It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
That being said, Harrison looks great and really dialed in. The score is going to be a triumph and the fun looks to be back!
To be fair.... they are doing lots of real stunts in this Indy movie, but looking how we are getting swamped with Marvel and other movies, that are mostly CGI and green screen, I see your point.
I’m pretty sure that’s an actual stunt person jumping from one car to another.
Perhaps, "I've got a bad feeling about this..." or "I don't know. I'm making it up as I go along."
2. Raiders
3. Crusade
4. Kingdom
I imagine I'll rank DoD between crusade and kingdom but we'll see...
Raiders IS one of the greatest movies of all time. And if you want to look at it as an action movie only, then it's in the same league as Die Hard. Again How?
Can't really answer that except to say personal taste. I agree raiders is one of the best action films ever made, if not THE best.
But it does seem like temple has undergone a OHMSS rejuvenation since the 80's when it was considered the worst by far.
Raiders simply has a far superior script to TOD, but Temple is very enjoyable. TLC is just behind Raiders IMO, and TKOTCS is the weakest of the 4 films so far. I do have high hopes for DOD.
As far as my personal ranking, Raiders and Crusade are tied for #1, followed by Doom then Skull.
Although for me Temple of Doom is a very close second to Raiders and Crusade because it's just so fun and full of adventure, and I actually enjoy Willie Scott as a character.
The first three are a near perfect trilogy; each are extremely entertaining and have their own identity.
Agree. I think as far was what I enjoy watching, I'm Crusade -> Raiders is close -> Doom ->->-> Kingdom
I would have hated the child sidekick he would inevitably cast. "James Bond has to save little Drew Barrymore." Jokes aside, the prospect is awesome, but could go sour.
Same ? Hmm...I've got a bad feeling about that comparison...
To me Raiders is head and shoulders above what followed. The action doesn't let up but it all builds to the story and there are no wasted scenes as far as I can tell.
The start of Doom to me is a great mini movie. Love the Chinese version of "Anything Goes" and the dance number. I give Spielberg and Lucas credit that they made the sequel different from the original. I enjoyed the movie, didn't love it but enjoyed it. Then comes Last Crusade and I didn't like it. To me it felt like a greatest hits of Raiders but with a Dad tagging along. However when I became a Dad many years later, this movie hit differently and I have it higher than Doom.
Crystal Skull we started to see the effects of CGI. The ant scene was a poor cousin of the snakes, bugs and rats from the first movie. Those animals were real, or at least looked darn real. The ant scene looked like a CGI mess.
Temple of Doom is way too Spielbergy for me, the yelling and frantic chasing, the pauses for slack-jawed awe. And the appropriation of the Short Round name from my favorite Sam Fuller movie rubbed me the wrong way and still does.
I wouldn't want a Spielberg Bond film from any era.
Agreed. No one is arguing Raiders isn't great, just not everyone's favorite.
As a film buff, bordering on a film snob, it sometimes makes me feel a bit weird to say that TLC is my favorite of the series, despite the fact that ROTLA is one of the great action adventure films ever made. But in the end, I just love the Ford/Connery relationship and I find that the pacing of TLC is better (the second act of Raiders sags a bit for me). This is all a long way of saying that I think we can all be objective and subjective at the same time.
Fair enough. Controversial opinion of my own: Crystal Skull did well with its setting. It proved that a sequel would have no problem continuing with the late 50s-early 60s. Irina was a enjoyable villain. I’ve overall enjoyed it from the beginning.