Hacker News Reader

Comment by JKCalhoun | Hacker News Reader

I kinda hate Raiders of the Lost Ark — and the transcript really backs up why.

To be sure, I loved the film when it came out. I enjoyed it for what it was — a fun action romp.

But now some 40 or so years later I recognize it as perhaps the beginning of this downward slide that popular films have been on: films that are no more than a stitching together of action sequences — storyboard movies.

Characters are 2 dimensional, don't change or grow across the film arc, morality is black and white....

I saw one of the "Pirates of the Caribbean" films and was confused several times as to if the film was about to end. An epic battle/action sequence would build and conclude and I would assume we were at the denouement. Alas, no, we had merely wrapped up action-sequence #13 and there were still epic battles to come. (I suppose I should have had a clue since we were only at the 2 hour mark.)

</rant>

View on HN

> Characters are 2 dimensional, don't change or grow across the film arc, morality is black and white....

Is it in Raiders, though? Indy had a fling with Marion when she "was a child". He isn't exactly a white knight on their quest. He's irreverent, unchivalrous, and they feud from the onset. As Belloq points out, "I am a shadowy reflection of you... it would take only a nudge to push you out of the line." Belloq, at times, is courteous of Marion in ways Indiana is not. He covers her with his coat when they take her back into custody. Indy lets her shiver in captivity while he hunts for the Ark. He is a mercenary with a few more ideals than Belloq, and a sentimental attachment to his mentor's legacy.

Popular entertainment has been breezy and shallow since before the emergence of mass media; it's not a new trend.

Indiana Jones was specifically inspired by the 1930s serials that Lucas grew up with, such as Buck Rogers and Zorro, which were always about set pieces strung together with minimal depth of character development.

If there's a trend, it's that there is a distinct drop in "adult" films — meaning smart dramas for adults, not necessarily arthouse films — that started around the 2000s. Maybe the Indy movies were portends of this (some might say Jaws and Star Wars), but it's been a slow trajectory, and one that seems to have even accelerated by the pandemic and the emergence of streaming.

Characters are 2 dimensional

That's the great twist of the movie though. Indiana is presented as an American Nazi-hating playboy thrill-seeking heroic professor...who is also into history or something. Belloq is presented as a French backstabbing Nazi-sympathizing schemer multilinguist...who is also into history or something. You're given all of this information upfront by the end of the first sequence.

But then, it turns out you had it backwards. These characters were actually men who are obsessed with history that are also some other stuff I guess. Indy basically gives the ark's power over to the Nazis just to see the truth of its history inside (but gets lucky lol). Belloq is shown not to care about the Nazis or getting rich. He really only wanted the knowledge inside[1].

Indy spends the film falling in love with Marian, fighting off reprehensible Nazis, and enjoying at least some of the immense glory coming his way. You expect him to grow as a character by the end and bazooka (or not bazooka) the ark for one of those reasons. Instead, he's swayed by Belloq's appeal of history and it turns out you never really knew who Indy was despite being given all of the information upfront.

[1]The original script provides more of the context for Belloq's character at the end

I thought they were both ark-aeologists, it's no twist that they're into history

I felt similarly about the Robert Pattinson Batman. I thought it was a good take on Batman and in my opinion he makes a good Batman, but both me and my partner thought it was going to end about 5 separate times. I also didn’t understand SPOILER the scene with the Batmobile coming to life to save them at the dock. They built it up so hard and menacing, only for it to sorta gently roll out.

Well, to be fair, Pirates of the Caribbean is a movie adaptation of a literal roller coaster based on a video game that was a lighthearted parody of pirate movies.

That's not exactly a proven track to having a solid story :)

I'm not sure quite what you mean. You loved it but it was actually bad?

While certainly possible, it merits more discussion about why you loved it in the first place. What was new? Why did it earn such a solid place among classics? Why do so many other stories derive from it?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com