Indiana Jones

12122242627199

Comments

  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,804
    mattjoes wrote: »
    I love the refrigerator scene in KotCS. When Indy realizes the bomb is about to drop, and beings looking around the house to figure out what to do to save his life, he looks convincingly desperate, more so with that cheerful music playing the background. It's a ridiculous moment, but in a good way. It's distinctive, memorable and not played for laughs (except for that damn gopher). In regards to the film, I'm more bothered by the lack of character development, the superfluous number of characters and the excessive comedy in the jungle action scenes.

    In all, it was a valiant attempt to recapture the magic of the first three films, and for what it was, I enjoyed the heck out of it. Getting Karen Allen back was the clincher for me- without her presence, I might have dismissed the film as MOST seemed to have.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    I too loved that fridge scene.
  • Posts: 19,339
    BT3366 wrote: »
    Does anyone else besides myself prefer the Indy series to Star Wars?

    Indiana Jones is more consistently good. All four brilliantso far.

    I do,a lot more !!

  • Posts: 632
    RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK: 10/10. The original, and still the best action movie ever made. No explanation necessary or given.

    TEMPLE OF DOOM: 7/10. Flawed, but ambitious and interesting. NB: it is not a sequel to RotLA; it is the movie for which the word "prequel" was invented. All of your marathons should begin with this one. http://bit.ly/2ucDRT7

    The only problem with that is the callback to when Indy shoots the swordsman in Raiders. The joke in Temple doesn't play without it happening (or being seen) first.

    Gotta agree-Raiders is a 10 out of 10!
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    JET007 wrote: »
    RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK: 10/10. The original, and still the best action movie ever made. No explanation necessary or given.

    TEMPLE OF DOOM: 7/10. Flawed, but ambitious and interesting. NB: it is not a sequel to RotLA; it is the movie for which the word "prequel" was invented. All of your marathons should begin with this one. http://bit.ly/2ucDRT7

    The only problem with that is the callback to when Indy shoots the swordsman in Raiders. The joke in Temple doesn't play without it happening (or being seen) first.

    Gotta agree-Raiders is a 10 out of 10!

    Agreed. There's no benefit to be had from watching them in anything other than the order of release.

    Otherwise you might as well say you should watch the River Phoenix scenes from TLC first then take out the DVD and watch TOD and Raiders before finishing TLC and then moving onto KOTCS.
  • JET007 wrote: »

    The only problem with that is the callback to when Indy shoots the swordsman in Raiders. The joke in Temple doesn't play without it happening (or being seen) first.

    My god that’s right! They should have saved a joke like that for Crusade!
  • Posts: 1,162
    RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK: 10/10. The original, and still the best action movie ever made. No explanation necessary or given.

    TEMPLE OF DOOM: 7/10. Flawed, but ambitious and interesting. NB: it is not a sequel to RotLA; it is the movie for which the word "prequel" was invented. All of your marathons should begin with this one. http://bit.ly/2ucDRT7

    LAST CRUSADE (or, "Rip-Off of the Lost Ark"): 5/10. Derivative and jokey, it squanders the goodwill of the first two pictures. Redeemed in large part by one of Sean Connery's liveliest performances.

    CRYSTAL SKULLS: 2/10. Ugh. Better movies include "Tomb of the Dragon Emperor," "The Cradle of Life," and "Krull."

    The stuff you drink must be good. I agree wholeheartedly with every single word of yours.
  • Posts: 16,169
    Watched KOTCS last night and enjoyed it far more than previously. Still, Mutt isn't exactly my favorite character in the series. Although I do love the greaser concept, I don't believe for an instant he's out of the late '50's. Even his D.A. doesn't look right.
    Also compared to the other films KOTCS still seems to have an airbrushed look to it that's difficult to explain. The other films just look more natural.
  • Last_Rat_StandingLast_Rat_Standing Long Neck Ice Cold Beer Never Broke My Heart
    Posts: 4,589
    Yesterday was the first time I'd seen Raiders from start to finish. Always caught parts but never in one sitting. Great Indy film and great film all together but not my favorite. Last Crusade will always be my favorite.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,217
    For me it’s
    1 Raiders
    2 Crusade
    3 Temple
    .
    .
    .
    4 Skull
  • mattjoesmattjoes Julie T. and the M.G.'s
    edited January 2018 Posts: 7,021
    I'd say Crusade, then Temple, then Raiders, then Skull.

    Skull felt like a retread of Crusade. It should've been its own film.
  • Fire_and_Ice_ReturnsFire_and_Ice_Returns I am trying to get away from this mountan!
    Posts: 25,160
    .
    talos7 wrote: »
    For me it’s
    1 Raiders
    2 Crusade
    3 Temple
    .
    .
    .
    4 Skull

    That's my rating also
  • Last_Rat_StandingLast_Rat_Standing Long Neck Ice Cold Beer Never Broke My Heart
    Posts: 4,589
    Crusade
    Raiders
    Skull


    Temple. Never was big on this one but it's next on my marathon so perhaps it will change. It's been years since I've watched it.
  • Posts: 11,425
    Always found Temple to be dire - it encapsulates all Lucas and Spielberg’s worst tendencies.

    Arc is obviously a masterpiece but I have to say Crusade gives it a good run for its money.

    Basically the lesson is that Indi should always be up against the Nazis - no other foe hits the mark.

    Have never seen Skull apart from a brief snippet on TV once which looked awful - really bad CGI.

    Can’t believe they set it in the 50s in Latin America and didn’t take the opportunity to have Nazis in it, when South America was swarming with them at that time. Missed opportunity. I blame bonkers Lucas.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    They have communists instead, works fine. There really is no difference.
  • edited January 2018 Posts: 11,425
    Disagree. Big difference. The USSR was a crucial ally in defeating the Nazis in WW2. Communism was a deeply flawed system but the ideology behind it wasn’t as evil as the racist eugenics underpinning Nazism. Even in the Bond films the Soviets were never really the baddies - it was always Spectre or Whoever trying to play the baddies off against each other. Nazis always make better baddies than Commies - always!
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Any state mafia will do.
  • Temple is pretty good once they get there.
    The opening and plane/raft escape is complete shit
  • WalecsWalecs On Her Majesty's Secret Service
    Posts: 3,157
    Getafix wrote: »
    Disagree. Big difference. The USSR was a crucial ally in defeating the Nazis in WW2. Communism was a deeply flawed system but the ideology behind it wasn’t as evil as the racist eugenics underpinning Nazism. Even in the Bond films the Soviets were never really the baddies - it was always Spectre or Whoever trying to play the baddies off against each other. Nazis always make better baddies than Commies - always!

    But they were in the books. Communist killed more people than the Nazis. Both were bad.
  • edited January 2018 Posts: 11,425
    Walecs wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    Disagree. Big difference. The USSR was a crucial ally in defeating the Nazis in WW2. Communism was a deeply flawed system but the ideology behind it wasn’t as evil as the racist eugenics underpinning Nazism. Even in the Bond films the Soviets were never really the baddies - it was always Spectre or Whoever trying to play the baddies off against each other. Nazis always make better baddies than Commies - always!

    But they were in the books. Communist killed more people than the Nazis. Both were bad.

    I’m not big on the books. Have read Moonraker. Villain is a Nazi. I agree Communism was evil but the superficially well intentioned bureaucratic machine is less threatening in an old school action flick than the concentrated ultra evil represented by the Nazis. It works so well with the biblically tinged plot lines of Ark and Crusade as well. Temple and Skull are just Lucas going off on one.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,804
    Temple is pretty good once they get there.
    The opening and plane/raft escape is complete shit

    I disagree here intensely. The opening is very Bond-like, and the dudes leaving the aircraft instead of just shooting them is clearly them following Lao-Che's orders to the letter. The raft plummet is a bit fantastic, but until Mythbusters debunks it, I still believe it's possible (though admittedly unlikely). I'm tempted to say it's my favourite Indy film, but that would be like saying Back To The Future II is my favourite Marty flick. All three are awesome in their own ways.
    Crystal Skull? I'd liken that to Rogue One in that it's not necessary, but a fun addition regardless.
  • edited January 2018 Posts: 5,767
    My only gripe with TOD is that the Indian village is dependent on certain stones for their wellbeing. A silly idea IMO. Apart from that the film is a master class in driving a story full force ahead. In that regard I find it the best of all Indy films.


    I feel like watching KOTCS again soon.
  • DrunkIrishPoetDrunkIrishPoet The Amber Coast
    Posts: 156
    JET007 wrote: »
    RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK: 10/10. The original, and still the best action movie ever made. No explanation necessary or given.

    TEMPLE OF DOOM: 7/10. Flawed, but ambitious and interesting. NB: it is not a sequel to RotLA; it is the movie for which the word "prequel" was invented. All of your marathons should begin with this one. http://bit.ly/2ucDRT7

    The only problem with that is the callback to when Indy shoots the swordsman in Raiders. The joke in Temple doesn't play without it happening (or being seen) first.

    Gotta agree-Raiders is a 10 out of 10!

    The problem with the joke in Temple is that it was given away in the preview.

    In the original preview for Raiders (I saw it in theaters as a teen), we actually saw Indy fighting Big Sword Guy with his whip.
    So when Indy shot that guy in the movie, it wasn't just a great moment--it was a reversal of expectations which came as a huge surprise.

    So naturally three years later when I saw the preview for Temple of Doom, in which Indy goes for his gun in a confrontation with TWO Sword Dudes--and the gun is gone--I was rubbing my hands gleefully, wondering: what will happen in the actual movie?? Will he draw his gun, only to be out of bullets? I was primed for some sort of fake-out, like the filmmakers had suckered us with before.

    But the surprise was: there was NO surprise! The movie was exactly what was shown in the trailer. So I couldn't help but be disappointed.

    Us old dogs who saw these movies on the big screens at the time of release are now outnumbered by newcomers who see them only on home video. There's a lot of discussion on How Do I Introduce My Kids to Bond? And, What is the Correct Order to Watch Star Wars (hint: Machete Rules!). The same is true with Indy. My advice: start with Temple. This makes Raiders the rare "sequel" which surpasses its source. When "Raiders" Indy shoots the Big Sword Guy, it functions perfectly fine as a "callback" to the time when "Temple" Indy tried and failed to shoot Two Sword Guys.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,804
    JET007 wrote: »
    RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK: 10/10. The original, and still the best action movie ever made. No explanation necessary or given.

    TEMPLE OF DOOM: 7/10. Flawed, but ambitious and interesting. NB: it is not a sequel to RotLA; it is the movie for which the word "prequel" was invented. All of your marathons should begin with this one. http://bit.ly/2ucDRT7

    The only problem with that is the callback to when Indy shoots the swordsman in Raiders. The joke in Temple doesn't play without it happening (or being seen) first.

    Gotta agree-Raiders is a 10 out of 10!

    The problem with the joke in Temple is that it was given away in the preview.

    In the original preview for Raiders (I saw it in theaters as a teen), we actually saw Indy fighting Big Sword Guy with his whip.
    So when Indy shot that guy in the movie, it wasn't just a great moment--it was a reversal of expectations which came as a huge surprise.

    So naturally three years later when I saw the preview for Temple of Doom, in which Indy goes for his gun in a confrontation with TWO Sword Dudes--and the gun is gone--I was rubbing my hands gleefully, wondering: what will happen in the actual movie?? Will he draw his gun, only to be out of bullets? I was primed for some sort of fake-out, like the filmmakers had suckered us with before.

    But the surprise was: there was NO surprise! The movie was exactly what was shown in the trailer. So I couldn't help but be disappointed.

    Us old dogs who saw these movies on the big screens at the time of release are now outnumbered by newcomers who see them only on home video. There's a lot of discussion on How Do I Introduce My Kids to Bond? And, What is the Correct Order to Watch Star Wars (hint: Machete Rules!). The same is true with Indy. My advice: start with Temple. This makes Raiders the rare "sequel" which surpasses its source. When "Raiders" Indy shoots the Big Sword Guy, it functions perfectly fine as a "callback" to the time when "Temple" Indy tried and failed to shoot Two Sword Guys.

    Yes.
  • Fire_and_Ice_ReturnsFire_and_Ice_Returns I am trying to get away from this mountan!
    edited February 2018 Posts: 25,160
    The first three Indy films are great, I never over analyse them as they are fun films paying home to old serials and are not films that demand that the viewer should take them too seriously.
  • Posts: 5,767
    JET007 wrote: »
    RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK: 10/10. The original, and still the best action movie ever made. No explanation necessary or given.

    TEMPLE OF DOOM: 7/10. Flawed, but ambitious and interesting. NB: it is not a sequel to RotLA; it is the movie for which the word "prequel" was invented. All of your marathons should begin with this one. http://bit.ly/2ucDRT7

    The only problem with that is the callback to when Indy shoots the swordsman in Raiders. The joke in Temple doesn't play without it happening (or being seen) first.

    Gotta agree-Raiders is a 10 out of 10!

    The problem with the joke in Temple is that it was given away in the preview.

    In the original preview for Raiders (I saw it in theaters as a teen), we actually saw Indy fighting Big Sword Guy with his whip.
    So when Indy shot that guy in the movie, it wasn't just a great moment--it was a reversal of expectations which came as a huge surprise.

    So naturally three years later when I saw the preview for Temple of Doom, in which Indy goes for his gun in a confrontation with TWO Sword Dudes--and the gun is gone--I was rubbing my hands gleefully, wondering: what will happen in the actual movie?? Will he draw his gun, only to be out of bullets? I was primed for some sort of fake-out, like the filmmakers had suckered us with before.

    But the surprise was: there was NO surprise! The movie was exactly what was shown in the trailer. So I couldn't help but be disappointed.

    Us old dogs who saw these movies on the big screens at the time of release are now outnumbered by newcomers who see them only on home video. There's a lot of discussion on How Do I Introduce My Kids to Bond? And, What is the Correct Order to Watch Star Wars (hint: Machete Rules!). The same is true with Indy. My advice: start with Temple. This makes Raiders the rare "sequel" which surpasses its source. When "Raiders" Indy shoots the Big Sword Guy, it functions perfectly fine as a "callback" to the time when "Temple" Indy tried and failed to shoot Two Sword Guys.
    Interesting. For me, that give-away in the trailer for TOD was THE most perfect lure into the cinema I ever experienced. I hadn´t seen Raiders at the time, just heard some stuff about Indiana Jones, contributing to some legend-building in my mind. Then I saw the trailer for TOD, and when Indy reached for his gun and it wasn´t there, I HAD to see what would come next. You´re right, what came next wasn´t that breathtaking, but I was so overwhelmed by the whole rest, I didn´t care. TOD was the first time I was overcome by the urge to see it several times in the cinema, something that was unthinkable until then, my parents would go, "You´ve seen it already, why do you want to see it again???" So I can say that TOD shaped my life to come :-).
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    I have seen all of them on the big screen. Loved them all the first time, and still do.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,718
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,976
    Time is a ticking. Can't say I'm even optimistic for what they might deliver after the last installment, but we'll see what they come up with.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,217
    Lol, and people are worried about Daniel getting older.......yes I know it’s different
Sign In or Register to comment.