The Haters thread

Montana Smith · Jan 16, 2012

Cole said:
Of course you wouldn't, I'm getting ganged up on. But that's fine, I have my own opinions.

Getting "ganged up on" is a hazard. Being "ganged up on" is also a fun exercise for the little grey cells.

Cole said:
It's still apart of arcehology.....you guys are splitting hairs just for arguments' sake over something that has nothing to do with the discussion.

It's the haters' lounge. If you can't have a good argument in here you might as well be getting drunk at the bar instead.

Rocket Surgeon · Jan 16, 2012

Montana Smith said:
It's the haters' lounge. If you can't have a good argument in here you might as well be getting drunk at the bar instead.

You mean I won't be welcome in The Bishops Blaize in my West Ham top?

The Drifter · Jan 16, 2012

Montana Smith said:
you might as well be getting drunk at the bar instead.

That's what I joined The Raven for...

Raiders90 · Jan 16, 2012

Does anyone else think KOTCS really failed in acknowledging the fact that Indy is an older man, slower than he used to be. Still a tough man--But not the man he used to be. This issue could've been explored in a way that would've added more depth to the film. They could've really made his aging an emotional (but small) plot point, something which gave even more of an emotional underpinning to the Quest. Time is running out for Indy--to have a family, to have a real lie--Just as time is running out for the world with the Russians on the March to recover the Skull. Think about how masterfully the two "treasures" in LC were written...There was quit a bit of emotional build up in LC, with Indy saving his father and the two coming together again as being the real victory, not discovering the Grail or defeating the Nazis. The series was moving in a deeper direction with LC. Get rid of the slapstick elements and stick with the depth and you could've had something great. Keep some action--a reasonable level of action, work around Indy's age while still making him seem tough, a tough old fighter, like John Wayne in his later films. Or think of the film Robin & Marian starring Sean Connery as another example.

Outside of being hit with every bit of '50s pop culture George and Spielberg could think of, and a throwaway line or two, there's really not much remarked on the passage of time. Indy may be 58, but he's actually STRONGER than he was at age 37. A near 60 year old man surviving a nuclear blast or defeating a much younger, much more in shape Russian soldier singlehandedly...Yeah, no.

Montana Smith · Jan 16, 2012

Rocket Surgeon said:
You mean I won't be welcome in The Bishops Blaize in my West Ham top?

They'll be smiling at you...as they crack their knuckles in anticipation.

The Drifter said:
That's what I joined The Raven for...

Your reputation precedes you.

Raiders112390 said:
Outside of being hit with every bit of '50s pop culture George and Spielberg could think of, and a throwaway line or two, there's really not much remarked on the passage of time.

There were lines about things not being as easy. There was the passing of Marcus and Henry Sr., and Indy's loneliness. Then there was his growing sense of responsibility - gaining a son, wife and promotion.

But these were all cursory as a means of re-introducing an older Indy to the big screen. In passing himself off as a leading man to the youngsters in the audience, he still had to be the tough guy. It was a paradoxical result of Lucas and Spielberg trying to recreate the past.

Cole · Jan 16, 2012

Attila the Professor said:
I don't think you're getting ganged up on; I just think you're being disagreed with. It's just hard to find what's defensible in some of what you're defending.

It's not hard, I've explained my reasoning every step of the way. You don't have to agree.

And trauma is funny? It's possible to like the film even if it has some stupid gags, you know.

As presented in the film? It's an obvious gag. It's not necessarily "stupid"; I think "lighthearted" is a better term. It's very innocent humor.

In my opinion, you all are overanalyzing the scene as to why it "doesn't make sense" as a way of justifying its "stupidity" as oppose to calling it for what it is: you think it's stupid humor. That's my point.

The hat bit isn't bad. I just don't see why it needs to be comedic to be defended. As I said, Harrison's "One...two...three!" bit isn't bad at all, even if in service to something unremarkable.

Whether or not you find Ford's reactions subtly comedic, so be it. At least we can find something we both like about the scene.

You made your "lost treasure" definition part of the argument; I think it's fair to discuss what sort of treasure they're focusing on, and why. I don't see why you're so intent on stamping out any sort of nuanced interpretation of things.

That doesn't mean I have to find it an interesting topic. So you don't think digging for lost treasures is an applicable term for archeology? Um....ok? Stoo only brought it up so he can argue for argue's sake. Watch out everybody, Stoo's got his big boy pants on.

Attila the Professor · Jan 16, 2012

Cole said:
It's not hard, I've explained my reasoning every step of the way. You don't have to agree.

Yes, but it's not as though discussion proceeds from people just presenting their reasons, and then nothing else happens. You dig deeper. You argue, if it matters. And since we're all at this forum - for whatever reason - it obviously matters on some level.

Cole said:
As presented in the film? It's an obvious gag. It's not necessarily "stupid"; I think "lighthearted" is a better term. It's very innocent humor.

It becomes a little less lighthearted once you start throwing around trauma as its justification.

Cole said:
In my opinion, you all are overanalyzing the scene as to why it "doesn't make sense" as a way of justifying its "stupidity" as oppose to calling it for what it is: you think it's stupid humor. That's my point.

Sure, we think it's stupid humor, but it's not automatically stupid; there are reasons. It doesn't fit tonally, it doesn't make sense, it throws off the moment, it isn't in concert with everyone else's actions, it doesn't match with what we see of the vehicle on screen, it takes one out of the film for being so obviously impossible..these are all reasons that it's stupid.

Cole said:
Whether or not you find Ford's reactions subtly comedic, so be it. At least we can find something we both like about the scene.

Yes. But our conceptions of the scene remain very different.

Cole said:
That doesn't mean I have to find it an interesting topic.

Perhaps, but you invited the subject.

Cole said:
So you don't think digging for lost treasures is an applicable term for archeology? Um....ok?

I think that definition is, like thinking that Indian food means bugs, snakes, and monkey brains, the sort of easy misconception one can get from the films. Treasure might be a minuscule part of archaeology, but it is far from the bulk of it, or its core.

Cole said:
Stoo only brought it up so he can argue for argue's sake. Watch out everybody, Stoo's got his big boy pants on.

You brought it up, and I responded to it before he did. While there's no reason to harp on it, there's also no reason to act as though archaeology is akin to bringing a metal detector to the beach.

Cole · Jan 16, 2012

It becomes a little less lighthearted once you start throwing around trauma as it's justification.

....ok? So Marion's emotional shock after the fall isn't an attempt at a lighthearted gag? Because I thought it was pretty clear.

Sure, we think it's stupid humor, but it's not automatically stupid; there are reasons. It doesn't fit tonally, it doesn't make sense, it throws off the moment, it isn't in concert with everyone else's actions, it doesn't match with what we see of the vehicle on screen, it takes one out of the film for being so obviously impossible..these are all reasons that it's stupid.

No need to repeat, they've been mentioned at least a half-dozen times now.

Doesn't fit tonally? Did you watch the rest of the film? Again, I fail to see what's so impossible. Just repeating makes us go in circles.

I'm in by no means defending it as some hilarious scene, just calling it out for the lighthearted moment it was intended to be and calling you out on the unnecessary justification of "why" it is stupid.

Perhaps, but you invited the subject.

I wasn't interested in discussing the definition of the term archeology...it was a trivial deviation from the topic at hand. Stoo's got his big boy pants on.

Attila the Professor · Jan 16, 2012

I don't know why I keep doing this...

Cole said:
....ok? So Marion's emotional shock after the fall isn't an attempt at a lighthearted gag? Because I thought it was pretty clear.

I just don't connect "trauma" and "emotional shock" with "lighthearted gag."

Cole said:
Doesn't fit tonally? Did you watch the rest of the film?

It doesn't fit into the tone of the rest of the scene, which, while lackluster, appears on the basis of its Ben Burtt sound effects showcase to be intended less as comic and more as tense. Indy never takes his hat off, and while it is, I'd agree, "subtly comic" that he does so, it isn't simply comic. That piece is comic because it's something he never does. Why does he do it now? Because what he's experiencing is uniquely dangerous.

Let me ask you this: do you like the moment of Marion holding the wheel? I get that it's meant to be funny. That's obvious. But do you like it?

Cole said:
I'm in by no means defending it as some hilarious scene, just calling it out for the lighthearted moment it was intended to be and calling you out on the unnecessary justification of "why" it is stupid.

I don't want to dissect it, but your defense of it seems to make it necessary.

Cole said:
I wasn't interested in discussing the definition of the term archeology...it was a trivial deviation from the topic at hand. Stoo's got his big boy pants on.

Yeah, you already told me about his pants.

Apart from my question about the Marion wheel moment, and whether you like it, let's take advantage of the thread that we're in, as none of us are actually haters, per se: what in Kingdom of the Crystal Skull don't you like?

Darth Vile · Jan 17, 2012

Raiders112390 said:
Does anyone else think KOTCS really failed in acknowledging the fact that Indy is an older man, slower than he used to be. Still a tough man--But not the man he used to be.

Yes... it failed as in aknowledging in a substantial, emotional way that would make the movie relevant as a revisition to the Indy universe.

Cole said:
Of course you wouldn't, I'm getting ganged up on. But that's fine, I have my own opinions.

Cole my friend... I see where you're coming from on many of your points, but this is a 'Hater's' thread afterall. Best to let it go and wait for a better opportunity.

Rocket Surgeon · Jan 17, 2012

Don't look for much in the way of sympathy in The Haters thread...

Cole said:
I'm getting ganged up on.

What did you expect?

If nothing else it might hint at how you're able to see humor in Marion's breakdown.

replican't · Jan 17, 2012

Humour in Marion's breakdown?

What breakdown?

Say what you like about the writers, director and actors in KOCS, but at least they managed to take a supersexy rebellious chick in her twenties and update her into a horrendously overplasticsurgeried hammy moaning mugger of a pointless waste of a character. Props.

Montana Smith · Jan 17, 2012

replican't said:
Humour in Marion's breakdown?

What breakdown?

I think he means the moment Karen Allen first read the script.

Stoo · Jan 17, 2012

Cole said:
If someone is clutching the wheel for dear life, the impact of the crash will exert superhuman force on the wheel so I don't think it's that unbelievable.

Cole, you are 100% delusional. NOBODY IS IN THE AMPHIB WHEN IT CRASHES! They all fall out in mid-air. (If you're going to debate the subject, at least refer to what is actually in the film and not in the imagination of The Crazy World of Captain Cole.)

Cole said:
Sounds like a continuity mistake. I'd have to see.

This is another example of your flip-flopping. Originally, you wrote that "it was clear Marion was clutching the wheel during the fall". Afterwards you stated, "I haven't examined the scene with a fine-tooth comb to know."

Cole said:
In my opinion, you all are overanalyzing the scene as to why it "doesn't make sense" as a way of justifying its "stupidity" as oppose to calling it for what it is: you think it's stupid humor.

No. Providing reasons to back up an opinion is normal and the humourous aspect of the scene would be fine, to me, if the gag was done with some form of logic. (You, on the other hand, are making up stuff in some bizarre attempt to justify its funniness...all the while ignoring the reality of how the part actually unfolds on-screen.

)

Cole said:
I think they are subtly comedic, yes. I enjoy Ford's charismatic expressions.

If you think the serious scenes of Indy losing his job and boarding the train were "subtly comedic", then you must have been smoking some strong spliffs!

Cole said:
Watch out everybody, Stoo's got his big boy pants on.

Big Boy doesn't wear pants, he wears overalls. Anyways, I always have my Big Boy pants on (except when they are being washed) and am wearin' 'em right now. Loud & proud, baby!

Cole · Jan 17, 2012

Stoo said:
Cole, you are 100% delusional. NOBODY IS IN THE AMPHIB WHEN IT CRASHES! They all fall out in mid-air. (If you're going to debate the subject, at least refer to what is actually in the film and not in the imagination of The Crazy World of Captain Cole.)

That's why I think it was a continuity mistake.....why do you make me repeat myself?

This is another example of your flip-flopping. Originally, you wrote that "it was clear Marion was clutching the wheel during the fall". Afterwards you stated, "I haven't examined the scene with a fine-tooth comb to know."

I still think the intention was that Marion was clinging to the wheel during the fall (and thus left clutching it after the fall in emotional shock)......I was unaware of what I believe to be a continuity mistake: the shot of everyone falling out of the amphib. But nice try trying to twist around my words.

If you think the serious scenes of Indy losing his job and boarding the train were "subtly comedic", then you must have been smoking some strong spliffs!

Never said they were subtly comedic. Clearly, I was referencing the waterfall scene. But you're more interested in arguing than a constructive conversation, so that's to be expected.

Attila the Professor · Jan 17, 2012

Cole, as I asked above:

Do you like the moment of Marion holding the wheel? I get that it's meant to be funny. That's obvious. But do you like it?

AND

Apart from my question about the Marion wheel moment, and whether you like it, let's take advantage of the thread that we're in, as none of us are actually haters, per se: what in Kingdom of the Crystal Skull don't you like?

Stoo · Jan 17, 2012

Cole said:
That's why I think it was a continuity mistake.....why do you make me repeat myself?

Because you are thinking backwards, Cole.

The shot of 'traumatized Marion' is the continuity mistake because it doesn't follow what comes before. (Did you watch the film in reverse?)

Cole said:
I still think the intention was that Marion was clinging to the wheel during the fall (and thus left clutching it after the fall in emotional shock)......I was unaware of what I believe to be a continuity mistake: the shot of everyone falling out of the amphib. But nice try trying to twist around my words.

Jesus H. Murphy, please go and watch the scene again before commenting further. :whip:

Cole said:
Never said they were subtly comedic. Clearly, I was referencing the waterfall scene.

No. I mentioned 1 waterfall scene and 2 other serious scenes. You replied with, "I think they are subtly comedic". Since when does "they" = 1?

Cole said:
But you're more interested in arguing than a constructive conversation, so that's to be expected.

Cole, this is a "Haters" thread. I stated my dislike of a certain scene and Attila agreed. It was YOU who decided to argue against it.

My Big Boy pants are TIGHT. What are you wearing? Baggy trousers or a pointed, dunce cap?

replican't · Jan 18, 2012

Lets get this thread back on the rails:

KOCS just doesn't work as a film, let alone and Indiana Jones one.

Rocket Surgeon · Jan 18, 2012

replican't said:
Lets get this thread back on the rails:

Oh the hate comes from all sides...can't keep it all on one track!

Attila the Professor · Jan 18, 2012

Rocket Surgeon said:
Oh the hate comes from all sides...can't keep it all on one track!

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Some point towards the aliens, some towards Marion, some towards the rest of the supporting cast, some towards Indy's age, some towards the animals, some towards the CGI, some towards the dialogue...and so on and so forth.

The Haters thread

Active member

Guest

New member

Well-known member

Active member

New member

Moderator

New member

Moderator

New member

Guest

Guest

Active member

Well-known member

New member

Moderator

Well-known member

Guest

Guest

Moderator