Adam Hughes' KOTCS Review

[pjam]

I think it's all about degrees: how much you "dislike" something varies. As I said from my initial viewing, I really enjoyed KOTCS, but, if I had my druthers, there are things I would have cut or changed, etc, like many of us.

I also said I think I prefer Skull to Crusade, and I believe that will remain even stronger over time and repeat viewings. Crusade has some great banter between Connery and Ford and that's about all its got. Skull has a lot more "stuff", so I think it will be more enjoyable to watch many times over, as you've said.

But I believe Adam's points will remain -- his "dislaikes" pretty much cover all the weak spots in Skull and no amount of repeat viewings will make them terrific; just more palatable at least. Like a habit.

Anyway, have a blast you two!!!

I'll be interested to hear Adam's second viewing take as well. For me, what bothers me about any Movie rarely goes away with repeated viewings. It can become more acceptable or irritable with repeat viewings but over time it seems to me the more it may change the more it stays the same.

I felt a certain way when I first saw TOD, TLC and feel pretty much the same about those films today.

 

[IrishJedi]

I'm moving on.

Wait! You can't move on yet! I just spent 30 minutes on the following:

https://www.sideshowcollectors.com/forums/showthread.php?t=35315

Have a great time with Adam tonight, btw. Sounds like fun.

Thanks, bro!

 

[Darth Caedus]

As I stated before, actually having an alien and his flying saucer
show up. Imagine if, in Raiders' climax, when the Ark is opened, and
an old man with a beard and a robe stepped out, and zapped all the
Nazis with lasers from his eyes. THAT'S how intrusive I found the
alien.

That would have been awesome

 

[pjam]

Wait! You can't move on yet! I just spent 30 minutes on the following:

https://www.sideshowcollectors.com/forums/showthread.php?t=35315





Thanks, bro!

Doesn't change what I know. Sorry Bro. Enjoy the Show!

 

[Viking28]

I like Adam's review but I've always loved LC, I always thought that was great movie. But why does repeat viewing have to make a movie better? I thought Sith was a good movie first seeing it (it helped that I read the book), but now I just skip to the next scene or skim a part and take a couple deep breaths saying oookkkk.

 

[nash]

Seems they should have added a buy one get one free when you purchase your first ticket to KOTCS. either that or, locked you in the theater until the movie played twice. Imagine how many favorable reviews it would then garner

 

[EVILFACE]

Note: Adam wrote that review on Opening Day and has only still seen the movie once.

I cant stand The Sound of Music, and multiple viewings ain't going to change my opinion of it.

 

[Trevolver]

I think Adam's seen the flick a couple of times.

I enjoyed the review! I can't disagree with any of it. While I really do enjoy this movie now, it just feels like a bunch of good fun parts intermingled with a lot of odd ones. I still feel like it was the thin plot of a video game. but hey...I love a good Indy video game!

Trev

 

[LOTRFan]

Seems they should have added a buy one get one free when you purchase your first ticket to KOTCS. either that or, locked you in the theater until the movie played twice. Imagine how many favorable reviews it would then garner

Say uncle, say uncle .....

 

[Khev]

Isn't that the point though? You don't know exactly what these beings are. Sure, they're spirits of some sort that seem a little grumpy about their roof being taken off, but - as the review said - Charlton Heston did not step out in white robes and start spouting exposition on how you are not meant to disturb the Ark of the Covenant etc etc etc before smiting all within smiting distance.

Neither did the aliens. We don't know anything about who they are, where they came from ("another dimension" is anything but specific), what their intentions are and what they're capable of. We don't even know if the disapproving look the one alien gives is because he wanted to give Spalko what she wanted but knew her brain couldn't handle it or if because he flat out wanted to kill her.

If you read about the Ark of the Covenant in the Bible you know that if you touched the Ark you died. The Bible doesn't say anything about ghosts or laserbeams but that's obviously how the movie wanted it portrayed. The Nazis messed with the ark, several of them touched it, they all died. There really isn't any "mystery" left to ponder.

After Crystal Skull the audience is left to wonder, along with Indy, just what the heck those beings were all about. I think that's cool, but it *does* have parallels with the weak X-Files movie, and I can see how that would put a number of people off. I thought Crystal Skull handled it much better than X-Files but obviously many disagree.

 

[Darklord Dave]

As much as I liked the Saucer shot I would agree that they gave us too much about the aliens. We didn't need to know that they unequivocally came from another dimension instead of outer space. We didn't need to know that the glowy thing was a portal to that dimension. We didn't need to see the Crystal skeletons become a fleshed alien. (13 skeletons = 1 fleshy, conscious alien?) And we didn't need to see ET fry Spalko's brain.

 

[screamingmetal]

As much as I liked the Saucer shot I would agree that they gave us too much about the aliens. We didn't need to know that they unequivocally came from another dimension instead of outer space. We didn't need to know that the glowy thing was a portal to that dimension. We didn't need to see the Crystal skeletons become a fleshed alien. (13 skeletons = 1 fleshy, conscious alien?) And we didn't need to see ET fry Spalko's brain.

Exactly my thoughts, they explained far too much. But I do think the main villain needed a notable ending, not the one with the alien, but something that stands out.

 

[LOTRFan]

Exactly my thoughts, they explained far too much. But I do think the main villain needed a notable ending, not the one with the alien, but something that stands out.

Lucas had some leftover CG he didn't use on Grievous.

 

[barbelith]

And we didn't need to see ET fry Spalko's brain.

Did we need to see God fry Belloq's?

 

[IrishJedi]

People are indeed pretty selective.

 

[Darklord Dave]

Did we need to see God fry Belloq's?

Ah, but the ark stuff was much more ambiguous - we didn't have Ox the explainer tell us what we saw after we saw it.

 

[LOTRFan]

Ah, but the ark stuff was much more ambiguous - we didn't have Ox the explainer tell us what we saw after we saw it.

Audiences are dumber now.

 

[hairlesswookiee]

the movie was crap... thats all to it. i won't watch it again, and i'd prefer to think it didn't happen.

 

[Khev]

Ah, but the ark stuff was much more ambiguous - we didn't have Ox the explainer tell us what we saw after we saw it.

The Grail Knight did a heck of a lot more explaining than Ox did. Did you have the same problems with Last Crusade?

 

[Darklord Dave]

The Grail Knight did a heck of a lot more explaining than Ox did. Did you have the same problems with Last Crusade?

I didn't have that much of a problem with either one - I liked LC and KotCS about equally as a 2nd tier Indy film. But I just saw LC and don't recall the Grail knight explaining that much. Indy figured out which cup, he noticed the water without being told and he knew not to drink from the wrong cup. I don't think the knight told him any of these things.