• tal@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    27 days ago

    I was just trying to grab the above because it’s a famous example of Indy not doing that, but aight, let’s put some numbers on it.

    This guy looks like he’s gone to the trouble of highlighting Indy’s kills:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zphhfHon_I&t=2561s

    Raiders of the Lost Ark

    Kills via shooting: 5

    Kills via other means: 4

    Temple of Doom

    Kills via shooting: 1

    Kills via other means: 20

    The Last Crusade

    Kills via shooting: 6

    Kills via other means: 7

    Kingdom of the Crystal Skull

    Kills via shooting: 0

    Kills via other means: 1

    Going by those numbers, most of Indy’s kills are via other means than shooting them – the only movie in which most were from him shooting people was Raiders of the Lost Ark – but I don’t know if I’d call it “so rare”.

    • MrScottyTay@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      27 days ago

      But not every altercation he has ends in the death of someone so i don’t know if deaths is the metric to measure it by

      • Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        27 days ago

        Yeah, the immediate problem with comparing gun to non-gun kills is that anything involving a gun is automatically more likely to result in someone dead. So it doesn’t really give you a picture of how Indy likes to approach problems. And once a gun does become the tool of choice in a scene, the body count is likely to rack up a lot faster. You can show five people getting gunned down much faster than you can show one Nazi getting his head propellered off. Guns tend to be how disposable mooks die, but signature enemies get the more elaborate deaths.