Mandatory Indy DVD thread.

[Layabout]

There is no way that Raiders is not a classic film. Here is why. INDIANA JONES is a HOUSEHOLD name. Everyone knows who indy is. Everyone can recognise the sillouette of indy. Raiders started the Franchise, so therefore they must have done something right.

I bought the DVD collection yesterday. I am going to sit down and watch all of them in order. But I still dislike temple alot.

And I'd just like to say I hated Titanic. And I hate James Cameron. In the same way I hate Jerry Bruckheimer. Most of their films are full of crap, with a few very small exceptions...

And SSH, if you like raiders, stop arguing with DG, it makes you look stupid.

[DGMacphee]

bspeers:
I did say both the quotes you mentioned, it is true.

And yes, SSH's argument counters my opinion of Lucas as a talented writer.

However, I still maintain my belief that his writing in past films show his brilliance (American Grafitti and THX-1138 as examples).

SSH, can counter this argument, sure (and his point of view has as much merit as mine or anyone elses) -- But I'm not going to immediately jump out of my chair and scream "YUO AERS RIGHT, LUCAS AERS TEH HACK WRITER!!1!"

I acknowledge Lucas' recent Star Wars films are poorly written -- However, that doesn't mean his talent suddenly disappears.

BTW, don't you find it ironic that you of all people are calling me a "masturbatory intellectual poofter fuck"?  

It's like a blind man telling another blind man his eyesight is fucked.

Anyway, it's great to see you again on you weekly midnight troll, Blake -- But next time you call someone a pompus arsehole, don't sound like a pompus arsehole.  





And just to show I can accept another person's argument, blake, I typed a response to Quintaros' post, but my McAfee's update wouldn't let me post it before -- So, here it is:

The reason I dispute the Oscars as a factor in whether a film is classic or not is that Oscars are handed out within a year of the films release. A films status as a classic takes time to be established. Most of your other points on the list were valid because they illustrated that 20 years later Raiders was still in the filmgoing publics mind.

I agree totally here.

I only brought the Oscar up as a point of historical significance.

The Oscars may not indicate high quality, but they are voted by people in the industry -- Thus, the nods for Raiders cement it's place in history among the many films voted industry sepcialists.

These people regarded it highly at the time -- Thus, it's historical significance plays a part in proving the classic status of the film.

I think its funny that you describe Titanic as an "over-produced, mass-marketed piece of drivel" and then defend the Oscars. Maybe its just me but I think the Academy Awards ceremony is the most over-produced piece of drivel coming out of the film industry.

Welcome to Hollywood -- leave your shoes at the door!  

[SSH]

bspeers:
BTW, don't you find it ironic that you of all people are calling me a "masturbatory intellectual poofter fuck"?  

He didn't. He was saying that that is what you called me. Maybe you should make an appointment with the optician because you seem to have trouble reading other people posts (and your own, although you have now finally admitted that you said taht Lucas is a talented writer after denying it 3 or 4 times).

And on the subject of arguing, every time I have made a point that you have either called it pedantic, made a personal insult or pretended that you were saying the same thing and tried to make it out that I was arguing for the sake of arguing. I really don't appreciate this, and so this is my final words in this thread. Now you can post something really inflamatory to try and bait me...

[Barcik]

So obviously we're not going to reach a common point here, but no worries.  I know that for some people it's just not as enjoyable to watch older films, because they seem more dated, and there's nothing I or anyone else can do about that.  And again, I know what you mean because there are movies like that for me, but there are some, such as the aforementioned films, that to me just never lose that appeal.

Of course we are not going to reach a common point, I am well aware of it. You like this movie, and I am fully cool with that. I am not trying to tell you that it is crap and you shouldn't watch it.
I don't think it's dated because it is old. There are numerous old movies I like, such as Planet of the Apes, Apocalypse Now and 2001. I just think that there is nothing in Indy I haven't seen before.

I think all the above (the talent, the awards, the top listings, the top reviews, the memorabilia, the homage to past films, the off-shoots, etc) proves Raiders of the Lost Ark is a classic film!

I use the term 'classic' in a slightly different manner than the usual. For me, a classic is a film that is timeless - it cannot look out-dated. Such as 2001, Brazil or Pulp Fiction. However, other movies I like such as LotR, Matrix (the first) or my favourite action flick Die Hard are bound to promise nothing new sooner or later. And as you can understand from the "Barcik definition", very few adventure/action movies are list of classics.

[Las Naranjas]

Well, it never intended to have anything that had never been seen before. It never pretended to be anything but unoriginal and derivative. It does do what it intends to do very well, but it seems harsh to condemn them for an a lack of originality when to try to include some would belie the entire point of reviving the adventure style of the old cliff hanger serials.


But then again, Pulp Fiction doesn't pretend to be anything but derivative (like all Tarintino's work), but it's granted timeless status...

[remixor]

But then again, Pulp Fiction doesn't pretend to be anything but derivative (like all Tarintino's work), but it's granted timeless status...

Pulp Fiction is rather different.  It is not derivative in the same sense that Indiana Jones (or Kill Bill) is.  Rather, it takes influences from various genres and creates a film that is in many ways unique.  The screenplay is also written with such a degree of skill that it does not come off simply as a throwback, but as a solid work in its own right.  There's a difference between taking significant inspiration and being derivative.

[Las Naranjas]

I think it's a case of splitting hairs, unless I was to unleash a horde of sophistries.

[DGMacphee]

He didn't. He was saying that that is what you called me. Maybe you should make an appointment with the optician because you seem to have trouble reading other people posts (and your own, although you have now finally admitted that you said taht Lucas is a talented writer after denying it 3 or 4 times).

Bspeers said:
"You seem to be unable to accept that someone can challenge your method of argumentation without either a. disagreeing in principal or b. being a masturbatory intellectual poofter fuck."

I probably misinterpreted it as:

"You seem to be unable to accept without either a. disagreeing in principal or b. being a masturbatory intellectual poofter fuck"

However, I didn't call you a "masturbatory intellectual poofter fuck", SSH -- That's taking what I actually said to extremes.

I did call you a pseudo-intellectual, in the sense you seemed to be arguing with very minor aspects of my list for the sake try to sound smart (After all, you did say you were trying to "mock my assertions").

Yes, they were very pedantic points you argued.

No, I didn't unjustly insult your personal stature (i.e. I didn't call you a retard).

And, we are actually arguing the same thing, because we think Raiders is a good movie.

You're arguing that I think it became a classic because so many critics like it, when I'm not even saying anything of the sort.

All I said is it's a classic and here's my proof why (i.e all these high ranking people think it's a classic, therefore it adds weight).

I'm not arguing any cause and effect.

I could argue the personal reasons why I like it, but I prefered to use something a little more concrete than my subjective opinion.

We have a miscommunication here.

So, I'm not going to 'bait you' or any of that -- But perhaps I just need time out for a while, so I might take a little leave from the forums for a week or so.

I appologise to bspeers for saying he sounded like a 'pompus arsehole' -- I misread his 'masturbatory intellectual poofter fuck' comment. (In all fairness, we've both called each other names like that in the past, so it's only natural to assume so).

I hope this clears up everything

I use the term 'classic' in a slightly different manner than the usual. For me, a classic is a film that is timeless - it cannot look out-dated. Such as 2001, Brazil or Pulp Fiction. However, other movies I like such as LotR, Matrix (the first) or my favourite action flick Die Hard are bound to promise nothing new sooner or later. And as you can understand from the "Barcik definition", very few adventure/action movies are list of classics.

I dig the Barcik definition!

[Matt Goble]

I've come into this thread a bit late, but i couldn't see a response to MODs / Chrille's question about the set being censored.

As far as I'm aware the UK version of Temple of Doom has about 1.30 cut from it - the heart through the man's chest etc.

Region 1 is uncut.  Europe Region 2 may be uncut.  UK Region 2 is definitely cut.

Best price I've seen is £28 for region 1 from DVDSoon.com

Hope that helps

"Snakes, I hate Snakes"

[TheYak]

One of the perks of my job.  I show up for my 2nd day of work and get handed a new copy of the Indy boxed set.  I have no idea what the MSRP is on that thing, but it kicks ass to get free shit from work.

[Layabout]

I envy you Yakspit. You lucky SOB!!! I wish i worked for george lucas (even so indirectly).

[|Alky|]

I have the set on VHS, so I won't be buying them till I get rich. But does anyone know a way to buy those 'young indiana jones' tv episodes? I kinda enjoyed those, and though they're not up to the original's standard I've only seen half of them, and wanna see the rest..

[TheYak]

I dunno..  I missed a few episodes after the first few and then lost interest.  I know you can rent them at some Hollywood video stores and even a couple Blockbuster stores.  If you wanna order (buy) them... you could try Suncoast..  they'll get almost anything you want as far as movies go.  I don't know if there's a store in your area but they may have a website.  For that matter, you might try e-bay.

[oscar]

I've got the VHS set...very good movies, my favorite scene is on the aeroplane in the Last Crusade movie. Indy (dressed as a worker on the plane) throws a nazi out of the window and explains to the passengers: "No ticket"...haha I love that