Re: Dark Sequels.

Posted by Patterson from gw.wizards.com on September 21, 1999 at 16:18:31:

In Reply to: Dark Sequels. posted by Short Round on September 21, 1999 at 10:44:29:

: Did anyone notice that Spielberg and Lucas sequels,(the second ones mostly) always seam dark, and stuff. Well like ESB and ToD. You have to admit those were dark. Well it's hard to explain but you might know where I'm getting at. With the heart thing, the Temple being shown through half the movie with nastiness(but it was a good movie all out) and with all those other things. And ESB having the Alliance nearly destroyed. I wonder how Ep II will be. Well see ya's, Shorty.
: "But it was so artistically done..." -Grand Admiral Thrawn, Last Command.

I always just figured that the second pictures weren't very good, with the exception of ESB.

As far as being "dark" I believe Raiders has the darkest feel by far. Maybe this is based on what I remember of the early 80's. It was a dark time in our society. Hero's were tough to come by, other then the 1980 US hockey team. I believe there is a difference between “dark” and “gory”. ToD falls more into the “gore” side of things, with a tendency towards being corny. Really a fairly simple movie formula.

I REALLY dislike the second BTTF movie - I think it was a piece of crap. The other two are classics, though.

I have strong affinities for Raiders and LC; both for different reasons based partially on what was going on in my life when they came out, and how their themes spoke to me. To me, ToD is like a rollercoaster; it’s a fun ride with no real meaning. If any of them fall into the B camp, ToD is it. The acting is pretty bad, and some of the lines really make me cringe. But, hey, its Indy so I guess that makes it OK.

Nothing personal. Just my two cents.

Cheers!

Patterson

Follow Ups:

Re: Dark Sequels. J 09:21:45 9/22/99 (0)

Post a Followup:

Name:    
E-Mail:  
Subject: 
Comments:

: : Did anyone notice that Spielberg and Lucas sequels,(the second ones mostly) always seam dark, and stuff. Well like ESB and ToD. You have to admit those were dark. Well it's hard to explain but you might know where I'm getting at. With the heart thing, the Temple being shown through half the movie with nastiness(but it was a good movie all out) and with all those other things. And ESB having the Alliance nearly destroyed. I wonder how Ep II will be. Well see ya's, Shorty.
: : "But it was so artistically done..." -Grand Admiral Thrawn, Last Command.

: I always just figured that the second pictures weren't very good, with the exception of ESB.

: As far as being "dark" I believe Raiders has the darkest feel by far.  Maybe this is based on what I remember of the early 80's.  It was a dark time in our society.  Hero's were tough to come by, other then the 1980 US hockey team.  I believe there is a difference between “dark” and “gory”.  ToD falls more into the “gore” side of things, with a tendency towards being corny.  Really a fairly simple movie formula.

: I REALLY dislike the second BTTF movie - I think it was a piece of crap.  The other two are classics, though.

: I have strong affinities for Raiders and LC; both for different reasons based partially on what was going on in my life when they came out, and how their themes spoke to me.  To me, ToD is like a rollercoaster; it’s a fun ride with no real meaning.  If any of them fall into the B camp, ToD is it.  The acting is pretty bad, and some of the lines really make me cringe.  But, hey, its Indy so I guess that makes it OK.

: Nothing personal.  Just my two cents.

: Cheers!

: Patterson

Optional:

Link URL:   
Link Title: 
Image URL:

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ The Indyfan Forum ] [ FAQ ]