Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
BobtheInquisitor wrote: They were always there. I remember my parents worrying that we would have nightmares, even though those scenes were pretty tame for 80’s movies. Around the same time they just put on The Gate for us without thinking twice about it since it was a “kid’s movie”.
Seems it was cut for the U.K. Theatrical Release to qualify for PG. Which makes sense, as the grading at the time was U (Universal) PG (Parental Guidance) 15 (over 15’s only) and 18 (self explanatory).
12, then 12a followed some years after.
Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?
BobtheInquisitor wrote: They were always there. I remember my parents worrying that we would have nightmares, even though those scenes were pretty tame for 80’s movies. Around the same time they just put on The Gate for us without thinking twice about it since it was a “kid’s movie”.
The heart rip gave me nightmares for years. It wasn't until I loved Last Crusade that I went back and rewatched it. I still consider it the worst film of the 4, though the minecart scene is one of the most influential scenes from the whole series.
I’m sorry to hear that. Perhaps we were more inured to gore effects in my family.
We got to see Robocop when it came out on VHS. My dad told me there was one scene that was too gory, so he would fast forward at that part and we had to look away. (When the gang kills Murphy.) So then the movie opens with ED-209 blasting a business man into bloody chunks. The scene just kept going, a fireworks display of squibs blasting the guy apart. Didn’t need to skip that scene. The henchman doused with toxic waste, staggering around with his skin melting off until a speeding car bursts him into roughly human-colored goo? That’s fine.
for years I was wondering, how gory must that one scene be?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: I’ve never understood why Temple of Doom is so poorly thought of. It’s probably my favourite of the bunch.
The characters are more cartoonish, the plot more straight-forward and less built on a race against the bad guys to find and decipher the clues, the child-friendlier-sequel effect.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/04/24 16:59:05
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: I’ve never understood why Temple of Doom is so poorly thought of. It’s probably my favourite of the bunch.
Easy answers:
White man falls from the sky and solves 'native' problems. Womanizer where woman hates him (because he seriously kidnapped her for no reason) and resists enough to still be problematic when she gives in.
The colonialist propaganda, from the 'crazy food' to the problematic 'Indian blood cult' that just needs to be exterminated by the British army. Which...actually happens on screen and presented as the cavalry saving the day.
Personal pet peeve- Expert means perfect knowledge of all subfields, no matter how unrelated they are (which in archaeology is extremely problematic -south/central American and 'Middle Eastern' (more properly Biblical, but it wandered a lot) was dubious enough, don't add China and India on top)
Other pet peeve- the overt magic (in particular, 'holy' death magic in all cases) of the first three is somehow more acceptable than alien tech. I... don't get it.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2023/04/24 18:12:21
You start with some big name like Indy or Star Wars. You enjoy it at the time because they’re enjoyable films.
Then, as you explore more movies, you see how they influenced the overall industry. This reveals the impact a solid, crowd pleaser movie can have.
You may find Really Good Films which started as cash-ins. You’ll definitely find Bloody Awful Knock-Offs. Some of those will have a charm all their own. Some will just be utter crap.
And like watching Spaced, the more and more you see, the more references you spot in other media.
You might then start exploring the influences behind those initial films. The serials, the Kurosawa movies.
And from there, with no formal training in it, you develop media literacy and can go really tinfoil
An example I’ll always fall back on for Rabbit Holing? Robocop. It is absolutely a Big Dumb Action Movie. And you can watch it as such and walk away satisfied from a well made, rounded movie going experience. But. Lurking just below the surface is the initial layer of satire. And down and down and down you go, until you see it’s full glory as an absolute cinematic Masterclass in how to pack a movie full of meaning, metaphor and satire without being an enigmatic arsehole about it. Basically it’s the movie version of Freeform Modern Jazz, but actually good, and not right up it’s own arse.
Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?
BobtheInquisitor wrote: I’m sorry to hear that. Perhaps we were more inured to gore effects in my family.
We got to see Robocop when it came out on VHS. My dad told me there was one scene that was too gory, so he would fast forward at that part and we had to look away. (When the gang kills Murphy.) So then the movie opens with ED-209 blasting a business man into bloody chunks. The scene just kept going, a fireworks display of squibs blasting the guy apart. Didn’t need to skip that scene. The henchman doused with toxic waste, staggering around with his skin melting off until a speeding car bursts him into roughly human-colored goo? That’s fine.
for years I was wondering, how gory must that one scene be?
It's worth noting Robocop was rated R, and Temple of Doom rated PG. There's a distinct difference in expectations between the two.
The writer Chuck Klosterman has a theory that while many people reflexively assume extremely popular things are bad, they are, in fact, usually very good. Plenty of bad things become popular, but the things that really become cultural touchstones are generally the best examples of their genre. You might not like the genre, but even within genres you hate, the most popular stuff tends to be the best.
In movies, flawed but enjoyable movies can become cult classics, or even hits, but never an all time great. "The boondock saints" is wildly entertaining while being... not great. Even then, in a world full of B movies, the Boondock Saints is probably one of the best, with some strong acting performances and some excitng fight scense.
So, why is Indian Jones such a big deal? The movies were huge hits, usually the top or top three gross for the year. they've had a long cultural shadow. But they're also just really, really finely crafted. Speilberg is arguably the greatest "popcorn" director of all time, and filtred George Lucas's ideas nicely. Harrison Ford wasn't a complete unknown by then, thanks to Star Wars, but they still were able to buy low on one of the most charismatic actors of the time. The music, of course, is spot on.
One of the things that some people dislike about the movies are their momentum. They intentionally never go more than 5-10 minutes between action set pieces. You don't have the slow start or exposition heavy middle, but you learn a lot about the characters during the set pieces.
In short, the movies are just really good. The two movies that most obviously model themselves off Raiders are National Treasure and the Mummy, as both feature treasure hunters solving clues. But you can pull back further, and see that many of the more successful MCU movies use the model.
BobtheInquisitor wrote: I’m sorry to hear that. Perhaps we were more inured to gore effects in my family.
We got to see Robocop when it came out on VHS. My dad told me there was one scene that was too gory, so he would fast forward at that part and we had to look away. (When the gang kills Murphy.) So then the movie opens with ED-209 blasting a business man into bloody chunks. The scene just kept going, a fireworks display of squibs blasting the guy apart. Didn’t need to skip that scene. The henchman doused with toxic waste, staggering around with his skin melting off until a speeding car bursts him into roughly human-colored goo? That’s fine.
for years I was wondering, how gory must that one scene be?
It's worth noting Robocop was rated R, and Temple of Doom rated PG. There's a distinct difference in expectations between the two.
Yes and no. The rating should set expectations, yet If I had a dollar for every parent who brought a child to see Robocop in the theater (presumably due to it’s name), I could executive produce the next Robocop reboot.
Polonius wrote:Plenty of bad things become popular, but the things that really become cultural touchstones are generally the best examples of their genre.
That would explain why Avatar and Avatar 2: It's Avatarin Time have zero cultural footprint. In thirty years we'll still have references to Vasquez but no one will remember who John Scurvy was.
BobtheInquisitor wrote:Yes and no. The rating should set expectations, yet If I had a dollar for every parent who brought a child to see Robocop in the theater (presumably due to it’s name), I could executive produce the next Robocop reboot.
I remember people bringing five year olds to the original Jurassic Park even though it was rated R because dinosaurs.
Amidst the mists and coldest frosts he thrusts his fists against the posts and still insists he sees the ghosts.
Honestly there are some bad things that achieve cultural footprint simply for how bad they are or because they were bad in particularly hilarious ways.
Memes especially give certain things a longevity far beyond their medium or quality.
Example;
Jim Carry's Riddler in Batman and Robin.
All around bad movie, but Carry's performance was so iconic it has kept the film alive in culture through memes and references.
I'd lump the Star Wars prequel trilogy in here too. Terrible movies, but with particular stand out performances and scenes so good or so bad/cheesy, they have kept the films alive through decades of popular culture. Compare to the sequel trilogy, which literally no one wants to talk about anymore if only because they're tired of arguing their merits/demerits.
Meanwhile, the prequels have spawned at least a hundred different meme formats and references even people who don't like the movies will recognize.
EDIT: Even better, The Emperor's New Groove (road to el dorado too) a bizarre average film in almost every way, that doesn't stand out in terms of plot, comedy, or art. It's not bad at all but it's hardly the stuff cultural icons are made up. Except that every scene in the movie is a meme format. Browse the internet long enough you can probably watch the entire film via memes without even streaming it.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2023/04/24 22:32:18
Polonius wrote:Plenty of bad things become popular, but the things that really become cultural touchstones are generally the best examples of their genre.
That would explain why Avatar and Avatar 2: It's Avatarin Time have zero cultural footprint. In thirty years we'll still have references to Vasquez but no one will remember who John Scurvy was.
BobtheInquisitor wrote:Yes and no. The rating should set expectations, yet If I had a dollar for every parent who brought a child to see Robocop in the theater (presumably due to it’s name), I could executive produce the next Robocop reboot.
I remember people bringing five year olds to the original Jurassic Park even though it was rated R because dinosaurs.
Rated R because dinosaurs absolutely makes no sense in the culture. Dinosaurs are functionally kids products. Dino-toys are the stepping stone to action figures.
BobtheInquisitor wrote: I think you’ve got his meaning backwards. The film was rated R, but parents brought kids because dinosaurs (are for children).
Wait, are the JP movies really rated R? Its mostly jump scares with offscreen cuts, and some fairly bland viscera strewn about that most kids probably can't even identify. My nephew's Christmas was basically a dumptruck full of Jurassic Park toys.
There's enough out there to swamp the old Kenner Star Wars toy line- the end market merchandise for Jurassic Park is aimed almost entirely kids under... 8? 10? 5? (whatever age plays with action figures now).
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2023/04/25 03:10:07
EDIT: Even better, The Emperor's New Groove (road to el dorado too) a bizarre average film in almost every way, that doesn't stand out in terms of plot, comedy, or art. It's not bad at all but it's hardly the stuff cultural icons are made up. Except that every scene in the movie is a meme format. Browse the internet long enough you can probably watch the entire film via memes without even streaming it.
The Emperor's New Groove is one of those odd films where the parts are somehow better than their sum.
The only way we can ever solve anything is to look in the mirror and find no enemy
Voss wrote: Wait, are the JP movies really rated R?
The first one was. While not slasher film gory there is quite of bit of violence including people being eaten and a dismembered arm dangling down. Nothing to wacky for teens/adults, sure, but for a five year old it would be quite intense. I remember a guy bringing a kid to the first Mortal Kombat and right at the beginning it zooms in and Shang Tsun and turns into a skull. Adults and teens were fine but the kid lost it and was screaming until the child was taken out of the theater.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2023/04/25 05:54:35
Amidst the mists and coldest frosts he thrusts his fists against the posts and still insists he sees the ghosts.
2023/04/25 13:06:46
Subject: Re:Why is Indiana Jones so highly regarded?
Jurassic Park was PG-13. It was nowhere near violent enough to justify an R rating and it would easily have been the highest grossing R movie at the time.
It's also listed as PG-13 on IMDB.
The only way we can ever solve anything is to look in the mirror and find no enemy
And then it depends on the kids. My lovely 8 year old neurodivergent daughter recently announced that she only ever wanted to watch films she has already seen so she doesn’t get scared…
And yet when she was in nursery, one of her 4 year old compatriots was extremely happy showing off his velociraptor impression
Please excuse any spelling errors. I use a tablet frequently and software keyboards are a pain!
LordofHats wrote: Honestly there are some bad things that achieve cultural footprint simply for how bad they are or because they were bad in particularly hilarious ways.
Memes especially give certain things a longevity far beyond their medium or quality.
Example;
Jim Carry's Riddler in Batman and Robin.
All around bad movie, but Carry's performance was so iconic it has kept the film alive in culture through memes and references.
That was technically Batman Forever, the third in the series. And you kind of made my point, because you remember Jim Carrey as the Riddlker (good!) but not the name fo the movie (... not... good)
I'd lump the Star Wars prequel trilogy in here too. Terrible movies, but with particular stand out performances and scenes so good or so bad/cheesy, they have kept the films alive through decades of popular culture. Compare to the sequel trilogy, which literally no one wants to talk about anymore if only because they're tired of arguing their merits/demerits.
The Star Wars sequels are basically Avatar with better press. Simply by including legacy characters, there will always be some affection for them, but they're objectively bad movies that aren't well loved.
The prequels have bad writing and some wooden acting, and some plots that are tough to follow, but the technical aspects are great, and they include amazing set pieces. We'll be watching the Darth Maul fight long after we forget the throne room fight from TLJ.
Again, this sort of proves my point, that popularity is correlated with quality. If the only Star Wars movie that had ever been made was Solo, it would be talked about like John Carpenter!
Meanwhile, the prequels have spawned at least a hundred different meme formats and references even people who don't like the movies will recognize.
EDIT: Even better, The Emperor's New Groove (road to el dorado too) a bizarre average film in almost every way, that doesn't stand out in terms of plot, comedy, or art. It's not bad at all but it's hardly the stuff cultural icons are made up. Except that every scene in the movie is a meme format. Browse the internet long enough you can probably watch the entire film via memes without even streaming it.
Yeah, but that's true of a LOT of content. I never saw Tiger King, but I can laugh at an "I'm never going to financially recover from this" meme.
Memes are a way to take a scene or line from something that really captures a specific feeling or expereince. That's not the same as being an overall loved piece of media.
Polonius wrote:Plenty of bad things become popular, but the things that really become cultural touchstones are generally the best examples of their genre.
That would explain why Avatar and Avatar 2: It's Avatarin Time have zero cultural footprint. In thirty years we'll still have references to Vasquez but no one will remember who John Scurvy was.
Avatar continues to be the strangest pop cultural artifact. Avatar was good! It really was! It was certainly gorgeous, and made excellent use of 3d. I think what hurts it's appeal is that as probably the greatest 3d movie, it doesn't translate as well to 2d, since the characters and plot start out 2d. Hey oh!
So, I would argue that Avatar is the best example of a 3d movie that needs to be seen in theaters. That explains it's huge box office, but minimal fandom.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/04/25 14:20:45
trexmeyer wrote: Jurassic Park was PG-13. It was nowhere near violent enough to justify an R rating and it would easily have been the highest grossing R movie at the time.
It's also listed as PG-13 on IMDB.
You're right. For some reason I always want to think the first was rated R. Probably because I recall the complaints of parents that took very young children then were upset the four year old was crying. Usually I see that kind of thing with parents taking kids to rated R movies so it may just all blend together.
Polonius wrote: Avatar was good! It really was! It was certainly gorgeous, and made excellent use of 3d.
No, it wasn't. It really wasn't! What it was was a great tech demo. It was a milquetoast film stapled to an amazing FX presentation.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/04/25 22:04:45
Amidst the mists and coldest frosts he thrusts his fists against the posts and still insists he sees the ghosts.
2023/04/25 22:29:21
Subject: Re:Why is Indiana Jones so highly regarded?
Staying power could also be a factor. The first 3 movies in the Jones series are still fairly well regarded, have a wide appeal to anyone who likes adventure films. They've aged well as some movies do and some don't.
The MCU is a bit mixed, for every ironman who will stand the test of time IMO you have an Incredible Hulk which we just... kinda forget about. Some have janky charm like the Peter Macquire spidermans for sure. Others are just, set dressing for the bigger movies. Like, oh yeah ant man is here in civil war. He had a movie right?
It's part of why the Justice League did as bad as it did. Besides being incredibly bland it also threw in some important characters like the flash and cyborg who didn't have time to be fleshed out within that movieverse. (Yeah they're pre-existing characters but I hope i get across what I mean.)
Adeptekon wrote: I can't think of Indiana Jones without Tomb Raider coming to mind.
Right, because Indiana Jones was the original Tomb Raider.
Lots of interesting thoughts on this, and I've a few to add.
Part of what made "Raiders" resonate was the choice of protagonist but also his costume. George Lucas and Steven Spielberg decided that Harrison Ford was the new Gary Cooper. Go look at "Star Wars." Ford is wearing almost the same outfit as Cooper did in "High Noon."
For "Radiers," Ford is wearing Cooper's outfit from "For Whom the Bell Tolls." These were deliberate decisions which people in the 80s recognized because even if you didn't know the originals, odds were you watched them on Sunday afternoon on TV.
Folks have talked about how "Temple of Doom" is a little off. No kidding. It was made while George Lucas was going through an epic nasty divorce with his wife Marcia. The heart being ripped out of the chest? Yeah, that's Marcia.
There's a reason why Lucas had to do his "Special Edition" versions of Star Wars - he had to undo Marcia's edits. Marcia (and others) got an Oscar for best editing - George didn't even get nominated for Best Director. George had feelings, okay?
"Temple of Doom" originated the PG-13 rating. Lucas and Spielberg were not going to accept an "R" rating for an Indiana Jones movie, so the MPAA invented a new one just for them.
Voss wrote: Rated R because dinosaurs absolutely makes no sense in the culture. Dinosaurs are functionally kids products. Dino-toys are the stepping stone to action figures.
I did not read the whole thread, but there is also the fact that everyone saw them on ABC's Sunday Night Movie; and then everyone talked about them the next day.
Now-a-days, there are very few films that can become a cultural touchstone BECAUSE no one is watching the same media.
Back in the day, everyone watched either the ABC Sunday Night Movie or the NBC Sunday Night movie. There was not much else to watch!
Support Blood and Spectacles Publishing:
https://www.patreon.com/Bloodandspectaclespublishing
Cadre Coronal Afterglow w1;d0;l0 
