Who cares?
This was my point:
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
I just watched Raiders of the Lost Ark for the first time, and I'm pretty sure I hate Indiana Jones
- Thread starter Deleted member 42
- Start date
Who cares?
This was my point:
OP
OP
That's clearly marked as him being a massive POS for continually doing that
I'm looking forward toward the conversations between our children.
"Stop being so woke!! You can't apply our 2049 standards to Bayformers!!! Racism was perfectly normal back than. They even made a serial rapist US President. You have to see them in the context of their time!!!"
I just hope your kids gonna be the shitty ones.
Very nice empty statement. Raiders of the Lost Ark is still seen as the apex of the action/adventure genre, that many films today (such as the MCU) still constantly reference and homage.
May you please point out how the film hasn't "aged" well? Am I supposed to feel sorry for the Nazis that Indy kills, or the fact that he's trying to recover the ark from them?
Touché. I will concede I seem to have missed the transmutation point when Raiders went from the multiplex squealing-fan fave of my childhood, to being considered an academic exemplar of the scriptwriting art. Perhaps I've taken it a bit for granted that Raiders's flaws were more forgiven than unrecognized.
But then, this is Era, where sacred cows are considered more sacrosanct and unassailable than they might be elsewhere.
You must have been one of the people complaining about Wolf of Wall Street. "Why isnt Jordan Belfort in jail? Why is he still succesfful! Why isn't the movie doing the moralizing for me!"
*enters bad guy lair*
"Yikes! This seems problematic..." - famous catchphrase
my kids would whoop your kids asses
You could try reading the OP/thread.
People can still have fun watching them, but they're full of sexist behavior, creepy implications (adult Indiana having a sexual relationship with child Marion), caricaturing foreign people and cultures, romanticizing the type of "archaeology" that steals artifacts from other cultures (when Indiana isn't destroying everything), etc.
Here's a review of Raiders that I would recommend reading. The Gunslinger this would be a good read for you as well.
While Indiana may be seen as morally dubious in some regards, he is still the hero and that is best established by the presence of his 'shadowy reflection' in the form of rival archaeologist Dr René Belloq (Paul Freeman). Both Indiana and Belloq are raiders of ancient artefacts, except Belloq prefers to let Indiana do the work and then turns up afterwards to claim the prize. Both are pursuing the Ark of the Covenant on behalf of foreign powers and both would prefer to keep it for themselves, but Belloq is working for the Nazis and Indiana is working for the Allies, specifically the American government. Belloq wants the Ark to harness its power himself while Indiana wants it for its historical and cultural significance. Belloq seeks personal glory and power while Indiana wants to improve humanity's understanding of the past. It's individualism versus the common good.
Indiana may be yet another white, male hero – a character-type that is overrepresented in mainstream cinema to the point that it is often mistaken for the norm – but the film reflects a mostly enlightened attitude towards women and other ethnicities. Marion Ravenwood (Karen Allen) may be the only female character in the film, but she is for the most part far from being a mere love interest or damsel in distress. Like she says to Indiana, 'You're gonna get more than you bargained for. I'm your goddamn partner!' And indeed she is, at least in the first half of the film where she's introduced literally drinking a man under the table, going on to shoot and punch the villains alongside Indiana, and even saving his life. Later in the film when she does require rescuing she remains tough, cunning and spirited. She's assertive with Indiana to the point that their eventual love scene is preceded by her smashing him in the chin with a mirror and then getting impatient with him for complaining about how much it hurts when she dresses his wounds. The final punch line of the scene is that while she is ready to go, he falls asleep.
Similarly, despite having a character who steals cultural artefacts as the hero, Raiders is reasonably progressive towards other cultures. The Hovitos tribe at the start of the film are a threat to Indiana, but only because they have been unknowingly duped by Belloq. In the scenes set in Cairo it is established that a characteristic of the Nazis, whom Belloq is working with, is to shanghai the local population into working for them. The film therefore casts the villains as colonialist-type figures, who are the real threat to Indiana, not the local population working for them. After Indiana and Marion, the other major character in the film is Sallah (John Rhys-Davies) an Egyptian excavator. Sallah is privileged in the film for his knowledge, bravery, resourcefulness and kindness, and like Marion saves Indiana's life. A smaller but significant role is Captain Katanga (George Harris) who also protects Indiana at a crucial moment. Raiders never goes out of its way to fly the flag of racial diversity, but in a film where the villains are a group notorious for their racial hatred it is notable that so many of the supporting cast that are portrayed as heroic are from a broad mix of ethnic backgrounds.
OP
OP
People hate Shakespeare in Love nowadays, but it's a brilliant screenplay. I mean, really really brilliant. I'm not surprised to see it high on a list made by writers, since it carters specifically to writer types.
Also, it's by Tom Stoppard, one of the leading playwrights of our time. It shows.
You dissing it kinda gives away the game of you having any real perspective on what makes a good screenplay.
*uproarious laughter turns to deep, full-throated sobbing*
Shakespeare in Love is a fine screenplay, I agree. In fact, I personally hold it in much higher regard than that of Raiders myself.
However, fine as SiL is, like Raiders I still don't believe it belongs in the top 100, much less anywhere near #28 or so. I can think of far too many superior screenplays to grant it such an undeserving place.
That's fine for you, but they are both clearly well-regarded, which was the original statement. That WGA list certainly skews toward popular movies, but they all do seem to be pretty great screenplays as well. I can't say they haven't omitted some genius ones that ought to be higher or not. But I don't see the issues with either screenplay. I recall seeing SiL and falling in love with the screenplay immediately. I'd certainly rate it very high on my own list.
Pretty sure there was a part in the movie where Nazis wanted to use the power of the Ark for world domination.
if spielberg had his way indy would be a real shithead. he was leaning more towards the drunk womanizer angle but lucas pushed back
maybe i need to give the trilogy a re-watch but imo he's your run of the mill adventure hero. i don't think any movie sunk its teeth into what was going on beneath that artifice. he's just a guy you see doing cool stuff
maybe i need to give the trilogy a re-watch but imo he's your run of the mill adventure hero. i don't think any movie sunk its teeth into what was going on beneath that artifice. he's just a guy you see doing cool stuff
Let's say if they had ranked SiL at #42 and Raiders at #100, I would have taken less issue. I still wouldn't agree, though, cuz said omitted genius screenplays. I mean Rod Serling--whom has never gotten his due as a writer for the big screen, and was not very prolific there besides--alone wrote four film scripts (Patterns, Requiem for a Heavyweight, Seven Days in May, Planet of the Apes) that were all superior than either SiL or Raiders.
Man, people these days want their characters to be boring good people, who have no personality and have to be non offensive.
People need to stop applying 2019 standards to previous decades. That's not how the world was back then. My dad was 19/20 years old when he met my mum who was 14 in the 70's.
People need to stop applying 2019 standards to previous decades. That's not how the world was back then. My dad was 19/20 years old when he met my mum who was 14 in the 70's.
Last edited:
I think you may have missed the point I was trying to get at. I mean it as a reference to the argument that people make a la "boy, people sure do suck these days. can't make a movie in this day and age like Blazing Saddles without someone getting upset" as a way to justify saying slurs in public.
Blazing Saddles was specifically critiquing attitudes toward black people leading up to and in the immediate aftermath of the civil rights movement. Of course it wouldn't be made today, because the conditions that it was commenting on have changed in the last 40-odd years since it was made.
Are they more gonna be Trumps, just in shittier type or is their gonna be some artistry involved and we gonna get a Jud Sueß II out of it, which future historians will judge within the context of its time?
Do white idols really need to be racist and sexist to be entertaining?
I hope this wasn't offensive to your 2019 sensibilities.
Last edited:
You mean the scene that became a meme before memes were a thing? I love the laziness. I can relate.
Godfather sets up Michael Corleone as a good man who becomes a monster
Indy is set up as the hero to aspire to be and cheer for, who gets the girl and saves the day
Totally forgot about that! That got a huge laugh in the theater.
Personally I want the Arc of the Covenant
Sure it melts faces but I could save it.
I'm coming for Super Mario next!
No the DX TANK DID!1
An immediate escalation to violence
Might makes right, the textbook belief of the colonialist
Indy would be proud.
I do not remember this, but I read it a long time ago.
Regardless, we're judging the film, not a novel that has long since been retconned (e.g. Marion's age).
OP
OP
OP
OP
I'm not a mod
I am a dumbass
I can also clearly recognize Indy in Raiders is not for me and still like the movie
They threatened my family!
(Or we had a vote on the next movie to watch and they picked Raiders, whichever works)
Imagine unironically using the term "woke" in a disparaging way.
