• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Indy 4 still as infuriating as ever

The only scene that I liked was the bomb test in that fake city, and Indy surviving by hiding inside a lead-lined refrigerator.

I liked it because it was so absurd that I laughed out loud when I first watched it.

The beginning of the movie has quite a few inspired moments, I think. From Indy being reintroduced from the trunk of a car, to having an entire action sequence take place in the warehouse from Raiders, to the creepy fake town, to the FBI interrogating Indy, to a bike chase through Indy's college...

But then it feels like everyone just gradually starts to lose interest in the story, and it becomes more and more lazy and uninspired as it goes on.
 
They talked about how his (The Knight's) brother died of extreme old age. This was because he crossed over the seal and the power of the Grail no longer kept him immortal.

Nothing in the film says that you need to keep drinking from the grail to remain immortal.

The knight got old and weak inside the temple. So based on that, the power isn't limited to the temple. So why did he get old? A) immortality is not possible with the grail, B) you need to get your frequent dosage of holy grail water to remain the same age forever, but he didn't take it.

Why does immortality mean you don't age? Immortality means you won't DIE. We don't know how the immortality actually plays out.

Exactly, the Fountain of Youth keeps you young, the grail just heals you. It does nothing about aging.
 
For what it's worth, I also enjoy KOTCS. I just need to watch it again to make a proper judgement on it. Perhaps it's finally time for me to pick up the box set, since a fifth film at this point seems unlikely.
 
As a typical summer adventure flick, I think the movie works fairly well, in that cheesy Mummy/Pirates movie kind of way. But for me the original movies were a lot more than that-- which is why they've always been acknowledged as some of the best action movies ever made.

And to me Indy 4 doesn't rise nearly to that level. I was hoping for more than just a competent, run of the mill summer blockbuster with this movie.

I mean, even for people who liked it, would you really put it on your list of favorite action movies ever? I kind of doubt it.
 
Even David Warner's St. John Talbut in STAR TREK 5 was more substantial and interesting than Professor Harold Oxley was in Indy 4. What a waste of someone of John Hurt's callibur. Just sit around and do nothing, or act Mentally Challenged in a Helen Keller kind of way. And the reason why his backstory is so interesting is actually because of RAIDERS ...

Oxley was a friend of Marion Ravenwood's father. He's a friend of the family who refused to have anything to do with Henry Jones, Jr., because of how he treated her. Whatever potential information was there, all of the Human Drama that would've added some interest to Oxley, for us to even care about him, in the first place ... all of that went bye-bye in favour of having John Hurt play The Village Idiot. And worst of all with that, it never had to be.

The expression of the Crystal Skull's effects could've been demonstrated through other means, or other people. Just to have Oxley confront Indy and get some of these past issues dealt with would've done so much, within the existing script, to just give the story some passion. And let Hurt shine, somewhat ... anyway, that's all ... that's nothing. This movie doesn't want to deal with anything profound. Even Mutt's true father is revealed in the most light-hearted manner possible.

In any event, the joke is that John Hurt demanded he be allowed to read the script first, before being cast for the role, which - apparently - Spielberg always had him in mind for (!!!). So he's sitting at home, with the guy who delivered it waiting on him, reading all this and after ALL of the lameness that this chore revealed, he goes ahead and accepts the part, anyway. Personally, I suspect this story of his is made up, because there's only one reason to have taken the part and that's a paycheque. The character and the story he's imbedded in are shite.
 
So do you age and become weak indefinitely, but you don't die? That makes no sense.

Why doesn't that make sense?
If anything, its cautionary. Be careful what you desire.

Why would the Knight NOT keep drinking if that would keep him in fighting form? That doesn't make any sense.
 
I quite enjoyed the movie.

Easy now, anyone who enjoyed the film is not welcome in this thread :p
Don't fret Haggis, I and some others stated the same.
IJ:KotCS is not nearly as bad as the haters make it seem. It's not w/o some flaws but it's overtly hated on for it's overall quality.

Well i am a massive 50 sci-fi fan, and Indy 4 just ticked all the right boxes for me with it, loved the Aliens, loved that 50s Saucer(That was fantastic), and i felt that Indy seemed right at home in the 1950 settings.

I just hope they make another and soon, i don't care what the subject is, as long as it has Indy, his whip, his quips, a few old charactors(Love to see Sallah back), and lots of actions, i will be there with me popcorn.:techman:
 
So do you age and become weak indefinitely, but you don't die? That makes no sense.

Why doesn't that make sense?
If anything, its cautionary. Be careful what you desire.

Why would the Knight NOT keep drinking if that would keep him in fighting form? That doesn't make any sense.
So in another 800 years, the knight would have lived as an extremely frail skeleton? And another 800 years later, he would have lived as a skeleton?

Aging means your cells stop dividing, die and don't get renewed. It's not just a cosmetic thing. You get weaker and weaker and die of old age for a reason. Being immortal, but still showing signs of aging makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.


You bring up a valid point. Let's assume the Knight did constantly drink from it. That means the Grail was NEVER about immortality, only prolonging life (and the Nazis were just wrong about it).
 
Sitting around in that room for 800 years, just to give some exposition? Wouldn't it have been a lot easier to leave a note?
 
Aging means your cells stop dividing, die and don't get renewed.
Really, so a newborn infant who just turned 1 year old didn't age at all?
You bring up a valid point. Let's assume the Knight did constantly drink from it. That means the Grail was NEVER about immortality, only prolonging life (and the Nazis were just wrong about it).
You have a weird idea of what immortality is. "It's not immortality, it's just prolonging life."

Immortality just means not dying of old age or natural (as in, nothing your body does on its own) causes. Rejuvination, eternal youth, and similar ideas are completely different concepts
 
So would he look like a dried up skeleton or rotten zombie not?

11aet5s.jpg
 
He'd look however he'd look. Physically he only looked a few decades older than when he became entombed, so it's obviously a much reduced process, and it might even have stopped as soon as he reached that physical age. Hell, he might not even have chosen to remain in the tomb until he was that age to begin with.

The point is, there wouldn't be a need for the terms "eternal youth" and "immortality" if they meant the same thing. Nothing about the Holy Grail included the phrase "makes you young again." All it does is heal you and keep you from dying of natural causes.
 
So it does keep him at the same age at some point, and he does not get physically older? That is eternal youth. Staying at the same age. No matter if it's the 20s, 30, or 80s. Staying at the same age is the whole concept. In Insurrection, they all stopped aging in their 40s, for instance.
 
Maybe, maybe not. There wasn't enough information given.

But of the information that was given, he was alive far longer than he should have thanks to the Holy Grail.

People would go insane just to get an extension of 20 years for their life.
 
LAST CRUISADE does keep trying to underscore that success in finding The Holy Grail is a Pyrrhic victory. Whilst I do not really like using wikipedia, as a source of knowledge, it may help the discussion: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_Grail

There are many myths and legends around the world that were far more exotic - and interesting, frankly - than The Cup of Christ. Which doesn't even factor into Christianity (at least Catholocism). Although, there are many artifacts around the world which are claimed to be associated with Jesus. Even the Shroud of Turin, though storied, is not a Miracle Factory. It's just curious to me why George Lucas would insist upon this particular item as Indy's next find.
 
People would go insane just to get an extension of 20 years for their life.

Not if it meant spending those 20 years doing nothing except guarding a bunch of cups.
Which they didn't know until they found out about it. The point, even if it was just 20 years, the Nazis would still have a hard-on for getting it.

It's just curious to me why George Lucas would insist upon this particular item as Indy's next find.
You mean besides the fame and popularity of it which trumps pretty much any other relic?
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top