What does KotCS do better?

[JP Jones]

Are you saying Hinduism isn't a religion?


...if there were only a facepalm emoticon. Simply the dumbest thing I'll likely read all day.

Congratulations.

You know what he means. The ark and the grail are both in the bible. Sankara Stones are not.

 

[ResidentAlien]

You know what he means. The ark and the grail are both in the bible. Sankara Stones are not.

No, I know what he said. And he said the stones were not a religious artifact. Christianity is not THE religion. It is not the end-all-be-all.

I refer you to this topic:

http://raven.theraider.net/showthread.php?t=13674

 

[JP Jones]

No, I know what he said. And he said the stones were not a religious artifact. Christianity is not THE religion. It is not the end-all-be-all.

I refer you to this topic:

http://raven.theraider.net/showthread.php?t=13674

I understand what your saying, hinduisum is a religion, but it doesn't have anything to do with the bible or christ. It's more similar to the skull than the ark or the grail. You following me?

 

[ResidentAlien]

I understand what your saying, hinduisum is a religion, but it doesn't have anything to do with the bible or christ. It's more similar to the skull than the ark or the grail. You following me?

No, because you're assuming an idiotic, deluded worldview where Christianity is at the epicenter.

The skull is NOT a religious artifact. The Sankara Stones are and are based in fact. The skulls are incredibly loosely based on artifacts that are believed by many to be a hoax. They've more in common with Scientology or other new wave bull**** than with a long-established religion like Hinduism.


Now do you follow me?

 

[JP Jones]

No, because you're assuming an idiotic, deluded worldview where Christianity is at the epicenter.

The skull is NOT a religious artifact. The Sankara Stones are and are based in fact. The skulls are incredibly loosely based on artifacts that are believed by many to be a hoax. They've more in common with Scientology or other new wave bull**** than with a long-established religion like Hinduism.


Now do you follow me?

I'm not really in the mood to post 100 posts about religion so here we go. Your right, the stones are based on fact, sure.This is not a complicated subject. The stones aren't in the bible, the ark and the grail are. I don't know why you can't just agree that the stones and the skull are more similar than the stones or something else. Ark,grail=Biblical,Stones,Skull= Lesser known religions(i.e hindu ,maya) This is nothing to gets so worked up about.

 

[ResidentAlien]

I'm not really in the mood to post 100 posts about religion so here we go. Your right, the stones are based on fact, sure.This is not a complicated subject. The stones aren't in the bible, the ark and the grail are. I don't know why you can't just agree that the stones and the skull are more similar than the stones or something else. Ark,grail=Biblical,Stones,Skull= Lesser known religions(i.e hindu ,maya) This is nothing to gets so worked up about.

I don't know why you don't understand the argument that the stones are not a religious artifact is invalid because they are in fact religious. The skull, on the other hand, is not.


It's not a difficult concept.

Ark - Hebrew
Grail - Christian
Stones - Hindu


Skull - New Wave BS



See?

 

[Rocket Surgeon]

I dont presume to state these numbers as difinitive, however Hinduism is a MAJOR world religion...roughly 900 MILLION followers.

The closest the Skull comes to any major world religion, (and I know you don't propose that...it just works out as a funny joke, to me at least) is Scientology which is based on outerspace aliens. If you believe as Scientologists do that scientology is a religion.

I think the point is you're stuck on Indy chasing Biblical artifact and other posters on this thread contend his adventures have been religious artifacts, which of course the Stones are...to the Hindus...

Here are some numbers to consider when discounting Hinduism as a religion:
Note, even my boys The Rastafari count more then the Scientologists...ya mon!

1.Christianity: 2.1 billion

2.Islam: 1.5 billion

3.Secular/Nonreligious/Agnostic/Atheist: 1.1 billion

4.Hinduism: 900 million

5.Chinese traditional religion: 394 million

6.Buddhism: 376 million

7.primal-indigenous: 300 million

8.African Traditional & Diasporic: 100 million

9.Sikhism: 23 million

10.Juche: 19 million

11.Spiritism: 15 million

12.Judaism: 14 million

13.Baha'i: 7 million

14.Jainism: 4.2 million

15.Shinto: 4 million

16.Cao Dai: 4 million

17.Zoroastrianism: 2.6 million

18.Tenrikyo: 2 million

19.Neo-Paganism: 1 million

20.Unitarian-Universalism: 800 thousand

21.Rastafarianism: 600 thousand

22.Scientology: 500 thousand

 

[mister64]

Those that aren't followers of the Hindu faith wouldn't know whether or not the Sankara Stones were actually big tenets of the faith like the Ark (10 Commandments) so it might appear that the film is set in India and perhaps Lucas and Spielberg embellished a legend for the film. And TOD wasn't as much about the search for the stones as it was rescuing the child slaves.

As far as I'm aware, the Grail isn't a big part of Christianity, but it is big in legend and pop culture, so the average filmgoer would be at least familiar with the concept going into the film.

The Ark of the Covenant is familiar to most American movie-goers, whether Jewish, Christian or otherwise.

 

[Rocket Surgeon]

Those that aren't followers of the Hindu faith wouldn't know whether or not the Sankara Stones were actually big tenets of the faith like the Ark (10 Commandments) so it might appear that the film is set in India and perhaps Lucas and Spielberg embellished a legend for the film. And TOD wasn't as much about the search for the stones as it was rescuing the child slaves.

As far as I'm aware, the Grail isn't a big part of Christianity, but it is big in legend and pop culture, so the average filmgoer would be at least familiar with the concept going into the film.

The Ark of the Covenant is familiar to most American movie-goers, whether Jewish, Christian or otherwise.

So your point the stones and the skulls are similar in that no one is familiar with them?

 

[StoneTriple]

Ark,grail=Biblical,Stones,Skull= Lesser known ....

I get what you're trying to say through all this mess, and for the most part I agree. However, just so you're clear on this, the Grail is not part of the Bible.

 

[The Drifter]

I get what you're trying to say through all this mess, and for the most part I agree. However, just so you're clear on this, the Grail is not part of the Bible.

You're right. The Bible only mentions Jesus drinking from a cup at the last supper. It never mentions anyone catching his blood at the crucifixion in a grail or chalice.

 

[James]

This is nothing to gets so worked up about.

It's also pointless argument, considering the Indy films have always been more about myth than religion. The fans are the ones who take the religious aspect and try to build it up into something more substantial. It's like when a metal band uses a reference from the Bible, then acts like it somehow justifies their album by giving it a deep, important meaning.

The Grail as depicted in LC is just as fantastic as the crystal skull in KOTCS. You've got a line about "the Arthur legend"...a few overly-simplistic clues to some videogame-eseque "challenges"...and an old knight, just sitting around in a little room. Oh, and don't try to take the Grail out of the cave, because then it won't work.

Of course, the Sankara stones don't fare much better. There's some rocks...and you have to get all five...because there are diamonds inside that "glow" when they're brought together. If you wait long enough, one will heat up- briefly- during the finale. Yes, it's such a shame that KOTCS couldn't weave its myths about El Dorado and the crystal skull into something as intellectual and meaningful.

Lucas obviously considers these films to be about myths and legends more than historical facts or serious religion. Remember, the Holy Grail could've just as easily been about a monkey king with some magical peaches. And TOD came close to owing more to Hammer Horror than Hinduism.

It's also true that the Sankara stones and the crystal skull will always be viewed as the "lesser" artifacts. They simply represent myths that aren't as widely-known among average moviegoers. (Not that the Ark was common knowledge back in 1981, but at least it had the Biblical connection.)

And of course the irony is that, unlike with the Ark or Grail, you can actually go to a museum and see an actual stone lingam or crystal skull. No, they won't be the magical ones that Indy discovered. However, they will be the kind- the "holy rocks" and "deity carvings"- that Indy referenced when explaining the magical ones.

 

[Lance Quazar]

You're right. The Bible only mentions Jesus drinking from a cup at the last supper. It never mentions anyone catching his blood at the crucifixion in a grail or chalice.

In fact, the movie conflates two separate legends about two separate cups.

Traditionally, the cup used at the crucifixion was never meant to be the same cup used during the last supper.

(This is off the top of my head, so I may be getting some of the details wrong), but the "holy chalice" (used at the crucifixion) was a separate story/legend/myth from the grail.

The two were often confused and conflated throughout the history, but began as separate stories and separate objects.

 

[Lance Quazar]

It's also true that the Sankara stones and the crystal skull will always be viewed as the "lesser" artifacts. They simply represent myths that aren't as widely-known among average moviegoers. (Not that the Ark was common knowledge back in 1981, but at least it had the Biblical connection.)

The problem with the crystal skulls is that they don't represent ANY mythology or historical, religious or cultural traditions at all.

Crystal Skulls were invented in the 19th Century by hoaxers trying to make a buck. That's it. There's nothing more to the tale.

While I don't believe in the "reality" of any of the Indiana Jones artifacts at all, at least they come from ancient and widely-believed religious traditions.

I'm not saying that the Indiana Jones universe can't make up artifacts to use in their stories. After all the fertility idol, peacock's eye and cross of coronado were all made up. And the stones were at least partially made up.

Though I was not a fan of KOTCS, I had no problem with the theoretical use of a crystal skull as a macguffin.

But I don't think those objects will resonate quite as much as those with a more well-known cultural origin.

 

[dr.jones1986]

If kotcs were released in 1990 I'm sure your views would be much different.
You'd probably think kotcs was a classic and therefore think It had some parts that were better. Now it's pretty difficult to not find 1 thing kotcs did better. Heck, I'll name a few more.
*Best looking McGuffin
*Best Indy hat
*Best punch( double punch)

I could name these all day. I'm not looking for deep provacitive answers hear.

I dont really pay that much attention to the punchs in a fight scene, but the German machanic fight is the best fight scene, than the Vogel fight on the tank, than the TOD fight with the big guard...last would be the ants fight.

As for hat, I would prob go TOD, but im not picky.

I like the Crystal Skull, I would prob say it is the 3rd best looking McGuffin, better than the Sankara Stones...which isn't to hard.

To me it has nothing to do with when a movie is made. I loved KotCS, but it was not as good as the first three. Im not a diehard Batman fan, but I must admit the Dark Knight was by far the best batman movie, better than all the Tim Burton ones. Its not when its made, its how good it is. While I enjoyed skull, it was a step down from the first three. But ill try to think of something about it that was better.

Ok, ill give you one...coolest looking creepy temple wall art. I really liked how the murals at Akator looked very much like real Mayan art...even though Peru is way outside of the Mayan civilizations range.

 

[Darth Vile]

The problem with the crystal skulls is that they don't represent ANY mythology or historical, religious or cultural traditions at all.

Crystal Skulls were invented in the 19th Century by hoaxers trying to make a buck. That's it. There's nothing more to the tale.

While I don't believe in the "reality" of any of the Indiana Jones artifacts at all, at least they come from ancient and widely-believed religious traditions.

I'm not saying that the Indiana Jones universe can't make up artifacts to use in their stories. After all the fertility idol, peacock's eye and cross of coronado were all made up. And the stones were at least partially made up.

Though I was not a fan of KOTCS, I had no problem with the theoretical use of a crystal skull as a macguffin.

But I don't think those objects will resonate quite as much as those with a more well-known cultural origin.

They represent the mythology of alien visitors having some hand in our development. It may be a more recent myth, but it's a myth just the same. In historical terms, the Holy Grail is relatively recent too. I think you are right that it's easier to tag a macguffin to a widely known religion... but the well was running somewhat dry in terms of seeing "the hand of God" in the movies.

 

[Rocket Surgeon]

Crystal Skull did the whip swinging wire work better than ToD.

Warehouse 51 light fixture swing looked better than the Elephant trunk swing across the lava

 

[The Drifter]

Crystal Skull did the whip swinging wire work better than ToD.

Warehouse 51 light fixture swing looked better then the Elephant trunk swing across the lava

But, it did not look better than Indy swinging into the mine cart.

 

[Rocket Surgeon]

But, it did not look better than Indy swinging into the mine cart.

He didn't use his whip to swing into the mine cart

 

[The Drifter]

He didn't use his whip to swing into the mine cart

I never said he did. He never used his whip on the wire fixture either.

(I am talking about when he was driving the truck towards Mac and the other Russian, and used the over-hanging light to grab ahold of. Maybe we are thinking about different times?)