What does KotCS do better?

[Rocket Surgeon]

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

Off the crates onto the truck he did.

But if you're not refuting the post you quoted then I'll go the next step and say it looked better than ANY ToD wire work.

Here's another one the natives, were "dressier" than in Raiders! Although I don't think thatis necessarily better...

 

[The Drifter]

Off the crates onto the truck he did.

But if you're not refuting the post you quoted then I'll go the next step and say it looked better than ANY ToD wire work.

I believe I misunderstood you. I thought your were referring to when he grabbed ahold of the light-fixture while in the truck and used it to get up to the rafters.
And, of course I was referring to when he grabbed the rope (was it a rope?) and swung/rode it down to the mine cart.

 

[Rocket Surgeon]

I believe I misunderstood you. I thought your were referring to when he grabbed ahold of the light-fixture while in the truck and used it to get up to the rafters.
And, of course I was referring to when he grabbed the rope (was it a rope?) and swung/rode it down to the mine cart.

I'm pretty sure it was a hook...

Another one...

It had a better ending than Last Crusade...and by that I mean ONLY that it made me feel like there might still be another Indy film.

(other then that,it was weak)

 

[The Drifter]

It also had the best intro for Indiana Jones. Seeing his shadow bending over to pick up the fedora as the theme softly plays was great.

Also, LC was a good one when we seen grown Indy fade in and smile before being punched.

 

[Lance Quazar]

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.

I agree that the "hand of god" scenario was becoming a little repetitive.

I also agree that coming up with a decent macguffin is extraordinarily difficult.

I personally am not a fan of the crystal skull plot device, nor do I really feel that aliens deserve a place in the Indiana Jones universe.

However, those two issues don't even crack the top 25 in my laundry list of massive, major problems with KOTCS.

They aren't deal breakers and I could have lived with them if the rest of the movie had been up to snuff. As Roger Ebert is fond of saying, a movie isn't "what" it's about, but "how" it's about it....

Heck, I think "Temple of Doom" is an exemplary action picture and it has a really dull macguffin - vague, muddled, poorly explained and fairly perfunctory. However, the rest of the movie (with a few minor caveats) was terrific.

I wish I could have said the same thing about KOTCS.

However, what adds insult to injury to KOTCS is the whole "alien interference" "Chariot of the Gods" scenario - that aliens just happened to instruct our poor, hapless ignorant forebears on how to get anything done.

It's not as much of a "recent myth" as is a bit of insipid, pseudo-scientific bullsh*t which is antithetical and offensive to archaeology and anthropology and insulting to humanity as a whole.

I would have preferred they just went off and created something entirely original rather than indulge in that bit of demeaning crap.

 

[lao che & sons]

I have some more
*Funniest-"For the love of God, Shut the hell up!""Indyon't just sit there ox get help. Ox: Help? "Indy: Help! Ox: Help! Later... Soviets show up Ox: Help.
*Coolest Temple
*Best Tough Guy Colonel
*Best creepy crawlies (juuuuuuust ahead of snakes)

funniest: crusade
coolest temple: temple of doom sacrificial temple
best tough guy colonel: kotcs
best creepy crawlies raiders snakes

I love crystal skull but it hardley evn compares to the original 3. Perhaps crystal skull had the best fight in the area 51 rocket sled which was really well correographed or perhaps it did have the best star wars references?

I think that it by far though had the most complex plot and I love the whole eire feel of it all. Like I've said before all indy movies kind of deal with famous myths if you will such as the ark of the covenant, being able to rip out a heart, the holy grail, and now area 51/aliens. It's really followed a patern and I think that it may have had the best paramount fade in. It also seems like each one goes along with a different civilization (ancient egypt, acient india, knights/the crusades, and now the early americas) all we have left is china and the arctic maybe.

 

[Darth Vile]

I agree that the "hand of god" scenario was becoming a little repetitive.

I also agree that coming up with a decent macguffin is extraordinarily difficult.

I personally am not a fan of the crystal skull plot device, nor do I really feel that aliens deserve a place in the Indiana Jones universe.

However, those two issues don't even crack the top 25 in my laundry list of massive, major problems with KOTCS.

They aren't deal breakers and I could have lived with them if the rest of the movie had been up to snuff. As Roger Ebert is fond of saying, a movie isn't "what" it's about, but "how" it's about it....

I agree that if one likes the movie, one is more likely to forgive its shortcomings. I personally think aliens, ghosts, monsters are all worth mining when it comes to the pulp notion of Indiana Jones. Of course, how the subject is handled is key.

Heck, I think "Temple of Doom" is an exemplary action picture and it has a really dull macguffin - vague, muddled, poorly explained and fairly perfunctory. However, the rest of the movie (with a few minor caveats) was terrific.

I'm sure you know my feelings re. TOD. As much as I do like it, it’s all rather mindless. I have to say, I prefer a movie that attempts something more philosophical and falls short, rather than something that just goes for straight thrills. KOTCS DOES fall short, but at least it tries (IMHO) to have more brains than TOD.

However, what adds insult to injury to KOTCS is the whole "alien interference" "Chariot of the Gods" scenario - that aliens just happened to instruct our poor, hapless ignorant forebears on how to get anything done.

It's not as much of a "recent myth" as is a bit of insipid, pseudo-scientific bullsh*t which is antithetical and offensive to archaeology and anthropology and insulting to humanity as a whole.

I would have preferred they just went off and created something entirely original rather than indulge in that bit of demeaning crap.

Having the movies depict a higher being i.e. God, fundamentally undermines the study of archaeology, anthropology and paleontology… but I don’t want to split hairs, because it's just a movie.

 

[Lance Quazar]

I'm sure you know my feelings re. TOD. As much as I do like it, it?s all rather mindless. I have to say, I prefer a movie that attempts something more philosophical and falls short, rather than something that just goes for straight thrills. KOTCS DOES fall short, but at least it tries (IMHO) to have more brains than TOD.

I'm not sure I can even grant you that.

While I agree that "Temple of Doom" aspires to little more than creating (at times literally) a rollercoaster action ride with little additional text, subtext or dramatic import, I cannot ascribe to the notion that KOTCS attempted anything "philosophical". Or had anything resembling "brains."

It does at least try to create some meaningful relationships with Indy, Mutt and Marion, but it falls spectacularly short, reducing the return of a beloved character and relationship to smarmy, broad, sitcommy nonsense.

Let's face it, all of the Indiana Jones films are light on dramatic and thematic resonance.

And I'd definitely agree that "Temple of Doom" is the least ambitious of all. "Raiders" dealt with the reconciliation between estranged lovers who clearly had a powerful bond and who endured a difficult break-up.

"Crusade" dealt with the reconciliation between an estranged father and son.

"Crystal Skull", in its clumsy, half-assed, inept way, tried to deal with family and romantic issues, as well.

"Doom", well, no one thought that Indy and Willie's romance was going to be anything other than a fling. There may have been sexual chemistry between them, but that was about it. Sadly, the cute father/son relationship with Indy and Short Round was pleasant enough, but not deep and there was no sense of what the context of that relationship was or was going to be outside of the events of the film.

However, I prefer the ToD model here. I'd rather have a movie not do something at all than do it badly. What's worse? No love story or a really, really bad one?

 

[Darth Vile]

I'm not sure I can even grant you that.

While I agree that "Temple of Doom" aspires to little more than creating (at times literally) a rollercoaster action ride with little additional text, subtext or dramatic import, I cannot ascribe to the notion that KOTCS attempted anything "philosophical". Or had anything resembling "brains."

It does at least try to create some meaningful relationships with Indy, Mutt and Marion, but it falls spectacularly short, reducing the return of a beloved character and relationship to smarmy, broad, sitcommy nonsense.

Let's face it, all of the Indiana Jones films are light on dramatic and thematic resonance.

And I'd definitely agree that "Temple of Doom" is the least ambitious of all. "Raiders" dealt with the reconciliation between estranged lovers who clearly had a powerful bond and who endured a difficult break-up.

However, I prefer the ToD model here. I'd rather have a movie not do something at all than do it badly. What's worse? No love story or a really, really bad one?

Well I’m certainly not trying to convince you of anything… I do like TOD of course (it’s Indy), but I prefer “Skull” for all the reasons positioned in other threads… and this is where it all comes down to interpretation and perception. KOTCS does seem to try and position Indy in a world that has outgrown him... So it does attempt something deeper, if only "Indy superficial". Also - the occasional gopher and monkey aside, KOTCS seems to aspire to the reality of Raiders (within context of Hollywood reality of course), whereas TOD is almost like a living cartoon... where you can almost imagine the "Bam!" and "Kapow!" bubbles. Not a bad thing for some I am sure.

Simply put (IMHO), TOD does the big stuff well and the small stuff poorly. KOTCS seems to work in reverse… I really like the slow build in the warehouse, the diner, Oxley’s cell, Orellana’s tomb, the camp interrogation scene etc. etc. And for me personally, I find those moments more compelling and open to repeated watching than TOD’s wall to wall set pieces (of which, I’d only really rate highly the rope bridge). But that’s just my take.

 

[Udvarnoky]

I'm sure you know my feelings re. TOD. As much as I do like it, it’s all rather mindless.

Oh, so it's like an adventure serial.

Simply put (IMHO), TOD does the big stuff well and the small stuff poorly.

I think TOD does the big stuff well, and just doesn't have any small stuff because it doesn't care about anything beyond the next wonderfully implausible excuse to put Indy on a rock crusher/mine cart/death bridge. Again, a perfect homage to pulp adventure inspirations. And ultimately, I don't think Indy4 accomplished anything "deeper" than Temple of Doom, whatever its hopes and intentions were.

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.

To be fair, the movie did address the Mitchell-Hedges skull and essentially wrote it off as unrelated. Personally, I think the crystal skull had the potential to be the series' most memorable artifact, but Lucas blew it by hiring a hack to write a screenplay that succeeded in including the specific ideas he was anally insistent on being included, but wasn't actually a good screenplay. The ark of the covenant was no household term before Raiders of the Lost Ark came out, even if it wasn't necessarily obscure either.

People need to also remember that Lucas and Kasdan made as much up about the Ark as was the case with the Grail or the skulls. People who don't know better will take the movie's claims about Tanis and the Staff of Ra at face value, but essentially the writers just took a few historic facts and twisted it to their own purpose, throwing in some unrelated myths in concocting their legend to lend it some authenticity. That's actually one of the more fun aspects of any Indy movie - the way real life mythologies are sort of molested and hurled together to create an interesting story that may not be factually accurate at all, but can seem accurate enough (to the extent that it has reasonable detail behind it) to someone who would never look it up. No one believes that there are alien skulls in museums, but people might assume some of the movie's subtler lies about Nazcans and El Dorado to be true the same way people who never read the Bible might have assumed the "cup that caught the blood at the crucifixion" reference in Last Crusade was factual.

 

[Cole]

Well, the thing is..............it's pretty much impossible to top the likes of what they did in the original movies.

Although set design may certainly be one - arguably. Indy's introduction was a good one.

I like to look at what's unique about it. What makes it a worthy return? It's fun to see what an older Indy is up to and it's great to see him still kicking butt. It's a modern Indy with modern effects. I like the fact that it's in the 50's, now we're dealing with Russians, and it's a completely different McGuffin.

 

[Hanselation]

4 is more than 3

What does Indiana Jones 4 better than the Indiana Jones movies before?

It's newer and it shows us another Indiana Jones story nearly 20 years after the lastone. The first three I've seen very, very often - so in my opinion it's great that I can choose now between 4 Indiana Jones movies when I would like to see an Indiana Jones movie again.

Five or six would be much more better

 

[Darth Vile]

Oh, so it's like an adventure serial.

I'd look to Spielberg/Lucas to aspire to something more than rudimentary strung together set pieces (keep it as loud and as fast as possible, and no one will notice hey?).

I think TOD does the big stuff well, and just doesn't have any small stuff because it doesn't care about anything beyond the next wonderfully implausible excuse to put Indy on a rock crusher/mine cart/death bridge.

And that’s why that particular movie falls short for me.

Again, a perfect homage to pulp adventure inspirations.

A more a successful homage to WB’s Looney Tunes perhaps.

And ultimately, I don't think Indy4 accomplished anything "deeper" than Temple of Doom, whatever its hopes and intentions were.

Perhaps, perhaps not… It’s really all down to the individual interpretation.

That's actually one of the more fun aspects of any Indy movie - the way real life mythologies are sort of molested and hurled together to create an interesting story that may not be factually accurate at all, but can seem accurate enough (to the extent that it has reasonable detail behind it) to someone who would never look it up. No one believes that there are alien skulls in museums, but people might assume some of the movie's subtler lies about Nazcans and El Dorado to be true the same way people who never read the Bible might have assumed the "cup that caught the blood at the crucifixion" reference in Last Crusade was factual.

Agreed – It’s something that the movies do well. Lucas manages to make the hokum seem somewhat grounded in fact.

 

[Udvarnoky]

A more a successful homage to WB?s Looney Tunes

Clearly you've never seen a 1930s serial!

 

[Darth Vile]

Clearly you've never seen a 1930s serial!

Clearly you've never seen WB's Looney Tunes!

 

[Goonie]

What does KotCS do better?

KotCS is the only movie in the series (so far) that acknowledges the Young Indiana Jones Adventures (Spring Break Adventure).