Posted by Beowulf from pool-209-138-0-224.nwrk.grid.net on October 28, 1999 at 04:35:31:
In Reply to: Prequel/episode # nonsense posted by TheycallhimBellosh on October 27, 1999 at 11:30:18:
That's ridiculous to order ToD AFTER Raiders simply because if that scene. The scene was an in joke for the audience who had already seen Raiders. It was not necessarily a direct followup as far as Indy was concerned to the scene from Raiders. It's entirely possible that this thing has happened to him a few times and one of those times was BEFORE ToD. Something like that that is so easily explained away and is not such a big continuity gaff does should not be used to contradict established facts such as teh dating of ToD as 1935 and Raiders as 1936.
: If TOD is supposedly a prequel to Raiders, then the little 'nod' to Raiders in TOD makes no sense. I talking about the scene where Indy confronts the two swordsmen and trys to go for his pistol like before. They even play a bit of the 'streets of cairo music'.
: I may sound nitpicky, but if TOD came first, how can they have a FLASHBACK to something that hasnt happened yet? I just re-arranged TOD to be second in line in the box set. (P.S. widescreen is better)