Aliens in part 4 started the human race...?

Lambonius said:

The ideas for Indy 4 are great!

Click to expand...

But that's not what was said about the film last summer. There's always been two major criticisms leveled against it:

1. Indiana Jones and ufos/aliens do not mix.

2. Erich Von Daniken's work was largely fictional, and should not provide inspiration for an Indiana Jones film.

Many fans believe that KOTCS was flawed on a fundamental level, long before any of those technical qualities you listed became a factor. You can find the points in just about every negative review, and it continues to provide a popular online argument against the film.

So the story conference transcript certainly reveals a delicious irony. Not only was KOTCS based on "Chariots of the Gods", but it was a major inspiration for ROTLA as well! Meanwhile, Indy was conceived/created as a character that could encounter everything from haunted houses to the existence of alien races.

It's strange that people accept ghosts, voodoo, miracles or black magic and not aliens, when I think that extraterrestial life is more possible in the future. They think is too sci-fi for Indy, but that concept is present since Raiders. The idea of the warehouse with secret crates is related to all the UFO paranoia and conspiracy theories. A perfect idea for a Indy movie.

James said:

But that's not what was said about the film last summer. There's always been two major criticisms leveled against it:

1. Indiana Jones and ufos/aliens do not mix.

2. Erich Von Daniken's work was largely fictional, and should not provide inspiration for an Indiana Jones film.

Many fans believe that KOTCS was flawed on a fundamental level, long before any of those technical qualities you listed became a factor. You can find the points in just about every negative review, and it continues to provide a popular online argument against the film.

So the story conference transcript certainly reveals a delicious irony. Not only was KOTCS based on "Chariots of the Gods", but it was a major inspiration for ROTLA as well! Meanwhile, Indy was conceived/created as a character that could encounter everything from haunted houses to the existence of alien races.

Click to expand...

Well, I certainly disagree on the first point, and the second point is problematic because, regardless of Von Daniken's work, humans as a people really have no idea where we came from. Historical records don't go back far enough, and we can only really hypothesize based on empirical evidence. For that matter, the belief in God and Judeo-Christian spirituality is just as provable as a belief in ancient visitors aiding and teaching early humans. The fact is we just don't know. None of the artifacts in ANY of the Indy movies are based on historical facts that can be proven empirically. Certainly not the Grail, since we KNOW that it is a fictional object invented in Medieval literature. Crystal skulls and interdimensional visitors are no more fictional.

I don't agree with them, either.

It doesn't change the fact that they were both used as popular arguments against the film.

James said:

I don't agree with them, either.

It doesn't change the fact that they were both used as popular arguments against the film.

Click to expand...

True enough.

You know to some people (like me) God, religion, etc. are all just as much fiction or a possibility as the aliens. There are a great number of things that we humans have little knowledge of. Has anyone ever seen the Ark, The Holy Grail, An alien? You see these things exsist only if we believe in them or until someone finds them.

I think it?s a fine line? ?Raiders of the Lost Ark?, and the subsequent movies, established a pattern and a presumption for what Indiana Jones ought to be about i.e. adventures involving the hunt for religious/historical artefacts of ?this Earth?. Clearly KOTCS breaks with those traditions somewhat by introducing the idea of aliens (?inter-dimensional beings? as it were). And although Lucas/Spielberg introduce it relatively subtly (after all, the Crystal Skull is a real, mysterious and well established artefact), it?s still a notable genre hop where it can be construed as dipping its toes in the waters of ?Sci-Fi?.

Now this is not to say that the idea/notion of aliens in an Indy movie doesn?t/can?t work, or isn?t in keeping with those original Lucas ideas (as clearly it is)? but it does take a little bit of a leap for those familiar with the ole' Indiana Jones territory. I for one don?t mind the idea of ancient cultures/higher beings in an Indy movie, but I can quite understand why it grates/feels uncomfortable for some.

Wilhelm said:

It's strange that people accept ghosts, voodoo, miracles or black magic and not aliens, when I think that extraterrestial life is more possible in the future. They think is too sci-fi for Indy, but that concept is present since Raiders. The idea of the warehouse with secret crates is related to all the UFO paranoia and conspiracy theories. A perfect idea for a Indy movie.

Click to expand...

The BIG difference is all in the way it's handled.

The Alien plot device while promising was poorly developed. In the end the movie depended on too much exposition to be compelling.They literally spoon fed us explanations. While they sat on it for 19 years they didn't spend much time making it compelling. By showing us the skull and the alien so soon it destroyed what little tension was developing.

Not a perfect idea, but a good one if handled well.

It's a shame, a damned shame...but I was glad to see Indy back.

Rocket Surgeon said:

The BIG difference is all in the way it's handled.

The Alien plot device while promising was poorly developed. In the end the movie depended on too much exposition to be compelling.They literally spoon fed us explanations. While they sat on it for 19 years they didn't spend much time making it compelling. By showing us the skull and the alien so soon it destroyed what little tension was developing.

Not a perfect idea, but a good one if handled well.

It's a shame, a damned shame...but I was glad to see Indy back.

Click to expand...

They didn't sit on this for 19 years the story was developed over a few short years. I think the story was handled just fine. We are never given too much info and the way it ended was a bit of a mystery, the way Spalko was killed or whatever. It's similar to what happened to the Nazi's at the end of Raiders and Donovan in LC.

Indy's Fist said:

They didn't sit on this for 19 years the story was developed over a few short years. I think the story was handled just fine. We are never given too much info and the way it ended was a bit of a mystery, the way Spalko was killed or whatever. It's similar to what happened to the Nazi's at the end of Raiders and Donovan in LC.

Click to expand...

I think you misunderstand me...they sat on a sequel for 19 years.

Too derivitive, the ending was...(sound like yoda...too lazy to edit), they killed the tension unveiling to early. Just my opinion.

Rocket Surgeon said:

I think you misunderstand me...they sat on a sequel for 19 years.

Too derivitive, the ending was...(sound like yoda...too lazy to edit), they killed the tension unveiling to early. Just my opinion.

Click to expand...

It's certainly derivative if you mean things collapsing, villains getting melted/shriveled etc. etc. I think going for the big payoff a la TLC was a bit of a mistake (as TLC?s dénouement was a tad dull). I would have either preferred an all out action set piece (similar to the rope bridge TOD) or something a little subtler (but you are not going to get that with an Indy movie).

Also, I don?t think revealing the skull and its powers early diminished the ?tension?... indeed (IMHO) the Crystal Skull was one of the best utilized MacGuffins of the entire series. The shortfall I think is that the dénouement doesn?t quite give us a resolution to the Indy/Mac relationship, and we also don?t get an insight into the full intent of the aliens. If we'd got that, the final 3rd would have been a lot more rewarding I think.

the person who started this thread never even responded to the follow up answers,lame. they obviously were way off mark in thinking that the aliens started the human race in kotcs,silly humans.

Darth Vile said:

...or something a little subtler (but you are not going to get that with an Indy movie).

Also, I don?t think revealing the skull and its powers early diminished the ?tension?... indeed (IMHO) the Crystal Skull was one of the best utilized MacGuffins of the entire series. The shortfall I think is that the dénouement doesn?t quite give us a resolution to the Indy/Mac relationship, and we also don?t get an insight into the full intent of the aliens. If we'd got that, the final 3rd would have been a lot more rewarding I think.

Click to expand...

I can't disagree more regarding the tension. The glimpses of the artifacts preceding the final reveals, (i.e. the power revealed) were just that...teases. Crystal Skull had no tension for many reasons, among them, the invulnerability code punched into the film. I'm paraphrasing someone else in the forum now...Spalco needs to do more than bark orders and wave her psychic hand around like some kind of Jedi to be a perceived threat. The eager to begin and quick to finish was her best/only good bit of trash talk. The movie is loaded with unfulfilled potential. Again I stress the lack of tension...as in a truck load of Russian Special Forces that successfully infiltrated a US military installation during a nuclear weapons test that couldn't hit a target 50 feet away with automatic weapons.

Raiders left the ending open and unresolved, they sparked as many questions as they answered...but they were a different breed of questions.

CS tried to jam so much into the end, they spoon fed us exposition until we puked and the unanswered questions were inane like what was it that changed that merited Indy's ascension to Assistant Dean? Tacked on, feel good tripe.

The aliens should have remained under lock and key like the spirits of the ark and should remain as mysterious. The real story, as you mentioned, should revolve around character development...why not make Mac somewhat sympathetic? It's the journey of the characters that gets you invested in the rest of the crap, and this movie was a statement, 1-2-3, The Word of God (Raiders), only in the footsteps of God will we succeed.

This of course is my opinion, birthed from the love of a great character...with the firm belief that anything so worthy will with stand the sharp eye of criticism, (and that does not mean box office receipts!). It's been said somewhere else that the red menace subplot was not fully exploited and I agree, there was much potential but it was squandered to pursue indulgences and the easy path.

Rocket Surgeon said:

I can't disagree more regarding the tension. The glimpses of the artifacts preceding the final reveals, (i.e. the power revealed) were just that...teases. Crystal Skull had no tension for many reasons, among them, the invulnerability code punched into the film. I'm paraphrasing someone else in the forum now...Spalco needs to do more than bark orders and wave her psychic hand around like some kind of Jedi to be a perceived threat. The eager to begin and quick to finish was her best/only good bit of trash talk. The movie is loaded with unfulfilled potential. Again I stress the lack of tension...as in a truck load of Russian Special Forces that successfully infiltrated a US military installation during a nuclear weapons test that couldn't hit a target 50 feet away with automatic weapons.

Click to expand...

I?m not really sure how the Crystals Skulls (or the aliens) early reveal in the movie undermines the tension??? If there is any lack of tension (playing the devils advocate), I think that has more to do with direction and actual writing rather than when and where the skull comes into play. The movie does successfully tease us with the power the skulls have (IMHO), it?s just that the ultimate pay off is somewhat limp.

As far as Spalko is concerned? Not sure that she?s designed to be any more than the brains behind the villainy (rather than the brawn). I can?t remember Belloq punching/kicking the sh*t out of anyone, but perhaps I missed that bit.

Rocket Surgeon said:

CS tried to jam so much into the end, they spoon fed us exposition until we puked and the unanswered questions were inane like what was it that changed that merited Indy's ascension to Assistant Dean? Tacked on, feel good tripe.

Click to expand...

Well I agree that KOTCS ending felt somewhat crammed, and as a consequence some of the substance seemed compromised? but again, I can?t think of many modern movies where they get the ending right (or as good as Raiders, Star Wars, Close Encounters etc.). There is clearly a perceived requirement to notch everything up to ?11? in the last 20 minutes (which doesn't seem to work in the vast majority of modern movies).

Rocket Surgeon said:

The aliens should have remained under lock and key like the spirits of the ark and should remain as mysterious. The real story, as you mentioned, should revolve around character development...why not make Mac somewhat sympathetic? It's the journey of the characters that gets you invested in the rest of the crap, and this movie was a statement, 1-2-3, The Word of God (Raiders), only in the footsteps of God will we succeed.

Click to expand...

Again ? I agree? I would have preferred it without seeing the physical alien and UFO too? because as it is, it?s sort of a half way house. Clearly there was some desire to ensure that there was no confusion as to where the Crystal Skulls power heralded from i.e. ?the space between spaces?.
It?s all about compromise in the end. Lucas would have had aliens/UFO?s in Washington; Spielberg probably would have just left it at yet another quest for a religious relic (what?s left? Adam?s Apple? Eve's bikini line razor?)? Personally speaking, I?m a man for progression... and I think religious artifacts are done.

Rocket Surgeon said:

It's been said somewhere else that the red menace subplot was not fully exploited and I agree, there was much potential but it was squandered to pursue indulgences and the easy path.

Click to expand...

Yep ? And I think my tongue in cheek response to that was something like ?it?s also a shame that Raiders and TLC didn?t address the issue of the onset of Fascism (through the rise of Nationalism) through the legitimately elected Nazi party. But hey? it?s an action/adventure movie.

I'd have to agree with the idea that Spalko was a rather cartoonish, unthreatening villian. I mean, there were a lot of little things they could have done to make her much more cold-blooded and menacing. The cut exchange between Spalko and Mac where she tells him she will kill him if she feels "the slightest need," would have helped, although that scene had some issues in terms of how to accurately let the audience know what Mac was thinking without him saying it.

It's kind of like Donovan in Last Crusade. He's the brains behind the brawn (Vogel,) and admittedly, he isn't that menacing during most of the film, but at the end, when he shoots Henry Sr., the audience has this "oh sh*t!" moment where Donovan is revealed to be truly obsessed and malicious. That's how they should have played Spalko in KOTCS, in my opinion.

Darth Vile said:

I?m not really sure how the Crystals Skulls (or the aliens) early reveal in the movie undermines the tension???

Click to expand...

It's akin to the close encounters moment in the warehouse...the Russians are clamoring to see the body just like we would be. The ark is glimpsed, boxed, shrouded then revealed...the stones are glimpsed, although the power of fire and karma is left till later, and the grail should be obvious...the tension made greater by the Russel Stovers Assortment.

Darth Vile said:

The movie does successfully tease us with the power the skulls have (IMHO), it?s just that the ultimate pay off is somewhat limp.

Click to expand...

The Skull/Alien body were overused to the extent that the finale was limp, as you say. They shot their load to early...excuse the crass expression.

Darth Vile said:

If there is any lack of tension (playing the devils advocate), I think that has more to do with direction and actual writing rather than when and where the skull comes into play.

Click to expand...

I would say the writing and direction is exactly the weakness, they wrote in the reveal too soon and too often and direction gave the object too much screen time. Too much too much. Familiarity breeds contempt, there was nothing left to unveil.

Darth Vile said:

As far as Spalko is concerned? Not sure that she?s designed to be any more than the brains behind the villainy (rather than the brawn). I can?t remember Belloq punching/kicking the sh*t out of anyone, but perhaps I missed that bit.

Click to expand...

Well she whipped out her sword: not exactly intellectual, (Belloq did grab the machine gun)...maybe you missed her physical confrontation with Mutt, kind of distinguishes her from Rene .

Darth Vile said:

I would have preferred it without seeing the physical alien and UFO too?

Click to expand...

I think it could have been handled better, with more finesse...it's in the way that you use it...and they went to the well too often.

Darth Vile said:

Spielberg probably would have just left it at yet another quest for a religious relic (what?s left? Adam?s Apple? Eve's bikini line razor?)? Personally speaking, I?m a man for progression... and I think religious artifacts are done.

Click to expand...

Funny! But if they had any balls, there's a whole Muslim angle that hasn't been explored...and Sallah could be more than a cartoon character.
The Sacred Relics consist of Islamic religious pieces sent to the Ottoman Sultans at various times dating from the 16th century to the late 19th century. The Staff of Moses is on its way!

Darth Vile said:

Yep ? And I think my tongue in cheek response to that was something like ?it?s also a shame that Raiders and TLC didn?t address the issue of the onset of Fascism (through the rise of Nationalism) through the legitimately elected Nazi party. But hey? it?s an action/adventure movie.

Click to expand...

I'm not for exploring the philosophy of fascism or it's onset...however the character driven by that philosophy, Indy a man with out a country, that's one example of an undercurrent, or subplot that would have been compelling, more so then just dropping the idea he was being watched and then just returns with favored son status.

Exploring these themes would have given more weight and tension, character development if you will to this action adventure film. If you don't care about the characters then it's just action for actions sake! Love them or hate them at least develop the character!

Rocket Surgeon said:

It's akin to the close encounters moment in the warehouse...the Russians are clamoring to see the body just like we would be.

Click to expand...

It was always going to be tough to hide the alien influence in 2008. As soon as the poster hit the internet, people guessed the film would incorporate aliens. Those that didn't suspect were clued in by the "Roswell, Nex Mexico" reference in the trailer.

It was a bold decision to let the audience in so early, but it was also true to the film's B movie roots. I'm not sure keeping it under wraps- as Darabont did in his script- would've worked any better. If the aliens had come out of nowhere during the finale, people that hated the idea would've probably been even more upset.

What I find hilarious is that, judging by the negative reception the alien at the end of KOTCS received, had Raiders' been the 20-something-years-in-the-making sequel, had the two movies' positions in history been flipped, us fans would endlessly ***** about the spirits that come out of the Ark. "Too showy." "No tension." "In your face." Blah, blah, freakin'-blah.

We only look at Raiders with so much love because we have turned it into something that it is not. It is not a spiritual commentary; it is not a heart-wrenching Oscar-worthy piece of art...it is an adventure movie. KOTCS is absolutely no different. The alien, the Wrath of God, absolutely NO difference.

So I take it all of you who bemoan the special effects-filled finale of Crystal Skull also objected to Raiders' special effects-filled finale? Uh-huh. Just what I thought. Now turn your brain back on and restore your common sense. Jeez, you guys are just heartbreakingly self-contradictory it genuinely hurts just reading these idiotically illogical posts. Yuck.

James said:

It was always going to be tough to hide the alien influence in 2008. As soon as the poster hit the internet, people guessed the film would incorporate aliens. Those that didn't suspect were clued in by the "Roswell, Nex Mexico" reference in the trailer.

It was a bold decision to let the audience in so early, but it was also true to the film's B movie roots. I'm not sure keeping it under wraps- as Darabont did in his script- would've worked any better. If the aliens had come out of nowhere during the finale, people that hated the idea would've probably been even more upset.

Click to expand...

Well the movie title WAS raiders of the lost ARK! I didn't mean to hide the idea of an alien, just it's time on-screen...and one of the things I've stressed is that I have no aversion to the idea of aliens, but it all boils down to how it's presented. Delivery is 90% of a story. It was too superficial and not very substantial.

kongisking said:

What I find hilarious is that, judging by the negative reception the alien at the end of KOTCS received, had Raiders' been the 20-something-years-in-the-making sequel, had the two movies' positions in history been flipped, us fans would endlessly ***** about the spirits that come out of the Ark. "Too showy." "No tension." "In your face." Blah, blah, freakin'-blah.

We only look at Raiders with so much love because we have turned it into something that it is not. It is not a spiritual commentary; it is not a heart-wrenching Oscar-worthy piece of art...it is an adventure movie. KOTCS is absolutely no different. The alien, the Wrath of God, absolutely NO difference.

So I take it all of you who bemoan the special effects-filled finale of Crystal Skull also objected to Raiders' special effects-filled finale? Uh-huh. Just what I thought. Now turn your brain back on and restore your common sense. Jeez, you guys are just heartbreakingly self-contradictory it genuinely hurts just reading these idiotically illogical posts. Yuck.

Click to expand...

Wow, not much on reading comprehension are we? Judging anything against Crystal Skull is a fools errand. It's funny that you have to restate posts to your skewed view to argue them. You are either being self contradictory, or playing with yourself. I imagine it does hurt, forgive me but no one's espousing Raiders to be art...merely the superior action adventure film that the sequel's content mostly squanders. If you see no difference between the alien and the wrath of God it's further proof that CS is an inferior copy cat. You enjoy the Frank Drebin Indiana Jones...you probably enjoyed Disaster Movie's take more then Raiders too.

Oscar worthy...yeah, that's the measure of anything but popularity.
Blah blah blah...just don't let that be the smartest thing you say today.

Special effects aren't the issue...it's the way they are employed. It's lucky to get the PG they had to put the pillar of fire in front of Belloqs face, that effect sucked...especially his floppy hands. It's minor to the dull, uninteresting, anticlimactic and uninspired FX of Crystal Skull.