk movie and the 1978 "Superman".

WillKill4Food said:
Now that's bullsh!t. The Man still posts last time I checked; Agent Spalko was banned for some unknown reason. And neither of them joined just to talk about The Dark Knight. They joined to talk about Indy, like everyone else.
Also, ResidentAlien was a Ravener for years and he was also one of KotCS's harshest critics (like you and your batmuffins).

I never mentioned Resident Alien and never said anything about people joining to ONLY talk about Batman. Agent Spalko and The Man consistently bashed "Skull" (as well as Lucas & Shia) while simultaneously showing their love for "Dark Knight". I don't remember the names of the fly-by-nighters and I'm not going to bother looking for their posts. (You wanted 1 example and I provided 2.)

Agent Spalko was banned after his comments about an assassination attempt on the U.S. president.

WillKill4Food said:
Your voice changes when you get on the phone with your mom, probably.

Heh. No, it doesn't (unless I'm playing a joke on her).

WillKill4Food said:
People change their voices all the time depending on the social situation. Changing his voice is a part of how Wayne hides his identity in the Nolan films...

Batman spoke is his Batman voice to a woman who knew his identity and no one else was within hearing distance.

Anyway, I'll be away for a few days. Will talk to you later, Will. Bye!

WillKill4Food · Apr 26, 2011

Stoo said:
A fluff article in TIME magazine.

"Fluff" in the sense that it is not particularly important, sure, but the article was talking about the most popular "things" of the year, so the article was quite applicable.

Stoo said:
No, I'm not biased against superhero movies because I like "Iron Man", "Spiderman", the Ed Norton Hulk movie and the 1978 "Superman".

So you just don't like bats?

Stoo said:
...never said anything about people joining to ONLY talk about Batman. Agent Spalko and The Man consistently bashed "Skull" (as well as Lucas & Shia) while simultaneously showing their love for "Dark Knight".

ACTUALLY...

Stoo said:
Would you join a Batman forum to shoot down Batman and gush about Indy?
...
In 2008, many termites came out of the woodwork to join The Raven in order to say that "Skull" was garbage but "Dark Knight" was the best film ever made. (Spielberg should have taken lessons from Nolan, etc.)

That's exactly what you said. If people join the Raven to talk about Indy, then what's the issue?

Stoo said:
I don't remember the names of the fly-by-nighters and I'm not going to bother looking for their posts. (You wanted 1 example and I provided 2.)

Those two are not fly-by-nighters.

Stoo said:
Heh. No, it doesn't (unless I'm playing a joke on her).

It doesn't become softer and sweeter? Your poor mother.
I, for one, can tell who my mom is talking to on the phone by the tone of her voice. Softer for my grandmother, louder and most respectful to my grandfather, either really lovey-dovey or brusque if to my father, etc. People change their voices, however slightly, all the time.

Stoo said:
Batman spoke is his Batman voice to a woman who knew his identity and no one else was within hearing distance.

I don't remember this and I do not see the relevance.

Forbidden Eye · Apr 26, 2011

If this were 2008, you'd have a point. I remember on sites like BoxOfficeMojo.com, that makes a game out of predicting the highest grossing film of the year, there were a lot of Nolan/Batman fanboys who were wanting Indiana Jones to flop/bashing Lucas/asking "Why does there need to be another film?" etc. before the film ever came out. TDK did hurt the film a little bit(and every film, not just Kingdom).

But as others said its 2011, the Nolan/Batman fanboys have moved on to other targets (such as whining about Nolan not receiving an Oscar nomination for Best Director for Inception). And honestly, how many people even remember that Kingdom of the Crystal Skull and The Dark Knight came out the same year? They're probably as aware of it as they are that Last Crusade and Batman came out in the same year. We're at a point where the only film Kingdom of the Crystal Skull has to live up to is the other Indiana Jones movies.

I think if you read the consensus you'll find that while there are people who hate KOTCS, more and more people are (re)watching it and realizing its not as bad as the hype is making it out to be.

You mention "Nuke The Fridge", that phrase is pretty null and void as I have not heard that phrase ONCE since 2008. Not once, and there were plenty of times where it would have been appropriate to use(Terminator 4 and Wolverine for instance). It obviously has not caught on and will never be as common as "Jump the Shark" has become. You don't have anything to worry about here.

Finally I can only give my opinion that I love both TDK and KOTCS. Maybe TDK a little more, but I own both on Blu-Ray and am willing to watch either at any time. Frankly if you want to blame something other than the Indiana Jones movies on Kingdom's negative response, I think South Park would've been a better target.

Darth Vile · Apr 26, 2011

WillKill4Food said:
Good for them. I hate Temple of Doom for similar reasons, but I don't speak for all Indy fans on the matter.

People said that kind of thing about Charles Dickens, too. And he wrote for the masses and the paycheck.
I'm not saying that TDK is the best film ever or a work of art that we should all love and study. But if you say that there is no such thing as "good taste" and "bad taste," you'll have to justify the popularity of Stephanie Meyer.

What do you mean even here? This would be the number one place to expect that kind of thing. I remember an episode of Bill Maher's talk show when he started criticizing America to three Brits and they all told him he was being to hard on his country. Friends (and by extension, fans) are the harshest critics.

I was using IMDB to gauge popularity. There's nothing wrong with such an application.

Are you saying that 'taste' is an attribute only available to an intellectual few? Is there is such a thing as good taste and bad taste?

1.) It's a TIME article about the most popular things that year.
2.) All of the other buzzwords on that list were popular... The association should be clear.

Will – I’m asking the questions because I’m genuinely unclear as to your position. I get that you like TDK, but I’m not sure if you believe it to be a greater, equal to or lesser movie than KOTCS (or the other Indy movies)…

As far as taste goes… no I don’t believe that it’s as black and white as people having good or bad taste. I’m more of the opinion that people are able to make better judgments when they can contextualize their responses. The less informed one is, the less informed one’s judgment will be. However, I know several PhD's who have some very dodgy taste when it comes to fashion, music etc. so it's really not about intelligence per se.

JP Jones · Apr 26, 2011

Montana Smith said:
That's not exactly what I meant, since I've consistently defended Indy's character as being at least one thing in the favour of KOTCS.

What I meant was the difference between Raiders and KOTCS in general - the situations and the extreme cliffhangers that Indy faced in the latter. While Indy is the same man, albeit older, he was downtrodden by circumstances, and upstaged by extreme spectacles, not to mention misplaced humour and uninteresting companions.

Compared with Raiders, KOTCS is a letdown.

On the other hand, a fan of Batman who read some of the darker, more serious stories that appeared in the '80s and '90s, may be much more impressed by Nolan's interpretation. (A big improvement over the camp post-Burton efforts).

Look at this... KotCS tried hard to stay with the tradition and did it well, but TDK puposely drifted away from the other movies to make it more "real".

WillKill4Food · Apr 26, 2011

Darth Vile said:
Will ? I?m asking the questions because I?m genuinely unclear as to your position. I get that you like TDK, but I?m not sure if you believe it to be a greater, equal to or lesser movie than KOTCS (or the other Indy movies)?

It's an unfair question, I would say. I wrote a paper on TDK for a class on postmodernism in which I fleshed out the motivations and inspirations behind the film, the subtleties of the plot and the characters, in particular. I could not do the same for KotCS, but maybe you could write a paper on one of the first three Indy movies (though the focus would probably be less on the story's merits and more on what the film says about US attitudes to religion and other cultures).
TDK is, foremost, an action film, but it has more to it than a Michael Bay film or what have you. It has a driving emotional core, but I think someone who doesn't want to be receptive to that aspect of the film *cough* Stoo *cough* would probably ignore it. I don't think most people ignore it. If you read into it past the surface level, there's a meat there that you don't find in a lot of other films... such as KotCS. I left the theater almost satisfied with KotCS. I don't think it lives up to the other films (maybe it surpasses Temple of Doom... at least there weren't insanely inaccurate stereotypes in KotCS), but I think you have to say, at the end of the day, that TDK was the better film.
Comparing TDK to Raiders is a lot harder. You can say TDK is a better film than KotCS because TDK is among the best of its genre, while the same cannot be said for KotCS. Raiders is arguably the best of its genre, so to determine which is "better" would require you to evaluate the genres rather than the films, and that's not really something you can do. I mean, which is better: a flashy film that makes you think and feel sad or a flashy film that takes you into a different world and makes you feel happy (and possibly angry at Shia LaTarzan)? I can't answer that.

Darth Vile said:
However, I know several PhD's who have some very dodgy taste when it comes to fashion, music etc. so it's really not about intelligence per se.

I never said that intelligence drives enjoyment. The "intellectual value of the subject" I mentioned earlier referred to the "value" of the media: the film, the novel, the whatever. I would never assign an "intellectual value" to a person...

So you know this could even be applied to fashion or food. When you go to McDonalds, someone just slaps together some beef and a bun. When you go to a fine restaurant, the cooking process is (hopefully) more detailed and the chefs more thoughtful. When you put on a t-shirt and wornout jeans, you're probably thinking less about your presentation than when you put on a button-up and khakis or designer jeans or whatever. Likewise, when you put on a suit and don't think about the ensemble (this makes me sound like a pr!ck), you're probably not going to look as "tasteful" or fashion-minded as someone who maybe puts on less expensive clothing but does so in a thoughtful manner, matching colors or styles or whatever.

The thought behind the product is everything.

So when it comes to film or literature or what have you, I would think it natural that the stimulation of any media (the "intellectual value of the subject") would play a large role in determining how much any person enjoys it. The effect may be negative (I may not read Finnegans Wake for pleasure because it requires too much out of me), but the effect is still there. There's something to be said for a person whose taste directs them to more nuanced media, such as Thomas Pynchon over Stephanie Meyer (I'm having a hard time coming up with irrevocably bad authors), or to a lesser degreeTDK over KotCS.

Darth Vile · Apr 27, 2011

WillKill4Food said:
I left the theater almost satisfied with KotCS. I don't think it lives up to the other films (maybe it surpasses Temple of Doom... at least there weren't insanely inaccurate stereotypes in KotCS), but I think you have to say, at the end of the day, that TDK was the better film.

I?m not sure I can say that Will? although I respect your opinion. The primary function of these movies, in this example TDK and KOTCS, is to entertain. If we?re talking about movies that enlighten and have something serious to say about existence, we?re better off watching a Mike Leigh movie and discussing that? as they are infinitely more intelligent (and have something 'real' to say) than either the Batman or Indiana Jones movies (IMHO).

In this instance, I didn?t particularly find TDK to be that engaging. I?d agree that it?s definitely a more serious movie (and takes itself more serious) than KOTCS, but that doesn?t necessarily equate to ?better? (unless one agrees what constitutes ?better? in the first instance). I?m not trying to take anything away from TDK (or those who love it), but in the scheme of things, I think you?d struggle to slip a cigarette paper between the two movies when it comes to actual significance. TDK may well be a superior superhero movie? it may be superior to KOTCS (and the other Indy sequels), but within context, it?s a lot closer to KOTCS than it is to Battleship Potemkin, Seven Samurai, Star Wars, The Red Shoes etc. etc.

WillKill4Food said:
I never said that intelligence drives enjoyment. The "intellectual value of the subject" I mentioned earlier referred to the "value" of the media: the film, the novel, the whatever. I would never assign an "intellectual value" to a person...

So when it comes to film or literature or what have you, I would think it natural that the stimulation of any media (the "intellectual value of the subject") would play a large role in determining how much any person enjoys it. The effect may be negative (I may not read Finnegans Wake for pleasure because it requires too much out of me), but the effect is still there. There's something to be said for a person whose taste directs them to more nuanced media, such as Thomas Pynchon over Stephanie Meyer (I'm having a hard time coming up with irrevocably bad authors), or to a lesser degreeTDK over KotCS.

As mentioned before (and we?ve used the helpful food analogies quite a bit here) sometimes a burger can be the tastiest, most enjoyable meal to eat. Time/money/effort (and a serious demeanour) doesn?t automatically equate to the best product/the best experience? High and low art (if you believe in such a thing) is not mutually exclusive. One should be able to love a pizza and beer just as much as foie gras and veuve clicquot... What?s more important I think is one?s ability to discern the differences and make informed choices about what is consumed.

Stoo · Apr 27, 2011

WillKill4Food said:
That's exactly what you said.

I think you need a pair of reading glasses. (If you already have some, it`s time to get a new prescription.)

Rocket Surgeon · Apr 27, 2011

Regarding this thread:

"A man may fail many times, but he isn't a failure until he begins to blame somebody else." - John Burroughs

Are/were the Batman fans responsible for a lot of the hate?

Well-known member

Active member

New member

New member

Well-known member

New member

Active member

Active member

New member

Well-known member

New member

Well-known member

New member

Well-known member

New member

New member

New member

New member

Well-known member

Guest