Of Crystal Skulls

Violet

Moderator Emeritus
No Crystal Skulls! Phantom's already done it! Atlantis has been done (Atlantis: The Lost Empire)! Aliens and artifacts together (Stargate)! Do something different please.
 

chapter11

Well-known member
Violet Indy said:
No Crystal Skulls! Phantom's already done it! Atlantis has been done (Atlantis: The Lost Empire)! Aliens and artifacts together (Stargate)! Do something different please.

But that's like saying they should have avoided the Holy Grail because Monty Python beat them to it! ;)
 

Professor Jones

New member
I believe the theme of Crystal Skull itself cannot just be "bad" or "good" authomatically, neither because some other fiction use it for some stories. It's obvious that all depends on how that theme is developed in the movie.

I must say, though, that I'd love another "catholic/christian/jewish" theme, because it would follow the path of the two most beautiful movies of the serie (in my opinion). I believe that certain lacks of Temple Of Doom were depending just on that emptiness of meaning of the three Sankara stones compared to the Ark or the Grail.

The goodness of the choice of these two last artifacts depended on the fact that they immediately evoke some deep meaning and rise some fantasy in everybody's mind, with no need to consult any book or any... Wikipedia! The fact that we needed to search for "Crystal skull" in a search-engine just demonstrates how that McGuffin could be a flop and how it'll need to be filled up with some meaning and some fantasy by the Authors of the next movie... so that's why the goodnes of ITS choice will depend purely on the solidness and the reliability of the plot.

As for the Atlantis connections I don't know... It could be nice a wink to the FoA game/comic, but I don't know if they'll decide to put it in. I don't know why but I've got the feeling that Spielberg and Lucas will not keep in great consideration the Indy's adventures that are not told in their movies for the next chapter of the saga. And I believe that they want to make a movie that's purely fruit of their own hands. So the only autoreferencial moments I can imagine are the ones related to the previous movies and not to comics, games or novels.

Besides, a reference to a video-game, for as glorious it could be (like FoA), for me would be a little too out of focus in an elegant movie. I say that because cinema is an art, and every reference to other arts increases it's cultural and elegance level, while video-games are entertainement and a reference to them in a movie would certainly low its level from art to entertainment.

I think we fans could perfectly survive without links to video-games or merchandising in the next Indy movie. But that's just an opinion of course.
 

HovitosKing

Well-known member
OKay so assume he's looking for 13 skulls. Are they all in one place, like in a pile on the floor in a jungle temple? or is Indy running around through the whole movie collecting 13 individual skulls? i think the mcguffin should be ONE artifact.
 

sarah navarro

New member
HovitosKing said:
OKay so assume he's looking for 13 skulls. Are they all in one place, like in a pile on the floor in a jungle temple? or is Indy running around through the whole movie collecting 13 individual skulls? i think the mcguffin should be ONE artifact.
maybe hes getting all 13 back from the Russians,but that sounds to close to the Temple of Doom doesnt it?
 

HovitosKing

Well-known member
yeah i just don't see crystal skulls happening here. the ark, maybe. skulls, no. i see this one as a Livingstone-type expedition (thus the "Property of Dr. Jones" supply crate) into the South American jungle in search of an individual artifact of great importance and power which lies hidden there. i don't see him chasing russians, probably the other way around. deep into the heart of darkness, with a killer Max McCoy-like temple and incredible chase scenes. this way, in the jungle, he's timeless. the updates of 1950's society remain almost totally obscured and it's just Indy and his gear like in the old days.
 
Professor Jones said:
Besides, a reference to a video-game, for as glorious it could be (like FoA), for me would be a little too out of focus in an elegant movie. I say that because cinema is an art, and every reference to other arts increases it's cultural and elegance level, while video-games are entertainement and a reference to them in a movie would certainly low its level from art to entertainment.


Fiiirst, Indy is not "high-art." It can't be as it is inherently cheap thrills entertainment as those were it's roots in Pulp Literature. Yes, I do think Indy is well made. Yes, there is some brilliantly expressive lighting in the first two films and excellent thematic material... still not high art though.

As for video games being a lesser medium... uhm... what?!

Hell, FOA is better written and thematically stronger than ANY of the films. Not to mention it has all those brilliantly drawn backgrounds... FOA not being art? Uh... what?
 

HovitosKing

Well-known member
too bad there can't be a Raven grand premiere screening, only for Raveners, on opening night. i'd fly in for that.
 

Professor Jones

New member
ResidentAlien said:
Fiiirst, Indy is not "high-art." It can't be as it is inherently cheap thrills entertainment as those were it's roots in Pulp Literature. Yes, I do think Indy is well made. Yes, there is some brilliantly expressive lighting in the first two films and excellent thematic material... still not high art though.

As for video games being a lesser medium... uhm... what?!

Hell, FOA is better written and thematically stronger than ANY of the films. Not to mention it has all those brilliantly drawn backgrounds... FOA not being art? Uh... what?

Art is art. How high it is depends on the point of view. But some kind of expressions can be considered art by definitions, such as poetry, music and paintings... How high you decide, on the base of your tastes and personal character.

Video games ARE NOT art. That's by definition. As I said they're "entertainment". You can say they're art but that's your opinion, and not a definition. Cinema is art by definition, no matter how high.

I'm sorry for my english, but I'm italian and it's quite difficult to find the right words to explain such "abstract" concepts.
 

HovitosKing

Well-known member
Define "art" for me, since you referred to its definition. That's something even philosophers in aesthetics (a recognized sub-discipline of philosophy) admittedly can't do.
 
Professor Jones said:
Video games ARE NOT art. That's by definition. As I said they're "entertainment". You can say they're art but that's your opinion, and not a definition. Cinema is art by definition, no matter how high.

Art is defined as any imitation of life. Video Games are therefore art. Some could even argue that they're the truest form of art. Art is also defined (by some) as the quest for perfection. So video games are an imitation of life that allows the admirer to live a more "perfect" life through their interaction. Now whether games are good or bad art is another matter entirely. But your argument is flatly wrong. You just don't seem to understand the meaning of art.
 

HovitosKing

Well-known member
Some would say that "life" is an imitation of perfection, therefore anything we create is an imitation of an imitation. Art is nothing more than a fluid concept that each of us interprets for ourselves. No definition stands up to much scrutiny. I wouldn't hesitate to consider a video game art. After all, it's merely an interactive portrait, isn't it? Does the quality of being "interactive" prevent a work from being art?
 

chapter11

Well-known member
Video games ARE NOT art. That's by definition. As I said they're "entertainment". You can say they're art but that's your opinion, and not a definition. Cinema is art by definition, no matter how high.

I disagree with this definition. Novels and movies are "entertainment," too. Video games in general, and FOA specifically here, can be considered stories -- interactive stories, which could arguably make them a higher form of art -- that are comprised of all of the same elements that make movies and novels art: things like plot, dialogue, characters, motivations, deeper meanings, etc.

A top-notch puzzle adventure game like FOA is like a marriage between a movie and a novel, with the added element of interactivity ... you could more easily argue it's a "higher" form of art than either movies or novels separately.

I must say, though, that I'd love another "catholic/christian/jewish" theme, because it would follow the path of the two most beautiful movies of the serie (in my opinion). I believe that certain lacks of Temple Of Doom were depending just on that emptiness of meaning of the three Sankara stones compared to the Ark or the Grail.

How very Judeo-Christian of you! In what way are the Sankara stones empty compared to the Ark or Grail? Culturally and religiously, they hold a similarly significant a place for the Indian characters in that film as the Christian relics in the other two movies. I think Indy comes to realize this at the end:

"Now you understand the power of the stones?"
"Yes, I understand."

This exchange isn't just about the literal "power" of the stones as objects, but their mystical, religious, symbolic and practical relevance as well.

HovitosKing said:
crystal skulls = LAME x 13

LOL. Touche. :hat:
 
Last edited:

No Ticket

New member
chapter11 said:
How very Judeo-Christian of you! In what way are the Sankara stones empty compared to the Ark or Grail? Culturally and religiously, they hold a similarly significant a place for the Indian characters in that film as the Christian relics in the other two movies. I think Indy comes to realize this at the end:

"Now you understand the power of the stones?"
"Yes, I understand."

This exchange isn't just about the literal "power" of the stones as objects, but their mystical, religious, symbolic and practical relevance as well.

I think he means, like what I meant when I said they didn't sound very interesting... is that they are not widely known of in history like the Ark of the Covenant or the Holy Grail. They are some rocks in some village in India that we've never heard of before. Inherently they seem pretty dumb, but they had a hidden power, although we don't see much of it. Indy has to have something to go after, but that doesn't necessarily make or break the movie in itself. There's just something awesome about going after something like the Ark of the Covenant... an object on earth with the power of God.

That's why topping that is so difficult. Last Crusade took a similar path and used the Holy Grail, another widely known object with the power of God... but still not as good a mcguffin as the Ark. Since the "Holy Grail" is technically fictional.
 
Top