Darth Vile said:
I think you have sort of answered it yourself. Delving deeper into that element of the story would not have added any real value to the rest of the movie (no matter how interesting the actual concept may be). It’s a little like feeling short changed in Raiders because the Abner/Indy relationship was not fully explored.
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..
Darth Vile said:
I do understand what you mean, I just think you are placing too much significance on it (which is of course your perogative). I have no real interest in seeing how Indy gets to the cemetery, be it by motorbike, hot air balloon or sewage system. It’s enough for me that he knows he must go there.
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.
Darth Vile said:
Yep - I think it’s a little too convoluted for it’s own good… but I didn’t find it to be as convenient as the discovery of the entrance to the tomb of Sir Richard in the library (TLC).
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.
Darth Vile said:
I can’t speak for others, but I found it quite easy to understand what led Indy to travel to Nazca, and consequently to the cemetery. I think the script tried a little too hard to make that section mysterious (where over simplification would have been better), but it didn’t hurt the overall story for me, or make me care less about why they were doing it.
The logic that led Indy to travel to Nazca was never once brought up. Beyond that, the two of us agree to disagree.
Darth Vile said:
I think you are excusing things in the other movies whilst not allowing KOTCS the same.
I do not, and think you're just really confused about how I feel, whether it's my fault or yours.
Darth Vile said:
The cemetery and Venice catacombs scenes serve a very similar purpose in overall structure/plot and pacing.
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?
Darth Vile said:
There are several elements of the TLC catacombs scene that fail close scrutiny… my only point is that, structurally, the two scenes serve a similar purpose and share a similar pace. I enjoy both.
"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:
Script wise... Mac's death is the one true fly in the ointment for me.
The
one? Hoo boy, Darth Vile, our huge differences in opinion about this movie ensures great discussion for ages to come.