new feeling over KOTCS!!!

deckard24 said:

Good point regarding Orellana! It would make sense considering many Central and South American cultures were duped by invading Spanish and other European explorers!

On another note I went to Tulum(the ancient Mayan ruins near Playa Del Carmen) over the summer, and the magical feeling of that place is just way too hard to ignore! There is definitely something spiritual and otherworldly about that locale, and seeing it after watching KOTCS was a pretty cool experience!

Click to expand...

I'm jealous. I really want to visit Tikal, Machu Picchu, Chichen Itza and Teotihucan. I was supposed to go to Cancun earlier this year but I got screwed out of it. Tulum was on my "go to" list.

Someday....

I have no new feeling over now seeing Indy 4 at home.

I loved it then, and I love it now.

sandiegojones said:

I'm jealous. I really want to visit Tikal, Machu Picchu, Chichen Itza and Teotihucan. I was supposed to go to Cancun earlier this year but I got screwed out of it. Tulum was on my "go to" list.

Someday....

Click to expand...

Yeah it really is worth it! I had the chance to visit Chichen Itza, but the bus ride to get there from where I was staying was a good 3+ hours, not to mention the temperature was easily over 100 degrees when we there, so it'll have to happen another time!
Machu Picchu and Teotihucan would be amazing!! They're definitely on my "go to" list!

metalinvader said:

Maybe the Russian scientist that were present when Indy was looking into the eyes of the skull took it back with them to Russia.

Click to expand...

I think maybe the remains of the alien corpse burned. Mutt used the lamp to burn the tent when the Russians were chasing them, thus burnig the alien?? That's what I thought.

I genuinely feel it is an Indy movie. That's my take and I think that's a lot of people's take, though certainly those disappointed are more vocal. Defining an "Indy" movie is hard enough since I think picking out the aspects which the viewer feels are what ends up making it an "Indy" movie to that viewer, so it's completely subjective. I can understand the disappointment but not the hate.

I will say this much: I went in on May 22nd with pretty low expectations. I was pumped, but I knew it was going to be only okay. I was expecting it to take 3rd place in the series. When I left the theater, I felt my prediction was right. I'm not one of those Temple of Doom haters, it's just my least favorite. I emphasize least favorite because I still love it. KOTCS did turn out to be a little more mainstream-Hollywood-adventure-movie feel, but I did enjoy it and had a lot of fun for what it was.

Sure, there were things I would change (even not making the film to begin with, Crusade was just the tops) but I've been a satisfied viewer from day 1.

I don't feel any different about the film. It has it's moments that I go yeah, that's a real Indy moment, but there are still a lot of bits that feel more like "Mummy" and "National Treasure" than Indy. My parents watched the movie for the first time last night. Dad's a Raiders fan by the way. Anyway, they were pretty disappointed in the product and complained that it didn't feel like an Indy movie. It felt like a pale imitation of Raiders. That's how they felt and they saw the originals at the movies.

Dad was my age when Raiders came out so it wasn't him having a nostalgic happy childhood memory. He felt that the "spirit" of the originals just wasn't there. He even suggested that perhaps the film is weak because there are plenty of intrigue and action adventure movies now that try to copy Indy and have thought up of all these different boobytraps, etc and it leaves very little wriggle room for Indy in terms of being unique for the time period that it is made and released in. He didn't believe it was the alien thing that so much weakens the film. He believed, like I have, that it was the narrative structure and character development.

I do however really enjoy the special features on the 2nd disc. They were a really treat and though there may not be any deleted scene features, I did manage to spot a couple of shots that didn't make it from New Haven.

Just finished watching it I enjoyed watching it a bit more that at the movies. I was slightly for accepting of some of the scenes that I thought weren't that good. But yes I think watching it on DVD did make it feel different to when I saw it at the movies.

I was thinking even thought it didn't feel quite the same as the other movies all the Indy movies are different.
Raiders was the more serious one
Temple was the dark one
Crusade was the light hearted one
Kingdom I'm yet to make up my mind
but they all did have a certain feel to them that was the same through out the 3 movies.

Here in Australia we only got it today we had to wait 2 weeks as you all know

indy34 said:

Here in Australia we only got it today we had to wait 2 weeks as you all know

Click to expand...

I managed to get it yesterday. I went to Video Ezy, Blockbuster and Kmart and they already had it all out selling. Mind you, I had to go from shop to shop to get the double disc. Grrrr... But, having watched the Special Features on that second disc it was worth it.

Violet Indy said:

.He even suggested that perhaps the film is weak because there are plenty of intrigue and action adventure movies now that try to copy Indy and have thought up of all these different boobytraps, etc and it leaves very little wriggle room for Indy in terms of being unique for the time period that it is made and released in. He didn't believe it was the alien thing that so much weakens the film. He believed, like I have, that it was the narrative structure and character development.

Click to expand...

Whilst I don't agree that the movie is weak, I would posit that KOTCS doesn't re-invent or push the boundaries of the action/adventure genre, that Indiana Jones helped define in 1981. Consequently, it may be interpreted (incorrectly IMHO) as a “weaker” Indiana Jones movie.

Your father is correct in that an Indiana Jones movie now has to compete with so much more. And ultimately, what can a new Indy movie bring that we've not already seen? There was nothing comparable to 'Raiders of the Lost Ark' when that first came out. And even when TOD was released, it's only competition were cheaper movies that were simply imitating the formula of Raiders.

Indiana Jones is now competing with everything from the 'The Da'Vinci Code', 'National Treasure' to 'The Mummy'. And these are not cheap movies... they are big budget, big merchandise event movies... and no matter how good a new Indiana Jones movie may or may not be, it's significance can only be diminished by the volume of other competition… which can, I think, result in a perception of feeling underwhelmed by the end product.

Does that make for an empirically "weaker" movie? No I don't believe it does.

Darth Vile said:

Whilst I don't agree that the movie is weak, I would posit that KOTCS doesn't re-invent or push the boundaries of the action/adventure genre, that Indiana Jones helped define in 1981. Consequently, it may be interpreted (incorrectly IMHO) as a ?weaker? Indiana Jones movie.

Your father is correct in that an Indiana Jones movie now has to compete with so much more. And ultimately, what can a new Indy movie bring that we've not already seen? There was nothing comparable to 'Raiders of the Lost Ark' when that first came out. And even when TOD was released, it's only competition were cheaper movies that were simply imitating the formula of Raiders.

Indiana Jones is now competing with everything from the 'The Da'Vinci Code', 'National Treasure' to 'The Mummy'. And these are not cheap movies... they are big budget, big merchandise event movies... and no matter how good a new Indiana Jones movie may or may not be, it's significance can only be diminished by the volume of other competition? which can, I think, result in a perception of feeling underwhelmed by the end product.

Does that make for an empirically "weaker" movie? No I don't believe it does.

Click to expand...

True. It reminds me of something Roger Ebert said about Crystal Skull:


"All you can do is compare one to the other three. And even then, what will it get you? If you eat four pounds of sausage, how do you choose which pound tasted the best? Well, the first one, of course, and then there's a steady drop-off of interest. That's why no Indy adventure can match "Raiders of the Lost Ark" (1981). But if "Crystal Skull" (or "Temple of Doom" from 1984 or "Last Crusade" from, 1989) had come first in the series, who knows how much fresher it might have seemed? "

jamiestarr said:

True. It reminds me of something Roger Ebert said about Crystal Skull:


"All you can do is compare one to the other three. And even then, what will it get you? If you eat four pounds of sausage, how do you choose which pound tasted the best? Well, the first one, of course, and then there's a steady drop-off of interest. That's why no Indy adventure can match "Raiders of the Lost Ark" (1981). But if "Crystal Skull" (or "Temple of Doom" from 1984 or "Last Crusade" from, 1989) had come first in the series, who knows how much fresher it might have seemed? "

Click to expand...

I agree. We all of course have our favourite, and not so favourite, Indy moments… and although these type of conversations are mostly enjoyable/good-natured, it’s folly to believe one can prove that, for example, TLC is better than KOTCS or visa versa.

What's better... a kilo of apples or a kilo of oranges?

i think it's pretty solid until marion shows up and then it gets too "cartoony" (rather than too "b movie" which is what it is supposed to be). needed more "mud and mess" = just looks way too squeaky clean from the moment they get to the "jungle". it's the first movie where indy ends up the whole last part of the movie all clean and with his shirt tidy and tucked in. he should look more like he went through hell by the end. no great climax to the movie = feels flat at the end.

i liked how he had aged and mellowed but they could have had him keep a little more of that devilish spirit - and he should have kissed marion at the end like he wanted to rather than like a squeamish old dude!

still - was a fun movie and will likely grow on me. i just don't think it will touch the other three because - in the end - a character like indiana jones is just more appealing/interesting as a strapping (younger?) bad ass. i think - ultimately - that's the root of it being the weakest film and why it disappointed.

I think the movie works as part of the franchise because we have a prologue in 1912 with Young Indy (River Phoenix), the three classic adventures (TOD, ROTLA, LC) in 1935-38 and an epilogue with Old Indy in 1957 (KOTCS) which closes the cycle.

cool way of looking at it, wil!

We can see now 3 different moments in the life of Dr. Jones. The best moment is between 1935-38 where he is the classic hero, but we also can watch his origins (Phoenix) and his last adventure (KOTCS) to fully understand his personality. Both moments (Young and Old) are connected with the symbol of putting the hat in Utah and in the church which closes the cycle.

right on ... i'll keep that in mind now i got the DVD and planning to watch it again. cheers

And "spanish conquistadores" are the common element in his first and last adventure: Francisco de Coronado (1912) and Francisco de Orellana (1957) so the story comes full circle.

Wilhelm said:

And "spanish conquistadores" are the common element in his first and last adventure: Francisco de Coronado (1912) and Francisco de Orellana (1957) so the story comes full circle.

Click to expand...

Too bad Coronado never went to Utah.

come ooooooooon - it's a movie!!

well somebody could have taken the cross there. I was wondering what makes Indy work as an older character, and i think Harrison is a big big reason.