Digital Spy

Search Digital Spy
 

DS Forums

 
 

Was Raiders of the lost ark the first indiana jones movie


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 15-10-2012, 18:07
geordielady
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 9,850

Just wondering as many trailers indicate it was not also the start of the film just gives the impression something came before it.
geordielady is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 15-10-2012, 18:09
grps3
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 2,723
it was the first movie but temple of doom (The sequel) was actually a prequel
grps3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-10-2012, 18:21
Helbore
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 9,846
I think the opening to Raiders is meant to give the impression that this is an ongoing series of movies and you are just catching the latest one. Lucas and Spielberg were inspired by the 20s-30s era cinema serials, so its meant to be like one "episode" in the middle of a series.

Same thing with the first Star Wars film being "Episode 4," and opening with a scroll of text that explained what had happened "last week."
Helbore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-10-2012, 20:18
LykkieLi
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Suffragette City
Posts: 3,725
it was the first movie but temple of doom (The sequel) was actually a prequel
Really?
LykkieLi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-10-2012, 20:37
-GONZO-
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Kent
Posts: 7,826
Yep, Raiders Of The Lost Ark is set in 1936 and Temple Of Doom is set in 1935.
-GONZO- is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-10-2012, 22:55
geordielady
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 9,850
OK thanks guys, like others I never knew temple of doom was a prequel, guess it makes sense now.
geordielady is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-10-2012, 22:58
Moboloco
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 856
I never knew that, great quiz question lol.
Moboloco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-10-2012, 23:48
rfonzo
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 6,851
OK thanks guys, like others I never knew temple of doom was a prequel, guess it makes sense now.
Yep, Raiders Of The Lost Ark is set in 1936 and Temple Of Doom is set in 1935.
it was the first movie but temple of doom (The sequel) was actually a prequel
I did not know that either. How does it make sense that the temple of doom was a prequel?
rfonzo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-10-2012, 00:35
LykkieLi
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Suffragette City
Posts: 3,725
Yep, Raiders Of The Lost Ark is set in 1936 and Temple Of Doom is set in 1935.
I didn't know that either! Whoa!
LykkieLi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-10-2012, 01:54
rfonzo
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 6,851
Is the Temple of Doom where they walk in a cave and they tread in all those bugs.
rfonzo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-10-2012, 02:39
Aneechik
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Mount Olympus
Posts: 15,538
It does actually say at the start of the movies what year they're set in.
Aneechik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-10-2012, 02:44
geordielady
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 9,850
I did not know that either. How does it make sense that the temple of doom was a prequel?
What I meant by that comment is I can now understand why at the start of the movie it appears people know each other and that, obviously because all that happened in the temple of doom as it was a prequel.

I thought maybe there was like a series and the first movie carried on from the series.
geordielady is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-10-2012, 08:39
RebelScum
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Aberdeen
Posts: 9,040
What I meant by that comment is I can now understand why at the start of the movie it appears people know each other and that, obviously because all that happened in the temple of doom as it was a prequel.

I thought maybe there was like a series and the first movie carried on from the series.
ToD being set before Raiders has nothing to do with characters appearing to know each other at the start of Raiders. Indeed, none of the characters of ToD appear in Raiders.

The familiarity between the chracters at the start of Raiders is to illustrate the ongoing adventurous nature of the central character rather than an ongoing narrative...

...although part of me thinks you already know that and are just up to your usual tricks.
RebelScum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-10-2012, 08:46
Listentome
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 9,692
It has nothing to do with ToD being set before Raiders. Indeed, none of the charcters in ToD appear in Raiders.

The familiarity between the chracters at the start of Raiders is to illustrate the ongoing adventurous nature of the central character rather than an ongoing narrative...

...although part of me thinks you already know that and are just up to your usual tricks again.

Just what I was going to say. Given Indy is the only character to appear in ToD and Raiders. Indy's history with characters like Balloq is there to establish the competitve nature of their history that will play a part in getting to the Ark first.

Actually, I can think of few movies that don't begin with the central characters having a history that we haven't witnessed.

I find it hard to believe that someone familiar with Raiders could think there were prior films featuring the same characters.
Listentome is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-10-2012, 09:43
revans9
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 691
i remember seeing a making-of documentary when Doom came out with Harrison Ford saying he got 3 years older and the character got 2 years younger.

so here's a head scratcher for you. Just before the rope bridge bit in Doom, Indiana is confronted by two swordsmen. They swing their swords and Indiana just smirks and reaches for his gun (which isn't there). This is a reference to the shooting-the-swordsman bit in Raiders. But how can he remember something that hasn't happened to him yet?
revans9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-10-2012, 09:50
-GONZO-
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Kent
Posts: 7,826
The begining of The Last Crusade you get to see the start of Indy's adventures.
And if you want to know all that went on from then up to the films you've also got the Young Indiana Jones series.
-GONZO- is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-10-2012, 09:54
MissDexter
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,554
Just what I was going to say. Given Indy is the only character to appear in ToD and Raiders. Indy's history with characters like Balloq is there to establish the competitve nature of their history that will play a part in getting to the Ark first.

Actually, I can think of few movies that don't begin with the central characters having a history that we haven't witnessed.

I find it hard to believe that someone familiar with Raiders could think there were prior films featuring the same characters.
I was thinking the same thing - there's nothing whatsoever in Raiders that connects to Temple in terms of characters.

The relationship we between Indy and.....whoever - is just the relationship that exists in the "created history" to give the film some grounding.
MissDexter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-10-2012, 09:56
RebelScum
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Aberdeen
Posts: 9,040
Re the gun scenes - because it's a move he probably relied on regularly, not just the twice we saw.
RebelScum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-10-2012, 10:17
-GONZO-
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Kent
Posts: 7,826
i remember seeing a making-of documentary when Doom came out with Harrison Ford saying he got 3 years older and the character got 2 years younger.

so here's a head scratcher for you. Just before the rope bridge bit in Doom, Indiana is confronted by two swordsmen. They swing their swords and Indiana just smirks and reaches for his gun (which isn't there). This is a reference to the shooting-the-swordsman bit in Raiders. But how can he remember something that hasn't happened to him yet?
It's in reference to the character and that particular scene from an audiance perspective, not through Indy's eyes.
-GONZO- is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-10-2012, 11:05
Eddie Badger
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,197
I always thought that the start was a sort of hommage to the Bond movies where you usually see Bond finishing off a previous mission before the titles.
Eddie Badger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-10-2012, 11:35
geordielady
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 9,850
ToD being set before Raiders has nothing to do with characters appearing to know each other at the start of Raiders. Indeed, none of the characters of ToD appear in Raiders.

The familiarity between the chracters at the start of Raiders is to illustrate the ongoing adventurous nature of the central character rather than an ongoing narrative...

...although part of me thinks you already know that and are just up to your usual tricks.
Why was it that once I saw who had made that post a comment like this was expected. People dont really want to see trolling baiting comments in this thread, leave people to chat and discuss without trying to cause arguements.
geordielady is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-10-2012, 11:39
geordielady
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 9,850
Just what I was going to say. Given Indy is the only character to appear in ToD and Raiders. Indy's history with characters like Balloq is there to establish the competitve nature of their history that will play a part in getting to the Ark first.

Actually, I can think of few movies that don't begin with the central characters having a history that we haven't witnessed.

I find it hard to believe that someone familiar with Raiders could think there were prior films featuring the same characters.
What a comment, had it ever crossed you mind that some people may not be fan boys of the movie and not remember every single word that was said. Some of us saw these movies origionally decades ago and have had a life since.
geordielady is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-10-2012, 12:14
Virgil Tracy
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 19,928
There is an odd bit in Raiders tho where Marcus is warning Indy about the powers of the Ark and Indy laughs and shrugs it off saying he doesn't believe in all that hocus-pocus stuff (wtte) and yet just a year before he'd witnessed all sorts of magic in Temple of Doom !
Virgil Tracy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-10-2012, 12:30
RebelScum
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Aberdeen
Posts: 9,040
There is an odd bit in Raiders tho where Marcus is warning Indy about the powers of the Ark and Indy laughs and shrugs it off saying he doesn't believe in all that hocus-pocus stuff (wtte) and yet just a year before he'd witnessed all sorts of magic in Temple of Doom !
The only supernatural elements in Doom are when the young prince is using a voodoo doll against Indy (which Indy doesn't see cause he's too busy fighting) and the other when the stones light up, something a sceptic could easily dismiss as a light trick. Certainly nothing there from his point of view to turn him into a believer.
RebelScum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-10-2012, 12:37
Johnny Clay
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,843
I always thought that the start was a sort of hommage to the Bond movies where you usually see Bond finishing off a previous mission before the titles.
It may well be. Legend has it Spielberg once said to George Lucas that he'd love to do a James Bond film. Lucas replied that he had a better idea. This gave birth to Raiders, which does roughly follow the Bond template of globe-trotting action/adventure with a dashing hero and a dash of humour.

Didn't they try to rebrand it as Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the Lost Ark, btw?
Johnny Clay is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:31.