Posted by The Northlander from dialup2-9.uplogon.com on July 04, 1998 at 18:06:10:
In Reply to: Is a bad Indy 4 better than no Indy 4 at all? posted by Mola Ram on July 04, 1998 at 17:24:26:
: Just curious to know whether people believe that having a bad sequel would
: ruin the whole series..or whether it wouldn't make any difference.
: Like...do people believe that the Batman series is ruined by 3 and 4, or whether
: you can just ignore them.
: The problem with Indy films is that it does affect the course of Indy's life...the actors
: are generally all the same so you accept the films as one whole story. Does that make sense?
: Anyway..if anyone understood the question...give us your thoughts.
Another interesting point. I personally don't want to see a "bad" movie, no matter what series we're talking about, but especially Indy! However, arguably, Temple of Doom was a "bad" Indy movie - no offense Mola Ram! :) What makes an Indy movie good? Does it have to follow the formula of Indy chasing a Christian artifact in the desert? Must it include members of the old "gang", such as Sallah? I don't claim to know the answer. Wheter a film is good or bad rests in the mind of the individual, as many of you must know. I'd love to see an Indy 4, whatever it may be, and have faith that even a "bad" one won't be so terible that we have to ignore it. This is Lucas and Spielberg after all!
And for the record, I ignore Batman 3 and 4. :)
Post a Followup: