It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Great points about the messy plot of KOTCS, especially pointing out the communist spy subplot and how it was never properly resolved. I have no problem with people enjoying KOTCS, but I do struggle seeing it as better than DOD in any meaningful way, at least for my tastes. I think they're both far behind the original trilogy, but KOTCS had more distracting issues and strained my interest a lot more. DOD is far from perfect, but I thought it was about as good of a product as we could have realistically expected at this point.
A well-considered story with something to say.... is that in and of itself not a change in what these movies have been all about? Face it my friend, if KOTCS was the Never Say Never Again of the Jones franchise, DOD was the Steel Magnolias of it.
Okay, I went for a laugh there. I'll cover my heart...
I wonder the choice of a science fiction element. Who drove that decision?
George Lucas suggested the idea of aliens being involved for CS because the 1950's were the boom of the sci-fi alien movies.
Not at all... ? Indy has a character and learning arc in every one of the first three movies. They're all stories with a point to them, they're not just about punching Nazis, fun though that is. Bond is the one who never changes, pre-2006 anyway. Indy is a character who grows: that's why Temple of Doom is a prequel.
And Last Crusade has one of the most brilliant scripts around: the story is beautifully considered and has so many elements it ties up at the end, both plot and character story. It's more polished at this than DoD is.
Why would that be better? I don't want to see the same thing every time. Why does Indy have to deal in only one type of extraordinary situation?
If the films had kept going in the 90s I'd have been quite happy to see him discover lost worlds of dinosaurs, visit the hollow Earth etc. like in the books. You can't have the same sense of wonder if he just sees the same thing over and over.
For me, mystical equals supernatural, just as religious does. I really do not see any difference in credibility, or for that matter: value, between time travel in DOD, the "aliens" in CS, the voodoo in TOD, and the pseudo-biblical aspects in ROTL (spirits from the Ark melting Nazi faces etc.) and TLC (the entire Holy Grail BS including 1,000-year old knights). Either you choose to present something that, in terms of science, allows for some suspension of disbelief (like the Bond films), or you cross the line to where literally everything is allowed.
And this is what all five IJ films have been doing to the same degree. They are all fantasy-enhanced adventures, and that's why we watch them. We may have our favourites among them, but not because one film is more credible or more close to reality than another. None of them are. And none of them are "science fiction" any more than any other.
And I love DOD, and think it's a worthy conclusion to the franchise and Indy's life story.
I guess religion is a problem for international markets
And it seems like he never dropped the idea. Even after Ford and Spielberg said no more than once. The one time Spielberg seemed interested in the idea was Frank Darabont’s screenplay. And of course Lucas said no, and wrote his own. Apparently, a number of Darabont’s ideas are used in CS, including the Nuke the Fridge scene.
I don't know if that started with Darabont: the fridge idea originally came from Back To The Future I think.
Darabont's City of the Gods has lots of fun bits, it has more peril and does Indy-on-the-run better, but there's some pretty naff and overblown bits in there too; I wouldn't say for sure it would have been a better film.
Personally I still think the aliens are a great idea. All the stuff about ancient astronauts building the pyramids and all that has been an idea around for a while, seems a perfect fit for a film about an adventuring archeologist to me.
Agreed. I also loved the time-rift in DOD. If crazy adventure has a name, it is Indiana Jones!
I think that's why Indy (as well as Bond at first), was a hard sell for movie studios at first. On paper, it looks like a budget disaster in the making. But the right people (namely on Raiders), proved that all 5 Indy movies work, in spite of their occasional flaws.
I guess it is just my sensibilities. I can buy an Ark containing spirits, I can buy a set of stones bringing prosperity to a village, I can buy a chalice giving eternal life.
I can't buy that aliens visited us and created a temple deep in the jungles, nor can I buy that back in history someone was able to time travel to a specific time in history. I guess I am more into the spiritual elements.
Thanks for the context of Lucas being big on the alien theme. Not sure who decided to add the time travel to DOD.
I have to say, back in the old days I had a REALLY hard time buying into the 'Indy being bad because he swallowed some blood' thing. Once I came to accept that, frankly nothing was completely off the table, even the dreaded fridge fly.
I've always loved the "fridge fly". No more unrealistic than lots of other stuff in the franchise, but one of its funniest moments for me.
Interesting thoughts spoilers for the great circle and dial of destiny
Anything Goes
Brilliant adaption of Cole Porter's classic, John Williams is a genus and Kate Capshaw is superb.
---
IMO Douglas Slocombe is one of the main reasons the early Indy films were as great as they are.
Though I feel Crusade is the best, Temple Of Doom remains my favourite.