[Just your average movie goer]

Thank you, Civilian, for saving my work for me. Mike, Indiana Jones wasn't supposed to be James Bond - that was a stupid decision made by yours truly, George Lucas.

they either have to get married or she dies in some Thugge cult ceremony.

You're forgetting something there, Mike - Temple of Doom didn't need to be/shouldn't have been made. See here.

However, I didn't know that Karen Allen had a hard time with the snakes. I always thought the fact that she left was Lucas' silly call.

[Mike Mac from NYU]

To civilian


Actually, this shocks me because your argument is actually the weakest one I 've heard from you. Usually your arguments have a lot of foundation in them. This one doesn;t

1. The relationship has to go somewhere! Oh no, that would be character development. This is bad for movies why? Add to which I don't think it was horrible to have Leia move more into an action role in JEDI, after the supporting role she played in the previous two films. I think there are places for women in action movies, outside the LARA CROFT genre. I don't think they need to be expendable.

The Indiana Jones series is NOT a trilogy in the purest sense of the word. Like James Bond, the Indiana Jones series is are a collection of individual stories. Continuity is not a part of the Indiana Jones series as it is in the James Bond series.

Once Indiana Jones finds the ark/sacred stones/the grail the story is over.
On to the next treasure hunt.

Once James Bond deafeats the bad guys plan....the story is over.
On to the next villain and his next dastardly plan.

The James Bond/Indiana Jones series are not the Star Wars series.

Indiana Jones is not on a quest to defeat Belloq in order to be the greatest archaelogist in a story spanning three movies.

The ONLY continuity needed in the Indiana Jones series..............is Indiana Jones HIMSELF!!!!!!

Just as the only continuity needed in the Bond series..............is James Bond.


2. What else is there to say about MARION?????????? Keeping Marion for the next movies would makes sense if they never kissed or showed their feelings in the first movie. Then I guess you could carry the romantic tension all the way into 2nd movie with them resolving it in the end. Then maybe in the third movie have them marry, then end it with Marion falling in the land of the crescent moon.
That would work except......................Marion and Indy have already kissed, had sex and gotten together intimately ALL IN THE FIRST MOVIE!!. MARION is a love interest as much as a sidekick You being such a great writer should know that a "love interest" can only last so long before you have to either have the character marry, die or get written off in the story. And to me the thought of Indy being weighed down with a permanent love makes will make his character less adventurous.

It' would be like given Sherlock Holmes a permanent girlfriend.

3. Speaking of Sherlock Holmes........the only way the sidekick angle works is if Marion is the "Watson" to Indiana Jones "Sherlock". The only problem with this is that Watson never got romantically engaged with Sherlock {altough some "scholars" may dispute that }. That angle just doesn;t work with a female character. It does work with Short Round & Indiana's father though!!

4. Is Marion and Indy's romance really that integral to the Raiders of the Lost Ark story???????? . What drives Raiders is the character of Indian Jones and the intensity of the search for the ARK. You could make the argument that Belloq, Sallah and Marcus Brody are just as importanat to the movie.

Again. Karen Allen does a nice job in Raiders........but she really is just an OBLIGATORY HOLLYWOOD LOVE INTEREST for the movie.

You could make a case that the movie still would have been successful.........if her character was removed!! Think about it civ.

ACTUALLY civ, you surprise me in that I kind of think that too many times movies force LOVE interests in the storyl, when in most cases they could do without them.


5. You know if you really think about it..........in real life James Bond and Indiana Jones wouldn't have permanent female relationships. They would have brief fleeting affairds with women

1. Their 100% involved in their work to an almost obsessive degree.

2. There travelling all over the world to god knows where and coming back at such odd times. A problem that real archeologist DO have in their relations.

3. Considering the danger of their work, most women are probably a liability to them.

In reality..........most real life spies and archeologists ARE the type of people who move from relationship to relationship.

NO BULLSHIT!!!!! Think about it.

[Mike Mac from NYU]

movie. Having Marion return in an INDIANA JONES movie would be like having Marion return in an INDIANA JONES. Indiana Jones is NOT James Bond. Flash Gordon stuck with Dale Arden through every series, and it didn't diminish his character. Tarzan had Jane, etc.

A comic book is different from a movie in so many ways.

In a comic book, especially one like, FLASH GORDON, artwork is so difficult to express "unique faces"....that if you changed FLASH GORDON's girlfriend every couple books.........I'm not sure that the audience would know that it's a different woman.

I mean how many times can you change a girls hair color?????????

Character continuity IS VITAL in comic book, because you can't draw distinct faces.

It would be like changing Batman's butler every issue. Nobody would pick up on the fact that it isn't the same guy every issue.

[Mike Mac from NYU]

movie. Having Marion return in an INDIANA JONES movie would be like having Marion return in an INDIANA JONES. Indiana Jones is NOT James Bond. Flash Gordon stuck with Dale Arden through every series, and it didn't diminish his character. Tarzan had Jane, etc.

And if I remember correctly....................wasn't a majority of the plot of FLASH GORDON about fighting Ming the Merciless????????


That's a continuity story in that the the ultimate plot of the series is for FLASH GORDON to defeat Ming and rescue earth.

[Mike Mac from NYU]

movie. Having Marion return in an INDIANA JONES movie would be like having Marion return in an INDIANA JONES. Indiana Jones is NOT James Bond. Flash Gordon stuck with Dale Arden through every series, and it didn't diminish his character. Tarzan had Jane, etc.

I'm also willing to bet in the FLASH GORDON serials that they never showed THAT much romance between Dale Arden and FLASH.

[Mike Mac from NYU]

You're forgetting something there, Mike - Temple of Doom didn't need to be/shouldn't have been made. See here.

But it has.

It's been made.

I liked it as did several other rational sane people on planet earth

I have watched a 1,000 times and will watch it another thousand times or as many as humanly possible.

You've watched this movie before and at some point you DID like it. Now over the years you hate for whatever reason. And will not watch it again.

That's cool with me.

Absolutely NONE of the reasons you and civilian gave me TOD and Return of the Jedi being a bad movie is even REMOTELY VALID!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If given enough time you guys could probably rationalize a reason why eating strawberry POP TARTS is bad.

Just a I could probably rationalize why licking the rim off your toilet bowl is a good idea.

PEOPLE HATE TO BE WRONG.

That's why if my TOD and ROTJ arguments made sense to civilian or yourselft .............YOU WOULD NEVER ADMIT TO IT!!

Just as if your TOD AND ROTJ arguments made sense to me...............I WOULD NEVER ADMIT TO IT


*******IF Civilian two, ever admitted to be wrong about something........I think that would be a great loss to this forum.


The same mind that joined this forum out of a rationalized hatred of the PT films.

Is the same one that loved Temple of Doom and Return of the Jedi.

There are probably several reasons for me to be put into a straight jacket {my wife can think of a 100 at the top of her head }, I think loving Temple of Doom and Return of the Jedi will not be one of those reasons.

[Mike Mac from NYU]

If given enough time you guys could probably rationalize a reason why eating strawberry POP TARTS is bad.

I swear to god CIVILIAN & JYAMG!!! IF YOU GUYS SAY YOU HATE STRAWBERR POP TARTS.................THEMS FIGHTING WORDS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Mike Mac from NYU]

You can tell it's a slow night for me.


With all the messages and what.


Damn, it's really is hard to sleep before 10 pm these days.......

[Jordan]

I enjoy watching female action heroes. And it has nothing to do with sex appeal. Call me strange, but I've never been turned on or really aroused by any female action role.

Lara Croft was sexy sure. But with pornography and ones own imagination, female action heroes in comparison are really conservative.

One of my all time favorite JEDI knights is Ballistia, from KOTOR. She was both complex and intriguing. I found her background story the only one worth while.

I bet what I put sounds hypocritical since my avatar is that of Kate Hudson. But she is not an action star, she's a ROMANTIC COMEDIAN. Romantic Comedies are one of my guilty little pleasures.

This post has been edited by Jordan: 07 September 2004 - 09:25 PM

[Madam Corvax]

Ooops, Mike, those must have been really exceptional drinks! Six rants in a row (pun intended).

I would have never thougt that ROMANCE sparks so much controversy. To me it is easy. I see if I would like to swap places with the heroine - if I do, the romance works for me. I would never swap places with Kate Capshaw. She is just ridiculous to me.

And I hate your comment that "most women are probably a liability to them". That is exactly why I love gals like Leia and Marion (and Eowyn), because they can fire their blasters/guns/wield swords and stand up to their men.

If you perceive women as whinging, complaining and "being a liability", then yes, TOD is the film for you. Proves your theory.

I am just a tad bit disappointed, Mike.

[Just your average movie goer]

Holy shit, Mike! Six posts in a row... let's see, a lot of exclamation marks, overuse of capital letters and some angry faces (maybe? I forget).

Not a lot of coherent thought though... which suggests that we've struck a nerve with you. Well, damn that was easy. I know just how to get you fired up, should I ever feel like it.

Your argument against continuing the romance between Indiana Jones and Marion is weak. Here's an argument for her inclusion in the sequels - being convincing and true to the characters. James Bond wasn't - that's fine. That's the James Bond serial. Indiana Jones doesn't have to copy the formula of the James Bond serial and it would have been better if it didn't.

Indiana Jones and Marion clearly had a strong connection and they clearly cared for each other deeply. A Bond girl for the most part is just some window dressing to hide the shitty plot.

I won't go on and on (because I don't feel like it right now) but I must respond to something you said right away -

You've watched this movie before and at some point you DID like it. Now over the years you hate for whatever reason. And will not watch it again.

Mike - I used to like Return of the Jedi when I was a kid. But I NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, EVER liked The Temple of Doom. I hated it with a passion the first and last time I saw it and have no desire ever to watch even a second of it again - unless it should be given the MST3K treatment.

I swear that this the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

[Jordan]

I don't get it. Indiana Jones is not good viewing any longer. For me it did not pass the test of time. It was good when I first watched it, but I was young. I've seen them all a handful of times since then and I can't say that I'm impressed. The only parts of the movies that I find captivating are when Jones talks with his collegues at the school just prior to taking off on the adventure. They sum up the story line and it gives a sense of "oh boy things to come". But the things are never all that great (test of time).

As for Jones not keeping the same lover. I agree. People don't want to see a married couple going out and looking for treasure, all the while dodging bullets and arrows. That kind of thing is guilty of those mid '80's TV seires that ran on BBC, and now are available on Video at your local library for free. You know the ones, right? "Mr & Mrs Whamelston: Episode 2- The Dagger from the grave" ( I made that one up, but can you see it being real?)

I've seen Jones enough to state the following

A ) The love interests never took center stage.

B ) The films had terrible editing.

I've caught more glitches on JOnes than any other series or film.

[Just your average movie goer]

Well I don't think I can dissuade you from your opinion, Jordan. But I will say that I strongly disagree with you... on Raiders of the Lost Ark. As for the other movies, The Last Crusade can't stand the test of time and The Temple of Doom can't stand the test of an initial viewing.

[Jordan]

What did you not like about Last Crusade? It was the only one I remember seeing in the cinema.

[Mike Mac from NYU]

Holy shit, Mike! Six posts in a row... let's see, a lot of exclamation marks, overuse of capital letters and some angry faces (maybe? I forget).

Not a lot of coherent thought though... which suggests that we've struck a nerve with you. Well, damn that was easy. I know just how to get you fired up, should I ever feel like it.

Your argument against continuing the romance between Indiana Jones and Marion is weak. Here's an argument for her inclusion in the sequels - being convincing and true to the characters. James Bond wasn't - that's fine. That's the James Bond serial. Indiana Jones doesn't have to copy the formula of the James Bond serial and it would have been better if it didn't.

You didn't read my posts fully........did you.