The Last Crusade is definitely NOT the best
-
buddyboy28 — 10 years ago(August 12, 2015 05:58 PM)
The original trilogy took reality and merely "stretched" it a little
LOL. A bunch of people on a live volcano, a woman a few feet from lava without being burned to death, a metal cage being lifted out of lava, Indy stopping a speeding mine cart with his feet, a speeding mine cart jumping and landing perfectly on to the next track, young Indy teleporting himself from a "magic box" to the outside of a train
Raiders was the only one that merely stretched reality. Crystal Skull probably had more OTT stuff overall but none of the things were anymore cartoonish than some of the things that happened in the other sequels.
Yeah well, history is gonna change -
ScottBBT — 11 years ago(July 01, 2014 09:13 AM)
T-eschberger,
First, I know two people who rank Skull over Crusade - and that's just me! - so you're not the only one
I prefer Crusade because a) I think the father-son relationship is terrific, and it has a complete arc; and b) there are more action setpieces in Crusade, and on the whole they are better (although I'll take the Area 51 chase over the young Indy train chase any day).
Love them both, though! -
hnt_dnl — 11 years ago(July 22, 2014 11:00 PM)
Yep! I've re-watched
Temple of Doom
a bunch of times. The movie just has a confidence, flow, and self-effacing sense of fun that makes it stand the test of time. And the action sequences are superbly done. Not to mention, I love the dark tone and theme of that movie.
Doom
is probably in my Top 5 favorite Spielberg movies he's ever done. Whenever I watch
Crusade
, which is as little as possible, I literally believe Spielberg and Company decided to just make a copy of
Raiders
to cash in! -
LionInWinter — 10 years ago(April 30, 2015 12:57 AM)
"Better little personality than an obnoxious, cringe worthy, annoying, omnipresent and just all around movie ruining one"
I'm going to respectfully disagree with you right there. To me, the "love interest" wasn't in this movie, instead functionally replaced by Sean Connery, who was the best supporting character in the series. The only real complaint you have is that it's "playing it safe", which I happily welcomed after all the retarded changes brought in Temple of Doom. -
hnt_dnl — 11 years ago(July 22, 2014 10:56 PM)
Total agreement. Not even close to the best. My order is:
Temple
Raiders
Skull
Crusade
I know I'll get blasted for putting Skull before Crusade, but at least Skull offers up something different, while Crusade is a (very) poor clone of Raiders. -
ravi02 — 11 years ago(July 28, 2014 11:14 AM)
but at least Skull offers up something different,
No. In fact, Skull's story outline is similar to both Raiders and Crusade: Indy has to reconnect with Marion and an estranged family member (this time, Mutt); start at the University; has to battle a military force (this time, the Russians) and it all ends with him reconciling with both Marion and his formerly estranged family. The only difference with Skull is the presence of aliens at the end.
You hyperbole much? Crusade still has enough to distinguish it from Raiders: the backstory of Indy's origins; the father-son relationship; the female lead working with the villains and the exploration of medieval lore.
Oh and when it comes to sidekicks: Henry Jones Sr., Marcus and Sallah > Mutt, Oxley and Mac. -
hnt_dnl — 11 years ago(August 03, 2014 11:13 PM)
The "backstory" of Indy's origins was the first few minutes of the movie, which was a ridiculous few minutes that "explained" Indy's idiosyncrasies. It was filler. It's not like there were detailed flashback scenes interspersed at various points of the movie. THAT would actually have been more interesting storytelling. After the backstory part, we had Indy against Nazis looking for a religious artifact as the main part of the film, same plot as Raiders. And the father-son stuff could easily be construed as Connery taking on the "female" role, because of the nonstop bickering and (so-called) chemistry, just like with Marion and Willie in the first 2 movies.
-
ravi02 — 11 years ago(August 04, 2014 11:03 AM)
I guess you missed the scenes in the River Phoenix segment that told us how Indy and his father were distant even during their younger days. It shows us how Indy developed his adventurous spirit and drifted away from his father. River Phoenix does a good job in that scene and it leads to a great transition of adult Indy getting punched in the face. Doing further flashbacks would not have been "interesting storytelling" as that would have just been irrelevant.
The Nazi-stuff was not the same as Raiders. This time the mythology centered around Medieval lore and the backstory of the crusades. The female lead was also in league with the villains. Indy's backstory is also explored bringing in some character development. There is also the Brotherhood of the Cruciform sword and their ambiguous nature, making the story about the grail more interesting as to which side was good and bad.
because of the nonstop bickering and (so-called) chemistry, just like with Marion and Willie in the first 2 movies.
Again, you seem to cherry-pick certain points while ignoring the rest of the film. While they do engage in some comical bickering, they have enough dramatic moments to balance the levity. The scene where Henry slaps Indy for blasphemy, the dinner aboard the zeppelin, "I discovered my Charlemagne" and the climax where Indy has to save his father from dying.
It's much more dramatically interesting than the stuff with Indy and Willie in ToD as that relationship was all slapstick comedy played for laughs. -
NeonManiac0 — 11 years ago(July 31, 2014 01:27 AM)
Last Crusade and Crystal Skull tend to rotate for me but these days I'm more likely to marginally pick Crystal Skull. Entertaining as Last Crusade is, for me it's too comical and jokey at times and too deriative of the first movie and lacks the feeling of danger the others have. Still an outstanding film, though.
-
Kruleworld — 11 years ago(January 24, 2015 08:47 PM)
by
CyborgGoblin
too deriative of the first movie
That's because after Temple of Doom, everyone said Raiders was better and that's what they should do. it's a common theme around these boards. While you have mentioned this is derivative, others have complained that it's not enough like Raiders.go figure.
Gimli: Youll find more cheer in a graveyard.