Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny (30th June 2023)

1190191192194196

Comments

  • Posts: 1,394
    Bit too late for an Indy game now that Dial Of Destiny killed the franchise ( it lost over a hundred million dollars for Disney on top of all the other flops they had this year.
  • JustJamesJustJames London
    Posts: 203
    Bet it makes it back eventually, and bet home video releases made more than expected (was easier to buy it on iTunes than find a cinema that still had showings…) even allowing for Hollywood accounting.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,020
    Wasn’t it reported awhile ago that the film performed better on digital than in theaters?
  • Posts: 6,710
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    Bit too late for an Indy game now that Dial Of Destiny killed the franchise ( it lost over a hundred million dollars for Disney on top of all the other flops they had this year.

    Not too late, it'll be arriving just in time for me to play it.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,473


    y
    MaxCasino wrote: »

    Uh-oh, Mr BREITBART is going to be nonplussed about this...

    Then again, if there are those pesky women and people of color show up, he'll be right back in his comfort zone of complaining about how woke the new video game is.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,102
    peter wrote: »

    y
    MaxCasino wrote: »

    Uh-oh, Mr BREITBART is going to be nonplussed about this...

    Then again, if there are those pesky women and people of color show up, he'll be right back in his comfort zone of complaining about how woke the new video game is.

    Probably would be worse for him, if Phoebe Waller-Bridge is in it, or helping write it.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,473
    MaxCasino wrote: »
    peter wrote: »

    y
    MaxCasino wrote: »

    Uh-oh, Mr BREITBART is going to be nonplussed about this...

    Then again, if there are those pesky women and people of color show up, he'll be right back in his comfort zone of complaining about how woke the new video game is.

    Probably would be worse for him, if Phoebe Waller-Bridge is in it, or helping write it.

    😆 😂 😆 Very true @MaxCasino .... When I first read those posts, it is startling. I always pause , and think: is anyone else seeing this about things like SNW or INDY, other than the true snowflakes who write for Breitbart -type rags?? Like really?? I know there are shows and films that want to boast their social equality accolades, and it's so obvious that it can be annoying. I mean these things do exist, but I find they're more outliers...

    But this guy sees it EVERYWHERE...
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 12,983
    Dial of Destiny. Love that movie.

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,921
    I kind of love it more the more I see it. I think it's great.
  • edited January 11 Posts: 1,394
    JustJames wrote: »
    Bet it makes it back eventually, and bet home video releases made more than expected (was easier to buy it on iTunes than find a cinema that still had showings…) even allowing for Hollywood accounting.

    https://thedirect.com/article/indiana-jones-5-box-office-losses-franchise

    Also go to 12:42 here ( unless you can’t face the truth that is )




  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    edited January 11 Posts: 4,102
    I enjoy all the Indy Jones movies. They all have more positives than negatives. I always enjoy playing The Infernal Machine on N64, and The Emperor’s Tomb on Xbox. Great stories that fit in well with the movies. Last year, I read the novelizations of the 4 movies, plus Army of the Dead. Once again, they are great in-depth stories that make Indiana Jones a great name. I really wish Lucasfilm would have turned Dial of Destiny into a novelization. Lucasfilm does it for their other movies (and even some Star Wars games). Lucasfilm also should put the previous books back in print as there is probably an audience for them, who like physical copies. Lucasfilm should have done a bit more with Indy than they realize.
  • I still haven’t seen the new Indy yet, but then again I’ve always been a bigger fan of Bond than I have of Indy personally. I’m sure I’ll get around to it eventually.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,473
    Does anyone actually watch these videos that Mr Breitbart keeps posting? I haven’t watched one. Am
    I missing something?
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    edited January 11 Posts: 8,026
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    Also go to 12:42 here ( unless you can’t face the truth that is )


    Massively curious to hear - in your own words if you're able to form them - what this video proves in contrast to the post to you're responding to.

    I don't recall anyone saying it didn't underperform theatrically.
  • JustJamesJustJames London
    Posts: 203
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    JustJames wrote: »
    Bet it makes it back eventually, and bet home video releases made more than expected (was easier to buy it on iTunes than find a cinema that still had showings…) even allowing for Hollywood accounting.

    https://thedirect.com/article/indiana-jones-5-box-office-losses-franchise

    Also go to 12:42 here ( unless you can’t face the truth that is )




    Video isn’t showing in my browser. But it doesn’t matter. Eventually is a very long time. It also assumes that the *only* purpose in a film (and by extension any art) and the only sign of success is in how much money is made.
    Is that the case?
    Is Avatar a better film than any Bond film? Should we then not make any more Bond films? The MCU makes more money too… only superheroes then?
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,921
    Agreed, I don't need a film to make loads of money in order to enjoy it. I think anyone who does can't be very comfortable trusting their own judgement and needs validation from others.
    I think this is a very good film which has already seen a level of reappraisal, and I think it will continue to.
  • LucknFateLucknFate 007 In New York
    edited January 12 Posts: 1,427
    mtm wrote: »
    Agreed, I don't need a film to make loads of money in order to enjoy it. I think anyone who does can't be very comfortable trusting their own judgement and needs validation from others.
    I think this is a very good film which has already seen a level of reappraisal, and I think it will continue to.

    If anything, films like Indy and their performance at the modern box office just indicate that something in Hollywood is a little broken, regarding budgets, leaks, production delays, and releases. With that in mind, there's a lot going on before you get to how the movie holds up on its own, and I do think it holds up.

    Funnily enough I think it's fair to say that time will be kind to DOD.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,921
    I think DoD is one of those funny ones where the budget has to show all of the work put into the different versions of the film over the previous 15 years or so: it's not strictly speaking how much it actually cost to make it. Plus it was made during covid restrictions which added a lot to the budget, I'm sure. I think it's more of an exception than the rule.

    It did also cost a lot though: I remember McQuarrie talking about how they looked at his latest Mission Impossible film having a de-aging sequence, but it would cost as much as the train stunt finale of the film!

    But, y'know: it's not my money, it's Disney's, and if they want to spend loads of it on something I like, well I'm not going to complain! :) Also they spent it in this country and I'm sure lots of businesses and people did well out of it.
  • LucknFateLucknFate 007 In New York
    Posts: 1,427
    mtm wrote: »
    I think DoD is one of those funny ones where the budget has to show all of the work put into the different versions of the film over the previous 15 years or so: it's not strictly speaking how much it actually cost to make it. Plus it was made during covid restrictions which added a lot to the budget, I'm sure. I think it's more of an exception than the rule.

    It did also cost a lot though: I remember McQuarrie talking about how they looked at his latest Mission Impossible film having a de-aging sequence, but it would cost as much as the train stunt finale of the film!

    But, y'know: it's not my money, it's Disney's, and if they want to spend loads of it on something I like, well I'm not going to complain! :) Also they spent it in this country and I'm sure lots of businesses and people did well out of it.

    We are in agreement. I would argue this film's 15-year production cycle is symptom of what I described, some sort of issue getting things off the ground in an efficient manner. And leaks did the movie no favors before release. And that early May screening. Just some weird business moves.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited January 12 Posts: 14,921
    Yes, they made a big mistake with that Cannes screening. It just wasn't the place, plus apparently the screening itself was delayed with a big Harrison Ford tribute beforehand which actually annoyed the journos a bit (they all had deadlines for their reviews and had to race back to their rooms etc. plus they'd been made to dress up in uncomfortable suits), so it actually kind of meant you had a lot of first reviews from tired people in a bit of a grumpy mood!

    And also yes to the weird business moves: Disney should have made the film as soon as they got Lucasfilm. Crystal Skull was a massive hit; there was no reason not to. Imagine another Indy movie in 2015 with the Ford that we see in Force Awakens.
  • Posts: 1,394
    LucknFate wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Agreed, I don't need a film to make loads of money in order to enjoy it. I think anyone who does can't be very comfortable trusting their own judgement and needs validation from others.
    I think this is a very good film which has already seen a level of reappraisal, and I think it will continue to.

    If anything, films like Indy and their performance at the modern box office just indicate that something in Hollywood is a little broken, regarding budgets, leaks, production delays, and releases. With that in mind, there's a lot going on before you get to how the movie holds up on its own, and I do think it holds up.

    Funnily enough I think it's fair to say that time will be kind to DOD.

    They spent 300 million on the film which is ridiculous.The money wasn’t on screen.It just shows the complete and utter incompetence of Kathleen Kennedy.To be fair it’ seems to be a common problem at Disney given the massive budget of The Marvels and how terrible that turned out.

    The Creator was made on an 80 million budget and that looked fantastic.It looked like they spent way more.Godzilla Minus One cost even less than that so yeah I agree modern Hollywood is broken in the sense that they can’t utilize their budgets properly or just overproducing these things.

    I don’t think time will be good to DOD at all.The best Iv heard overall from fans both online and in real life is along the lines of “ Oh well,it was better than Crystal Skull at least “.

    Crystal Skull was a bad movie that made a lot of money because it was coming off the incredible good will of the classic trilogy.That films reputation has gotten only worse over the years.That,and Disney’s failure to capitalise on the brand by not producing new comics,books and especially games for current day consoles ( Just how awesome would an Indy game done by the likes of the makers of Uncharted have been? ) is the reason younger viewers just weren’t interested.



  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,473
    And the “love bombing” continues….
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited January 12 Posts: 14,921
    I just don't understand why people care how much a super corporation like Disney spend on stuff. I don't really understand why folks want a Bond film with less spent on it. They're not a public company, it's not tax payers' dollars: who cares. The money absolutely was on screen: anyone who thinks 1960s NYC still exists may have trouble with that.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,473
    mtm wrote: »
    I just don't understand why people care how much a super corporation like Disney spend on stuff. I don't really understand why folks want a Bond film with less spent on it. They're not a public company, it's not tax payers' dollars: who cares. The money absolutely was on screen: anyone who thinks 1960s NYC still exists may have trouble with that.

    Absolutely @mtm … the money was up on the screen. I’ve now seen the film a couple of times more, and it really is a bitter-sweet wrapping to the series, and a much better way to conclude it, than Crystal Skulls (which I still don’t “hate”)….

    In a wild universe, such as Indiana Jones, there was something remarkably grounded about DOD. And that ties into the themes of mortality and the passage of time. Some really lovely stuff in the film…
  • JustJamesJustJames London
    Posts: 203
    The PWB character was pretty good, I thought — she’s Indy as he was in ToD, and she changes by the end. At no point does she actually undermine Indy either, and in the end it’s his influence on *her* that leads to her bringing him back. I do think the ending was rushed mind you. Needed a half hour stuck-in-the-past segment to breathe, maybe a campfire conversation. I would have been tempted to have Sallah go back and remain there too, and maybe end with Indy finding his resting place in the present day.

    I’m not sure it’s a better capstone to the series than Skull (which is better than most remember) as it is more of a down ending than that — but maybe it wouldn’t have been if Shia’s career had taken a different turn. He would have been in the PWB characters arc instead, and I don’t think it would have worked as well as it did with Helena.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited January 13 Posts: 14,921
    JustJames wrote: »
    The PWB character was pretty good, I thought — she’s Indy as he was in ToD, and she changes by the end. At no point does she actually undermine Indy either, and in the end it’s his influence on *her* that leads to her bringing him back.

    Thank you- I'm actually a bit confused by how many people miss that. This isn't a complex film, and yet you see folks thinking Indy was the sidekick to her, whereas this film is clearly entirely about Indy.
    JustJames wrote: »
    I do think the ending was rushed mind you. Needed a half hour stuck-in-the-past segment to breathe, maybe a campfire conversation. I would have been tempted to have Sallah go back and remain there too, and maybe end with Indy finding his resting place in the present day.

    I feel like the film is probably a bit too long as it is (the underwater bit feels perhaps the one to prune, but it is a nice change of scenery) but I think if I were going to change anything about the ending I might give Indy a bit more of a goal during the battle: like the Nazis had decided to drop a bomb on Syracuse and he had to stop them. Just something to punch it up a bit.
    JustJames wrote: »
    I’m not sure it’s a better capstone to the series than Skull (which is better than most remember) as it is more of a down ending than that — but maybe it wouldn’t have been if Shia’s career had taken a different turn. He would have been in the PWB characters arc instead, and I don’t think it would have worked as well as it did with Helena.

    Skull is a lot of fun but for me the story just doesn't work- it's nowhere near as good as DoD's story, which is actually saying something. And they're almost dangerously close in places: the story begins when a young person takes Indy for a drink and suggests an expedition- Indy is wary and resistant, but then baddies appear and Indy is forced to make a fast-paced escape through the crowded streets, and his being under suspicion from the authorities leads to him leaving the country... (only DoD does this bit better because he establishes what he needs in order to clear his name)
    KOTCS doesn't know what to do with Indy & Mutt's relationship- they sort of think each other are okay, they find out they're father and son, they go on thinking each other is okay (compare it to the really simple and strong growth that Indy and his Dad have in Crusade and it's nowhere near); it doesn't even really seem to know whether the existence of aliens is something it wants to tell you about in the first couple of minutes, halfway through or at the end (Indy is acting all amazed at the paintings of aliens in the temple at the climax, but we saw them back in Area 51- it's all a bit confused). I don't think Skull is bad; it's clearly still better than most adventure films and it is fun, but it's frustrating because if they'd just sorted the story out it could have been as good as the originals.
  • JustJamesJustJames London
    edited January 13 Posts: 203
    mtm wrote: »
    JustJames wrote: »
    The PWB character was pretty good, I thought — she’s Indy as he was in ToD, and she changes by the end. At no point does she actually undermine Indy either, and in the end it’s his influence on *her* that leads to her bringing him back.

    Thank you- I'm actually a bit confused by how many people miss that. This isn't a complex film, and yet you see folks thinking Indy was the sidekick to her, whereas this film is clearly entirely about Indy.
    JustJames wrote: »
    I do think the ending was rushed mind you. Needed a half hour stuck-in-the-past segment to breathe, maybe a campfire conversation. I would have been tempted to have Sallah go back and remain there too, and maybe end with Indy finding his resting place in the present day.

    I feel like the film is probably a bit too long as it is (the underwater bit feels perhaps the one to prune, but it is a nice change of scenery) but I think if I were going to change anything about the ending I might give Indy a bit more of a goal during the battle: like the Nazis had decided to drop a bomb on Syracuse and he had to stop them. Just something to punch it up a bit.
    JustJames wrote: »
    I’m not sure it’s a better capstone to the series than Skull (which is better than most remember) as it is more of a down ending than that — but maybe it wouldn’t have been if Shia’s career had taken a different turn. He would have been in the PWB characters arc instead, and I don’t think it would have worked as well as it did with Helena.

    Skull is a lot of fun but for me the story just doesn't work- it's nowhere near as good as DoD's story, which is actually saying something. And they're almost dangerously close in places: the story begins when a young person takes Indy for a drink and suggests an expedition- Indy is wary and resistant, but then baddies appear and Indy is forced to make a fast-paced escape through the crowded streets, and his being under suspicion from the authorities leads to him leaving the country... (only DoD does this bit better because he establishes what he needs in order to clear his name)
    KOTCS doesn't know what to do with Indy & Mutt's relationship- they sort of think each other are okay, they find out they're father and son, they go on thinking each other is okay (compare it to the really simple and strong growth that Indy and his Dad have in Crusade and it's nowhere near); it doesn't even really seem to know whether the existence of aliens is something it wants to tell you about in the first couple of minutes, halfway through or at the end (Indy is acting all amazed at the paintings of aliens in the temple at the climax, but we saw them back in Area 51- it's all a bit confused). I don't think Skull is bad; it's clearly still better than most adventure films and it is fun, but it's frustrating because if they'd just sorted the story out it could have been as good as the originals.

    The story is absolutely stronger in Dial than Skull… well, the characters are, for sure. Just not sure which works better as an ending. I think Dial has more meat to it in general mind you, and think Crusade might be the only one that doesn’t rush it’s ending mind you.

    With the ending… it just seems we aren’t there long enough to believe Indy would immediately *want* or think he *needs* to stay. It also meant some audiences didn’t pick up on all the foreshadowing (the spear being made from a modern alloy for instance) because it was so rushed in its climax. Would also have helped if it was less jarring a jump to him waking up in his apartment. Just… a little more in there. Heck. Maybe a map graphic on a calendar lol.

    I too am surprised anyone misses the ‘Helena is Indy’ bit, as it’s laid on pretty thick — she’s working for organised crime, picks up a kid sidekick, and has a problem with her dad resulting from his archaeological obsession. Shes appearing in her own personal Temple Of Doom opening, but we don’t see any more of it, because we’re following Indy. She’s not at the ‘it belongs in a museum’ stage yet, like Indy wasn’t until Crusade. Indy as her godfather is being what he never had, and never had a chance to be with Mutt it turns out. You could even argue he’s to an extent fulfilling something like his fathers role was in Crusade. I mean, he even gets shot and healed by his ‘child’. Destiny, a dial going in a circle. It’s almost clumsy in how obvious it is, but people still didn’t get, so I guess people just can’t follow subtext anymore in films, unless it suits them.
    Short of calling it ‘Indiana Jones and The Surrogate Parent’ I am not sure how more obvious it could get. But then, it is a film called the Dial of Destiny, and is all about history repeating, so it’s not like they didn’t at least try. (And it wouldn’t surprise me if at one point Helena was Mutt, early in development, as they pulled the ‘names after the dog’ for him in Skull.) It’s not subtle, with all the repeated elements showing the sixties isn’t so different than the fifties, or the forties, or the thirties, or even when he was a kid riding horses after trains. It’s just Indy has got older and been changed by events. By the end, he’s changed back — hence the hat not the bat.

    I should probably watch it again at some point, since have only seen it once.

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited January 13 Posts: 14,921
    JustJames wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    JustJames wrote: »
    The PWB character was pretty good, I thought — she’s Indy as he was in ToD, and she changes by the end. At no point does she actually undermine Indy either, and in the end it’s his influence on *her* that leads to her bringing him back.

    Thank you- I'm actually a bit confused by how many people miss that. This isn't a complex film, and yet you see folks thinking Indy was the sidekick to her, whereas this film is clearly entirely about Indy.
    JustJames wrote: »
    I do think the ending was rushed mind you. Needed a half hour stuck-in-the-past segment to breathe, maybe a campfire conversation. I would have been tempted to have Sallah go back and remain there too, and maybe end with Indy finding his resting place in the present day.

    I feel like the film is probably a bit too long as it is (the underwater bit feels perhaps the one to prune, but it is a nice change of scenery) but I think if I were going to change anything about the ending I might give Indy a bit more of a goal during the battle: like the Nazis had decided to drop a bomb on Syracuse and he had to stop them. Just something to punch it up a bit.
    JustJames wrote: »
    I’m not sure it’s a better capstone to the series than Skull (which is better than most remember) as it is more of a down ending than that — but maybe it wouldn’t have been if Shia’s career had taken a different turn. He would have been in the PWB characters arc instead, and I don’t think it would have worked as well as it did with Helena.

    Skull is a lot of fun but for me the story just doesn't work- it's nowhere near as good as DoD's story, which is actually saying something. And they're almost dangerously close in places: the story begins when a young person takes Indy for a drink and suggests an expedition- Indy is wary and resistant, but then baddies appear and Indy is forced to make a fast-paced escape through the crowded streets, and his being under suspicion from the authorities leads to him leaving the country... (only DoD does this bit better because he establishes what he needs in order to clear his name)
    KOTCS doesn't know what to do with Indy & Mutt's relationship- they sort of think each other are okay, they find out they're father and son, they go on thinking each other is okay (compare it to the really simple and strong growth that Indy and his Dad have in Crusade and it's nowhere near); it doesn't even really seem to know whether the existence of aliens is something it wants to tell you about in the first couple of minutes, halfway through or at the end (Indy is acting all amazed at the paintings of aliens in the temple at the climax, but we saw them back in Area 51- it's all a bit confused). I don't think Skull is bad; it's clearly still better than most adventure films and it is fun, but it's frustrating because if they'd just sorted the story out it could have been as good as the originals.

    The story is absolutely stronger in Dial than Skull… well, the characters are, for sure. Just not sure which works better as an ending. I think Dial has more meat to it in general mind you, and think Crusade might be the only one that doesn’t rush it’s ending mind you.

    With the ending… it just seems we aren’t there long enough to believe Indy would immediately *want* or think he *needs* to stay.

    Well it's less that he needs to see it to realise he wants to stay (he's been studying the ancients all his life: there's not much he needs to see to be convinced!), and more that he thinks there's nothing to go back to in his old life. And as you say, he's made Helena realise that she needs other people more than she thought she did, and so she has to bring him back to that and make him not give up. Really the idea of staying in the past isn't about wanting to stay with Archimedes and enjoy the first century: Indy is basically saying that he wants to die. And that's why I find that bit actually quite heart-breaking: I think PWB is great in that scene.

    It's one thing I got wrong when they were announcing the film: I was concerned that Sallah's appearance would be an old face turning up for the sake of it, but really his role was kind of essential at the end, because once you have that apartment filled with Teddy, Helena, Marion and Sallah and his grandkids, you have this big extended family that Indy didn't realise he had- and his and Sallah's long history together makes that work.
    JustJames wrote: »
    Heck. Maybe a map graphic on a calendar lol.

    Haha! Oh they definitely should have done that :D
    JustJames wrote: »
    I too am surprised anyone misses the ‘Helena is Indy’ bit, as it’s laid on pretty thick — she’s working for organised crime, picks up a kid sidekick, and has a problem with her dad resulting from his archaeological obsession. Shes appearing in her own personal Temple Of Doom opening, but we don’t see any more of it, because we’re following Indy. She’s not at the ‘it belongs in a museum’ stage yet, like Indy wasn’t until Crusade. Indy as her godfather is being what he never had, and never had a chance to be with Mutt it turns out. You could even argue he’s to an extent fulfilling something like his fathers role was in Crusade. I mean, he even gets shot and healed by his ‘child’. Destiny, a dial going in a circle. It’s almost clumsy in how obvious it is, but people still didn’t get, so I guess people just can’t follow subtext anymore in films, unless it suits them.

    Yes, the fact that she has her own Short Round and they met in exactly the same way would have been a big clue you'd think, but some folk just thought they were ripping ToD off rather than giving it any more thought.
    JustJames wrote: »
    It’s not subtle, with all the repeated elements showing the sixties isn’t so different than the fifties, or the forties, or the thirties, or even when he was a kid riding horses after trains.

    Heh. That's nice. It is quite pleasing that we've seen this one hero go from childhood to old age onscreen almost in real time, that is fairly unique.
  • JustJamesJustJames London
    Posts: 203
    mtm wrote: »
    JustJames wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    JustJames wrote: »
    The PWB character was pretty good, I thought — she’s Indy as he was in ToD, and she changes by the end. At no point does she actually undermine Indy either, and in the end it’s his influence on *her* that leads to her bringing him back.

    Thank you- I'm actually a bit confused by how many people miss that. This isn't a complex film, and yet you see folks thinking Indy was the sidekick to her, whereas this film is clearly entirely about Indy.
    JustJames wrote: »
    I do think the ending was rushed mind you. Needed a half hour stuck-in-the-past segment to breathe, maybe a campfire conversation. I would have been tempted to have Sallah go back and remain there too, and maybe end with Indy finding his resting place in the present day.

    I feel like the film is probably a bit too long as it is (the underwater bit feels perhaps the one to prune, but it is a nice change of scenery) but I think if I were going to change anything about the ending I might give Indy a bit more of a goal during the battle: like the Nazis had decided to drop a bomb on Syracuse and he had to stop them. Just something to punch it up a bit.
    JustJames wrote: »
    I’m not sure it’s a better capstone to the series than Skull (which is better than most remember) as it is more of a down ending than that — but maybe it wouldn’t have been if Shia’s career had taken a different turn. He would have been in the PWB characters arc instead, and I don’t think it would have worked as well as it did with Helena.

    Skull is a lot of fun but for me the story just doesn't work- it's nowhere near as good as DoD's story, which is actually saying something. And they're almost dangerously close in places: the story begins when a young person takes Indy for a drink and suggests an expedition- Indy is wary and resistant, but then baddies appear and Indy is forced to make a fast-paced escape through the crowded streets, and his being under suspicion from the authorities leads to him leaving the country... (only DoD does this bit better because he establishes what he needs in order to clear his name)
    KOTCS doesn't know what to do with Indy & Mutt's relationship- they sort of think each other are okay, they find out they're father and son, they go on thinking each other is okay (compare it to the really simple and strong growth that Indy and his Dad have in Crusade and it's nowhere near); it doesn't even really seem to know whether the existence of aliens is something it wants to tell you about in the first couple of minutes, halfway through or at the end (Indy is acting all amazed at the paintings of aliens in the temple at the climax, but we saw them back in Area 51- it's all a bit confused). I don't think Skull is bad; it's clearly still better than most adventure films and it is fun, but it's frustrating because if they'd just sorted the story out it could have been as good as the originals.

    The story is absolutely stronger in Dial than Skull… well, the characters are, for sure. Just not sure which works better as an ending. I think Dial has more meat to it in general mind you, and think Crusade might be the only one that doesn’t rush it’s ending mind you.

    With the ending… it just seems we aren’t there long enough to believe Indy would immediately *want* or think he *needs* to stay.

    Well it's less that he needs to see it to realise he wants to stay (he's been studying the ancients all his life: there's not much he needs to see to be convinced!), and more that he thinks there's nothing to go back to in his old life. And as you say, he's made Helena realise that she needs other people more than she thought she did, and so she has to bring him back to that and make him not give up. Really the idea of staying in the past isn't about wanting to stay with Archimedes and enjoy the first century: Indy is basically saying that he wants to die. And that's why I find that bit actually quite heart-breaking: I think PWB is great in that scene.

    It's one thing I got wrong when they were announcing the film: I was concerned that Sallah's appearance would be an old face turning up for the sake of it, but really his role was kind of essential at the end, because once you have that apartment filled with Teddy, Helena, Marion and Sallah and his grandkids, you have this big extended family that Indy didn't realise he had- and his and Sallah's long history together makes that work.
    JustJames wrote: »
    Heck. Maybe a map graphic on a calendar lol.

    Haha! Oh they definitely should have done that :D
    JustJames wrote: »
    I too am surprised anyone misses the ‘Helena is Indy’ bit, as it’s laid on pretty thick — she’s working for organised crime, picks up a kid sidekick, and has a problem with her dad resulting from his archaeological obsession. Shes appearing in her own personal Temple Of Doom opening, but we don’t see any more of it, because we’re following Indy. She’s not at the ‘it belongs in a museum’ stage yet, like Indy wasn’t until Crusade. Indy as her godfather is being what he never had, and never had a chance to be with Mutt it turns out. You could even argue he’s to an extent fulfilling something like his fathers role was in Crusade. I mean, he even gets shot and healed by his ‘child’. Destiny, a dial going in a circle. It’s almost clumsy in how obvious it is, but people still didn’t get, so I guess people just can’t follow subtext anymore in films, unless it suits them.

    Yes, the fact that she has her own Short Round and they met in exactly the same way would have been a big clue you'd think, but some folk just thought they were ripping ToD off rather than giving it any more thought.
    JustJames wrote: »
    It’s not subtle, with all the repeated elements showing the sixties isn’t so different than the fifties, or the forties, or the thirties, or even when he was a kid riding horses after trains.

    Heh. That's nice. It is quite pleasing that we've seen this one hero go from childhood to old age onscreen almost in real time, that is fairly unique.

    Oh I get why Indy wants to stay…but… for the rhythm of the movie you know? What’s there is great, but maybe it needed to be even closer in tone to the scene earlier on the boat. Some pause between the action climax and the character denouement, before we head into that nice Coda. I also think Helena shouldn’t have vanished off so fast. Maybe even have her get her own hat, symbolically speaking (maybe something in straw, like a Panama) and be part of that. With Sallah and his family it does nice call back to Indy’s rescue in Raiders, but also the village at the end of Temple. Again, a repeated motif that seems to have flown over the heads of people who really don’t know very much about Indy films, or films, beyond the most surface experience of once having sat mostly still through most of one at some point perhaps.
Sign In or Register to comment.