Do you think Indiana should have had more of an effect on the Story?????

I think you totally understood the assignment here. Amy and Sheldon are really book smart, but they lack emotional intelligence. The movie is ruined for them bc they are unable to understand or connect with the emotional arc (no pun intended) that Indy is going through. For all their knowledge, they don’t get the movie. I bet Penny would tho

By that same logic, Dr Grant (The Dinosaur Man) didn't play any real part in Jurassic Park, the park was going to collapse regardless of whatever he did to it

Something else that Indy did was basically save the world by getting involved with the Ark: the Germans were originally gonna bring it to a grand ceremony in a big city, but Indy causing them to get sidetracked made them go into a more isolated location, leading to only the deaths of the Nazis.

6:28, to be fair the characters in the Big Bang Theory as written don’t really tend to understand the stories they love as fundamentally character driven. In the For the Love of Spock episode, Penny is the one who notices that Sheldon is missing the entire point of Spock that despite presenting himself as an emotionless alien deep down he’s as human as everyone else is and that’s a good thing and Sheldon is shocked by the revelation.

I think part of what makes Indy's inner journey so powerful in the movie is exactly that he can't really do a lot about the outer plot. All he can really do is submit, just like he eventually learns to submit to a higher power, be it love, the arc, god, whatever you might want to call it in the end, maybe all of the above. It's all part of the process. If he had too much influence on how that part of the story unfolds, he wouldn't have a chance or a reason to sit back and reflect on that.

This is what bothers me about this whole misunderstanding, Indiana Jones really does effect the outcome of the movie. It starts with Amy claiming the German's would have found the Ark anyway, without Indiana, but there was a scene where Belloq told his superiors how primitive another person's digging was, comparing it to using a bulldozer. The Germans would probably have buried the Ark even further with their digging techniques before they found it, or the was would have been over by the time they found considering how long it took them to find it. Secondly, the Germans never planned to take a boat to an island and open the Ark there, they planned to fly it to Germany and open it there. It was only after Indiana Jones blew up their plane that they decided to take it to the island. That's a major point that is overlooked, what she said happened wasn't supposed to happen, it only happened because of Indiana. Amy's biggest sin was supposing what would happen if Indian wasn't there, how things would have worked themselves out without Indiana's involvement, but if you want to suppose in one direction then you are allowed to suppose in other directions, The Germans may never have found the Ark, the plane could have been shot with lightning and crashed, Belloq and Germans could have opened the box in Germany, killing Hitler and leading members of the Nazi party (now that would be an amazing alteration to the history books right there!). The biggest issue I have with this whole discussion is that it trade what did happened for what might have happened and that's just wrong. In that case, no hero ever effects the outcome of their movie, Luke didn't need to blow up the Death Star, a black hole could have sucked it up and destroyed it. Batman doesn't need to stop the Joker, the balloons would have run out of gas eventually and he would have gotten sick and died anyway. For every reality where the hero saves the day there's another reality where they didn't have to do it to save the day.

It could also be argued that Indy saved Marion's life. Hadn't he been involved, the Nazis would've likely tortured and killed her to get the medallion.

Amy is wrong, if Indy didn't show up in Nepal, the Nazis would have gotten the headpiece and Belloq would have read the DON'T OPEN THE ARK Warnings that were all over the headpiece and NOT open the Ark and the Nazis win

I always felt that this was such a nothing argument, that’s beyond easy to disprove if you actually think about it. I feel like the people that came up with this so called “problem” with the movie, only did it because they wanted to cause controversy.

I would say the McGuffin is pointless, not Indy. It's still an adventure! And the fact that they put it away in a warehouse, is the writers saying "See? This thing doesn't matter at all, it was all about the adventure." It was kind of the point of the whole movie that the Ark wasn't important at all. But Amy was 100% correct. She just didn't see the irony.

Also, the joke does not stand up to scrutiny. The ark-opening scene takes place on a (fictional) island in the Aegean sea that has a hidden German U-boat base. A few dozen Nazi's died in the cave, but there would have been a lot more in the neighborhood. So, how did the ark ended up in a US warehouse? I guess that all happens off-screen, but it's hard to imagine Indy played no part in any of it, or that the ark wouldn't have ended up in a Nazi lab for further study without him. It's obviously real, mystical and powerful, after all.

This was the episode that convinced me Big Bang Tbeory was stupid people's IDEA of smart people. Because literally the entire POINT of every Indiana Jones movie is in some roundabout way showing humility before God. Whether its the character change in Raiders, the child slave cult in Temple, or when Speilberg literally spells it our for the audience in Last Crusade, the movies always come down to the bad guys wanting wanting to use the divine power for their own selfish means and paying the price for thwir own arrigance, while the good guys submit themselves to the higher power they're faced with and give up their obsessions and pride. "Only the penitent man shall pass" is essentially the motto of the entire series

It’s really not a fair criticism of the movie but I don’t think that that was really the point of the episode. Sheldon and his ilk argue about trivialities in movies and television all the time. Sheldon once comments that “I used to be like the Tin Man before the evil wizard gave him a heart” and didn’t understand that Pinocchio becoming a real boy was a happy ending. And when Sheldon says “the purpose of emulating Spock was rising above human emotion” Penny asks him “aren’t you missing the entire point of Spock” and provides good character analysis of Spock shocking Sheldon with the revelation that he had Spock all wrong. Amy hasn’t offered film criticism opinions that often but given that Sheldon got her to watch Raiders by telling her she would lose her virginity and she instead ended up watching an Indiana Jones movie (since she took Sheldon literally) she was frustrated enough to be specifically looking for flaws in the film. And I know it’s not a fair Indiana Jones criticism but it’s not actually a critique the show is endorsing.

Turning down existing IP to make your own character? Modern Hollywood is baffled.

Aside from other comments pointing out that Indy did, in fact, alter the course of the plot in some meaningful ways, it's also a good example of story vs plot in that you can't copyright an *idea* you can only copyright the *execution* of it (which is why we often have twin films released the same year like "Dante's Peak" vs "Volcano" or "Deep Impact" vs "Armageddon"). The *story* is misunderstood by Amy (and by extension the boys who come to believe that Indy serves no purpose in the film) in that they think it's about what happens to the Ark. It's not. The *story* - as rightly pointed out here- is the journey of Indiana Jones from the beginning of the film to the end. The Ark was simply the vessel (no pun intended) to incite that change. By looking at it from the perspective of, "Indy did nothing to save the Ark", you would miss the entire point of the movie, which is, "The journey to find the Ark changed Indy irrevocably into a better person."

Indiana Jones tracked the arc to the island and put himself in a position to hand it over to "top men", rather than leave it sitting in the rain.

While I agree with your analysis, having recently re-watched the film, I think that big bang got it wrong even on its basic claim about the plot. In the movie the Germans, even after finding the ark with the help of Indy, they were going to fly it away from there. While a destination is not mentioned it is impossible to have been in a remote island with no airstrip, most likely aiming to fly it to Berlin. There even of the first experiment had the outcome we saw the controlled environment would make certain that a few deaths would make no difference to the Germans maintaining control. It was only due to the fact that Indy stole the ark, loaded it in a ship, then got intercepted by a U-boat that finally led to the ark being in the remote island base, where the final scenes took place, outside of full German control. So, even in their basic premise, big bang theory got it wrong. Indy made possible the recovery since he exploited fully Dr Beloq’s fascination, making him open the ark in a remote location where he could intervene and recover the artifact. It is interesting to note, that the writer of the show (BBT) could have had the same idea with you, but wanted to mock the audience, instead of enlightening it. I mean, he must have understood that this was indeed a story about a character and not a series of events and wanted to mock the reverence of nerd fandom that considered it a masterpiece due to its plot. The premise here is that nerds are out of touch with their emotions so they focus on the story instead of understanding the emotional and personal evolution of the hero. So it would be impossible for them to follow character development, instead following only the beat by beat storytelling, like little immature children. Emotional stagnation of nerdom is a recurring theme of BBT after all.

I yelled at the screen, "Without Indy Marion would be dead! The Nazi's would have tortured her and then killed her at her bar!" It was a terrible episode.

Well, beyond the story, just from the plot Indiana saves the world from Nazis. If Indiana Jones hadn't been involved, sure the Nazis find the arc, and all die when they open it however, then other Nazis come and look to see what happen, are more cautious now and use the Ark to win the war! So if Indiana hadn't been involved the Nazis end up with the Ark, but instead it ends up in Warehouse 51 or something

Finally, someone talks about this, it's bothered me so much over the years. How does one small detail ruin an entire movie? I get that its a comedy show, buy in my opinion, TBBT has done more harm than good to the geek community.

Thank you I hated that episode because it demonstrated to me that the writers themselves were using they multi million dollar show to pat themselves on the back for being to dumb to understand a fairly basic concept but thinking they are smart

Denial isn't a river in Egypt.

That aside, the Nazis wouldn't have found the ark cuz Indy was the one who led Major Arnold Toht to Nepal in the first place, the location of the medallion that would show them where the ark is Ig you could say they could've dug up the entirety of Egypt, but i think that's a far fetched claim. It's most likely that they started the excavation cuz of Major Toht's scar

The meaning is plain. "Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned" ♥️

she said "It Was Very Entertaining despite.... "

OK… but nobody would have gone to see it if the title was… _Indiana Jones_ _(and the)_ _Arc of his Emotions!_

That joke/observation about Raiders existed long before TBBT. (Obviously, since it is to clever for the showmakers.) I assume, it is as old as the movie itself.

Without Indy the Nazis would never have known that Marion had the headpiece. Therefore they wouldn't have found the ark.

How did the Ark end up in American hands if he didn't have an effect.?

Isn't the whole "Indy is insignificant to the plot" an old trope? Big Bang pretty much appropriated it.

Indy's presence may actually affect the fate of the Ark, depending on how one writes the alternate story. Say Indy goes after the idol from the movie's opening instead of the Ark. The Nazis find Marion, the medallion, and the Ark. They load it on that flying wing and take it to Germany. I don't think there's much to debate so far. What next? Do the Nazis test the Ark first or do they open it in front of Hitler? If they test it and learn its danger, do they persist or do they store it, with dire warnings? If they persist, do they harness its power and win WW II? If they store it, is it destroyed in a bombing raid or do the Americans capture it, read the warnings, and put it in a warehouse? How about the Brits? The French? The Soviets? Without Indy, Amy assumed the Ark would end up in a warehouse somewhere, but there are multiple alternate possibilities.

3:58 beyblade metioned!!!🗣️

Shelond and his friends may be brilliant scientists but they’re also nerds who have zero understanding of storytelling.

2:42 they spelled neolithic incorrectly on the chalkboard

Even though no one cashes in on the ark's power, you still need a hero. The story would be interesting if the nazis took the ark to Berlin, opened it up in Hitler's presence and all the nazis were vaporized, changing history, leaving no nazis ( at least in Germany) to fight. In stead, the u.s. government gets the ark, Indy warns them of its power. Those government officials must have had a little trepidation in Indy's warning, since they didnt open the ark. Instead, they crated it up, nailed it shut, and put it in a big, secret warehouse with thousands of other crates containing who-knows how many other hidden secrets.

I think wrong is probably a bad title. The point she makes is accurate. However you are pointing out that she has missed the point of the story. Which is fair. Also Sheldon said she ruined it "for him" making it his opinion which he is entitled to.

Hmmm. First of all not agreeing with BBT, I hate that show, but you pointed out a plot hole. If he was so keen on seeing what was inside the ark, why didn’t he look? If the most important change that occurs is between him being captured and the ceremony, how come there is basically no scene showing that change?

It's a really dumb idea that they chose to run with, to be sure, and I'm not entirely sure why anyone would act like it's a stunning revelation. Tons of great stories center around a protagonist observing, enduring, or reacting to plots they may or may not have influence over, it doesn't invalidate their worth as a tale in the slightest. I was really interested in the BBT when it first started out, but after awhile it just sort of revealed itself as this nerd minstrel show; I'm not sure what harmed it more, the shitty writing or the fact that it started actively reinforcing ugly stereotypes and generalizing nerds as incapable of maturity or emotional growth.

Sheldon was frequently wrong. 🤣

Amy is the one who pointed it out

In other words, your biggest issue is that the nerds on The Big Bang Theory is that you didn’t understand the point of TBBT to begin with. TBBT is hardly the source of the argument that Indiana Jones plays no part in the outcome of Raiders of the Lost Ark. It has been argued by film theorists (aka film nerds) almost from the moment the movie first hit theaters. But here’s the thing you don’t seem to understand: the guys on TBBT aren’t film theorists. They are incredibly smart individuals, but that doesn’t mean that they are smart about every single thing. The show points this out over and over again and is one of the show’s primary sources of humor. Oh, and a major reason why the guys don’t put much into Indy’s character arc is because it doesn’t actually stick with the character. He is exactly the same character at the beginning of both Temple of Doom (the prequel where he goes through a similar arc) and Last Crusade, so any character development doesn’t actually stick from movie-to-movie.

FINALLY!!! Dear God!! Finally!!

What was the blurred symbol at 5:38? I don’t think it looked like that in the original video. Kinda ruined the experience ngl

In other words the Big Bang theory was technically right, but that doesn’t mean I cannot enjoy the movie. Go it

To be fair nerds like in the big bang theory are known for missing the obvious and generally being emotionally unintelligent.

I story I agree

In Indiana 5 his actions didn't do anything to the greater plot too, nazi died anyway.

Sheldon was wrong about the endinig of Alfas and about Sherlock Holmes drog problem. It"s like the writes cares more about making a joke then actuall nerd culture....

This is a bit too far. It's a fun movie, and the observation (that lots of people made long before BBT brought it to the mainstream) that the characters agency in the overall plot is minimal is still relevant. And for some it will ruin the movie as plot is important to them. The joke is that Sheldon and the guys are taking the movie too seriously and now you are guilty of doing the same (for Indy and BBT). It's just a joke and Raiders is just a well executed pulp movie. Getting upset to the point of making content because someone else highlights a genuine (if minor) issue with the movie is the essence of fandom that is being put under the lens here. Arguably (in this instance) BBT has a lot more meaningful commentary to make than the movie does itself, and that's fine, because the movie was intended to be a fun adventure romp and not a moral tale. BBT too just makes the comment in passing as it's more interested in making people laugh than being insightful. The writers of BBT just happen to be nerds themselves and know these arguments and so they deployed them because mainstream viewers would still find this observation fresh, when the fandom would have heard this argument 20 years prior. There's really nothing to see here, in both cases writers went to work and did their jobs well.

That’s because the ark is a “macguffin” an object that the characters seek throughout the story, but that is only incidental to the ACTUAL point of the story (character arc, love story, etc)

kzfaq.info/get/bejne/n8uBepB5r96-inU.htmlsi=I9nhCkztTc6ICdpw No offense, but this is a better explanation

People who like BBT are a word that I can’t say on the internet

Soooo, you're mad about the fictional opinion of fictional characters over a movie??

This just makes me so sad for how far they have ruined our hero...OG trilogy

No they are right this films series are overrated way overrated and kinda suck

bro got triggered enough by some stupid joke to make a whole ass rant about a children's character. and yet they call women the sensitive ones 💀

I mean who actually takes any criticism of anything by TBBT writers seriously?