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
Totally agree Raiders... is a Masterpiece shot for shot its phenomenal.
OHMSS is probably the closest Bond film to a Masterpiece for me, I love FRWL and TB also.
The only way I can fault it is that it fails to set up Indy’s “don’t look at the Ark” advice. But other than that, I think it’s flawless, and actually excels in pretty much every department.
If I were to compare OHMSS, well I love it, but Lazenby is no Ford. Only Connery and Craig come close (sorry Roger; I love you!).
The truck chase is hands down the best live action sequence in cinema in Raiders.... Ford is only bestest by Connery for screen charisma in this kind of role, Steve McQueen is in the mix in modern cinema.
No one is arguing about religion. Surely we're allowed to figure out where Indiana Jones might stand on religion given his experiences.
Yeah, nobody was really arguing except for the people arguing about whether people were arguing.
All I was doing was tying @Risico007's comments into the arc that was clearly present in the first three films and why they worked well for me in comparison with the more sci-fi stuff present in the last film. It's really not that big of a deal, and certainly shouldn't open up any cans with worms in them! :)
None. But I do remember enjoying TLD more than Temple of Doom in the cinema (watched them both for the first time during the same week).
That's a damn good week.
An enormous problem with KOTCS is that the motivations are all over the place. In Last Crusade, Indy goes to rescue his father who has been captured and seems to be in serious danger, and also we're shown that the power of the grail is something which absolutely resonates with him in the scene with Marcus in Henry's house.
In Skull, on the other hand, a kid he doesn't know turns up and asks for his help in rescuing a guy Indy used to know a couple of decades ago (who he thought was pretty boring at the time) on the request of a woman called Mary he can't remember. In order to try and track down a fabled city of gold he doesn't believe exists, and has something to do with crystal skulls which he doesn't find very interesting. This is not how you set up a quest movie, and all of the stakes which were done so well in Crusade have gone out of the window. Indy doesn't care so why should we?
Note incidentally that when they do get the skull from the Russians after the jungle chase later in the movie, they continue on to return it to the aliens' spaceship. But... we don't really know why (Oxley wants to but is mad, Mac wants to find the city and lots of gold, and Indy is presumably just curious to have a look I guess), but they have a platoon of Russian soldiers after them; why not just chuck the thing in the river and go home? That would stop any plans Spalko has dead. There are more compelling reasons to stop than there are to keep going, but the script doesn't give strong reasons as to why anyone would care. There's a bit after the 'three waterfalls' sequence where they climb out of the water and Mutt has two lines; he says: "We got to go through that waterfall!" and then seconds later when Indy says he'll return the skull, Mutt replies "Who cares?"....!! If the writer can't decide if Mutt wants to go or not, why should we be bothered? It's so odd.
Honestly we should have had a dozen Indy movies by now.
Ford's reactions are funny, he briefly comments on the Indy 5 trailer.
I feel exactly the same
Damn straight! A fantastic sequence that left my mouth agape when I saw it at the cinema age 14.
I only watched Raiders again a few nights ago, and it really is a perfect film. And unbelievable how much they cram into less than 2 hours.
I rank them
1) Temple
2) Raiders
3) Crusade
TTOD is my favourite film in the series. I love the darker vibes of the film, the action, the score -- Oh that score! -- and the setting. Criticism is often aimed at Willie, ShortRound and the plot, but I don't mind them at all.
1. Raiders of the Lost Ark ****
2. The Last Crusade *** 1/2
3. Kingdom of the Crystal Skull ***
4. Temple of Doom ***
These are my personal favorites and doesn't necessarily reflect the quality of the movies. For example ToD is a better made film than KotCS but it's so dark and isn't as much fun as the others. Also TLC is a bit of a retread of RotLA but the addition of Sean Connery and his chemistry with Ford just elevates the film. KotCS is the weakest film of the series but I still think its a good film.
So I'm not the only one! I shared my ranking when I did a marathon of the films earlier this year and didn't think I found anybody who had the same ranking, let alone thought Temple was the best. Its darker tone is one of my favorite aspects.
I'm not a huge fan of the sequels. I don't even own them on any medium.
Temple Of Doom is childish even with all the heart removing stuff. And I can't abide child sidekicks.
Last Crusade is a little better, but just a rehash of Raiders. Connery is great, but turning Marcus into a buffoon was unforgivable.
Crystal Skull had it's moments, but it was mostly jaw droppingly bad.
Let's also accept that whatever one expects from Spielberg movies, this is the only IJ film with a child sidekick.