Dewy9 said:
It doesn't make me mad, but it gets a little tired when every news article out there has to interject their thoughts about the recent SW/Indy films.
What's the statue of limitations on all this? Whenever I read something about King Kong ('33), I don't hear them talk about Son of Kong (also '33) and stick in their thoughts on it.
It doesn't really matter even if you're the only one in the world who likes something. The fact remains that the film still exists for you to enjoy, let the haters work themselves up in hate if they want to. The film exists, and we have to understand that as an audience we don't own Indiana Jones, we have no claim to him, but are passive observers in the creative process, unless we're lucky enough to be involved in the creation.
There are parts of KOTCS that I don't like. Just as I don't like most of
The Phantom Menace or
Attack of the Clones, yet I have to accept that they are a legitimate part of Star Wars chronology. I just focus on the original trilogy instead, just like KOTCS haters will focus on the Indy original trilogy.
If Indy lived for a hundred years, you don't have to be interested in every single year of his life. Some of his years might have been pretty dull or uninspiring. For the haters of KOTCS 1957 would be one of those uninspiring years that they'd rather gloss over.
There's no real point trying to make people like something that seems so utterly unlikable to them, and the media revels in controversy and negativity, so it's easier for them to praise the classic trilogy at the expense of the new kid on the block. That still doesn't prevent you from continuing to enjoy the fourth outing. The Indy movies aren't just simple adventure stories, but have their inspiration in past cultures, which you have to get to understand why they all have outrageous moments. They're stylish rather than realistic.