Something to also keep in mind about the Indy series is that the adventures were supposed to resemble the serial cliffhangers of the 20s and 30s (also the basic inspiration for Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow). These were B-movies, hastily cobbled together and shot on shoestring budgets, with over the top plots full of holes, and a focus on exotic locations (to the extent the small budget could provide, meaning there was much reliance on swarthy foreign-looking actors in heavy makeup), derring-do, dashing heroes, damsels in distress, and flashy action sequences often involving chase scenes and just-in-time escapes from fire, monsters, etc. Looking at Indy 4 from this perspective, I found it to be strongly rooted in its original concept, and exploited the real fun in that kind of genre in great ways.

That doesn’t mean, however, that I thought it was a particularly good movie. For its genre, I thought it was excellent. As the fourth Indiana Jones film, I found it stale, predictable, and populated with one-dimensional characters. It was great fun, the way a summer blockbuster is supposed to be. But there was no excitement or suspense like was captured in Raiders, or character exploration and real emotion like in Crusade. And very little of it was funny. Even the old serials were supposed to be funny.

I think what is different now is quantity. And from that quantity an opportunity to find quality.

But back in the day, Star Wars or Star Trek had the corner on SciFi (then along came Dune, Stargate etc). And Indiana Jones had the monopoly of that style of adventure (as you mentioned to bring along Pirates–which I did not like, and The Mummy, which I did)… we watched what we had. But, it’s the sentimentalist in me that enjoys the movies now.

Doctor Who held up well though.

*chuckles* Of course it was the lack of my genres in the nineties that drove me into the arms of Japanese culture.