|
Yep, one of the best things about Raiders is its sparse use of effects, to excellent effect.
After that, the series went hog-wild with effects, with increasingly diminishing returns.
It's interesting what nits people will choose to pick with Indy 4. There are indeed so many to choose from.
I've heard "why didn't Indy use his whip to get out of the (non)quick sand?" Um, he didn't have his whip at the time; he'd been disarmed by the Russians.
And I've heard "how can Marion have just driven off the cliff hoping for a tree to break their fall' when she's clearly shown scoping out the cliff and finding the exact spot of the tree. (And by 'clearly,' I mean I finally noticed this on the 3rd viewing.)
Most people are bothered with the Tarzan swinging, some aren't. Just about everyone freaks that he survived a nuclear blast in a flying refrigerator. It never concerned me in the least. When the TV and slip-&-slide water and car-watering hose were all on in the fake town set up for nuclear annihilation ... I had surrealism telegraphed to me quite clearly.
The ants were too big. Three waterfalls were too many.
I can't defend any of this stuff. But there are far larger problems, imo, with a very weak story and underused characters.
If it's just the preposterous nits that are bothersome, I think the movie is pretty good.
|