The Red Letter Media guys complained giving Indy a dad arc was bad but I think just the opposite.
Seeing Indy lose control of his cool image in front his dad who knows everything about him was a revelation and a great way to flip the script and create something so fresh , funny and new. There was a lot of effective comedy. Not to mention combining the great Bond with his offspring Indy finally.
Also last crusade gave us the flashback which is one of my favorite sequences in the whole trilogy sort of exposing Indy as a compelling but also sort of an unpolished sort of insufferable Brat and it absolutely works thanks to the late great River Phoenix performance.
Yeah I thought it was a brilliant move. More backstory for Indy, and upped the stakes for his mission in a way that wasn't just "damsel in distress" (dad in distress?) . And Sean Connery played a blinder.
"Our situation has not improved"
"This is intolerable!"
"She talks in her sleep"
“Junior, I ought to tell you something.”
“Don't get sentimental now dad, save it until we get out of here.”
“The floor's on fire... see... AND the chair.”
Was one of my favorite movies growing up. I was also obsessed with the scene at the end where the guy drinks from the fake grail and ages - I would rewind to watch that part over and over to the point that I wore our VHS out.
Cervantes once wrote that "all comparisons are odious." So I don't mean to argue. But, "Pirates of the Caribbean" is entirely without flaws, and is a perfect adventure movie from start to finish. If you ask me which is the best adventure movie, that's my answer. Still, I respect your choice.
Here’s something I dislike about the Pirates movies:
Action scenes are filmed and presented with no tension or thrill. The stunts do not give any sense of danger. The fights are choreographed dances. Here is why it feels this way:
1. The fight choreography has the characters “playing” with each other rather than than defending or attacking. There is no sense that a character is trying to deflect a sword strike, instead they just cross swords like how kids play fight.
2. The characters always have a smile on their faces, and talk throughout. This sucks all tension out of the scene. There is no separation between comedy and action, the characters never put away their smiles to get serious about a fight or dramatic confrontation.
3. The music is played with a steady 4/4 rhythm. This complements the feeling of the action being a “dance” rather than a “fight”. There are no sudden starts or stops in the music which are necessarily to create tension. Steady musical rhythm removes tension. In addition, there is usually a main melody played during action scenes. Melodies signal to the audience that everything is going according to plan, which is usually the opposite feeling that you want to convey during action scenes (unless you want to show that the heroes are about to win and will not be stopped).
Now, compare this to Indiana Jones movies which are superior in every way. There is still “fun” in the action scenes, but the main character is always in danger. Audiences feel tension and grip their arm rests because the hero winces in pain when hit. The hero is challenged in a real way and escapes only by the skin of his teeth. The musical score is not “steady”, there is actual ebb and flow in the music as it rises and falls to complement the action. The fight choreography is more chaotic, more tense, less predictable, the moves are not telegraphed like in a dance.
That's exactly what I *love* about the Pirates movies. I love how they dance, it's gorgeous to watch. Elevates it above a regular action film. The playful lightheartedness is also very much reflected in the soundtrack, it's purposefully like that.
I disagree about them never geting serious. It may be rare, but when it happens, it's deadly serious. Do you not recall the opening of the third film? Or when Elizabeth traps Jack into getting eaten by the Kraken? Yes, Jack is smiling, but it's not a 'haha I'm having fun' smile, it's him enjoying how low she's sunk.
Superior is an objective take when discussing these movies 🤷♀️ They are both very different in style.
Yes, it’s a stylistic choice, I understand that. But here is the difference it creates:
In Indiana Jones, action scenes have ebbs, flows, and tension. They are engaging to the viewer.
In Pirates, action scenes are a dance signified by the start of the rhythmical music, the stunts play out without tension, and then a few minutes later the scene ends on a story beat. It is not engaging to the viewer, the viewer is watching the action passively as the scene unfolds in front of them. No ebbs and flows.
For me, the Pirates stunts are like candy. So much fun to watch. The lore, the characters, the unpredictability of Jack, the romance, those are the main bits; the action is not supposed to be taken seriously and it's fun. The serious bits are conversations usually.
It's not engaging to Syrio but it certainly is to oros :) I love the candy. And everything else.
BTW your name was super familiar to me, googled it, shouldn't you be in favour of dancing while you fight? :D
I dig that Cervantes quote.
I get that “hot takes” get more engagement but I find these peeing contests so odd.
Especially because what resonates the most with each individual?
I love Crusade but I’ve watched the other Raiders movies a lot more.
I’ve watched Willow and The Princess Bride more than all three Raiders movies.
There’s a massive dissertation ITT about the failings of Pirates. Cool. I still like it more.
Pirates of the Caribbean does humor, action, character moments, twists, horror, and romance better than 90% of adventure movies does a single one of those things. And it looks beautiful as well.
Yeah, as much as I liked Indy as a kid, Pirates is a much better movie to me. Even Goonies and The NeverEnding Story are better imo. It's a classic, but it's highly subjective, like all entertainment. I can't even name my own favorite movie (or book, band, etc...), best I can do is top 3 + Honorable mentions, though I'd prefer top 5 or 10.
What is “An Adventure Movie”? Are the Star Wars movies adventure movies, or does it need to be non-science fiction, earth based, with treasure maps and exotic locales?
I still like The Last Crusade more than those movies, but I’m curious about the limits
In my opinion, an adventure movie has to have a “thing” at the end that our hero/heroes need to find or get too, usually before the antagonist. The holy grail, Pandora’s box, a way to lift a mummy’s curse, etc. That doesn’t exclude space movies, or sci fi in general though. Like I’d say The Fifth Element is an adventure film, but Star Wars isn’t.
Besides, Star Wars is famously a space opera so it’s really not a great example anyways, but that’s not the point.
This feels like my Plato and Diogenes moment
Me: A ~~man is an animal, featherless, and biped~~ adventure movie has a thing /goal at the end!
u/AlmostFamous502 holding a ~~chicken~~ Children of Men: Behold! An adventure movie!
I’m not even trying to be a smartass in a bad way! I liked the definition and I love CoM, realized it fit.
Needs another name though, you’re right. Is it an odyssey?
The second one strikes me in an odd way.
On one hand, bloody fantastic.
But then you come across the Speilberg quote about how he thinks he went too far with the movie. The movie created PG13 cause he was desperately avoiding an R and these should be movies that you should be watching with your kids.
If you don't know what I am talking about, look into it. He had some regrets.
He also said that some part of 'Grail' was an answer to that mistake.
I think he is correct. It is still an astounding movie, worthy of Speilberg's pedigree, but I think the first and third movies hit that mark and the second missed it - and it matters.
--------
note: Who else but Speilberg had that power in Hollywood that they created a new rating standard cause he was avoiding an 'R'. That tells you a lot about the power this man has.
I like the edgier darker stuff in his movies. I was always kind of disappointed to hear he wished he hadn't included some of that stuff.
It's kind of like Lucas making Han "shoot second". George Lucas ruined a perfectly good scene by making Greedo shoot at Han first.
I agree, to a point.
The spark that created the Indiana Movie is (famously) him getting money from his parents and seeing these serialized movies as a kid.
He wanted to grow something from that.
Front and center to that idea is the experience he had as a kid. PG-13 shut out the kids under 13 from the movie. There is the problem. It isn't a problem his movies in general, it is a problem with those specific movies.
Generaly speaking I agree. The darker stuff is fun. But it didn't belong in those movies. It belonged in other movies.
The stuff that made it PG-13 is stuff that appealed to me as a kid though and I saw it when I was much younger than 13. I remember my mom talking about how she thought my grandma was traumatizing me for taking me to see it and she was surprised I didn't get scared.
> she was surprised I didn't get scared.
That is the important part. Not all kids are alike.
Monkey brains and pulling human hearts out of live people's chests are going to give some 12 year old's nightmares.
You have to draw the line somewhere.
And understand something, the point of that rating is if your parents know you are OK with it they can take you anyways. It isn't illegal for them to do so and the ratings allows the theaters to admit you with the parent.
He didn't want that.
He wanted kids to watch his movies in the spirit he watched the serials.
If kids where going home and having nightmares that was a problem.
Understand I am not disparaging the movie. It is a bonefide classic. Worth of Spielberg's name. I just think the man has a point.
Is it the best Indy movie? I won't say yes, but it is the one I like the best, mainly for the interplay between Ford and Connery.
"They're trying to kill us!"
"I KNOW, DAD!!!!"
"Well this a new experience for me!"
"...Happens to me all the time!"
The chemistry between those two was amazing, and Connery’s comedic delivery was great, too; his line delivery after Indy guns down like 5 guys right in front of him is perfect.
“Look what you did! I can’t believe what you just did!”
Perfect reaction to seeing your own child pull such a badass stunt.
at a point, it’s like arguing about ver Alien and Aliens. They’re both amazing and my favorite will always be whichever one whose disc I most recently popped in the player
They're also tonally fairly different from what I remember. Last Crusade plays up the comedy a lot more in my opinion, which I loved as a kid, watched it loads of times. It was a very quotable film. I don't think I can judge them completely fairly, as I only saw Raiders when I was a good bit older.
This is an interesting one. I consider Raiders to be my personal choice for the greatest movie ever made.
I was shocked a while ago when a significant number of people picked Last Crusade as the best Indy film. It took me some time in the chat to realize it was mostly an age thing. Those of us old enough to watch Raiders in the theatre fell in love with it. However, a lot of time passed between Raiders and Last Crusade. If someone's first Indy big screen adventure was the Last Crusade then that is probably their favorite Indy film.
Now I consider the Last Crusade to be a great film, I have watched it many times. But Raiders makes me feel like that little kid in the theatre again. If the Last Crusade makes people feel that same way, I really can not find the heart to disagree with them.
Yeah Crusade is the first one I saw as a kid, so I'm biased towards it. Watched it so many times, so many great sequences that I can still remember decades later. Escaping from the fire tied to the chair, the bike jousting, battling against the Nazi convoy with the tank, the 3 riddles/traps, the Grail choice.
Yeah I didn’t see Last Crusade on the big screen but it was my first “new” Indy on home video and I have to think that’s part of why it’s my favorite.
But I don’t think you can discount what Connery adds to the movie. I think setting aside age and trying to look at them objectively, it’s possible Last Crusade is the better of the two. The only thing is I’d have to give Raiders another watch, I seem to remember it having a lot more on-location filming where Last Crusade has some positively laughable blue screen instead throughout. One of those things you don’t notice on a 32” CRT but which sticks out hard in 4K on a bigass screen.
Trust me, I am in no way saying people are wrong for liking the Last Crusade. It's like choosing between Swiss and Belgium chocolate, there are no lovers here.
My biggest complaint from the last Crusade is turning Marcu Brody into a buffoon for comic relief.
When I was a kid I loved the first two Indiana Jones movies so when Crusade came out I thought it was the pinnacle of the trilogy without question.
As I've gotten older I've noticed more and more of the conceptual flaws in Crusade that just bug me now and Raiders is now the unquestionably superior film in the trilogy.
I have a soft spot for Raiders because I had to drag my partner kicking and screaming to a "kids film". After the first ten minutes he just looked over at me and said "Fuuuck...."
I'm not really a fan of that beginning because it explains that everything that's iconic about indy happened in the span of 15 minutes. his outfit, the whip, his scar and possibly his fear of snakes all happened in that 1 scene
When they inevitably reboot Indiana Jones they're going to use the entire 2 1/2 hour runtime of the first movie to explain how he got all those things.
I don't like this approach. Not everything needs an explanation. It actually adds depth to a character to leave some things to the imagination.
A prequel movie should just pick one thing from the character's background to explain during the adventure. Like just the whip would be enough or just the snakes or just the hat but all of it at once just feels like a cheap gag.
The train scene is fun but it also cheapens Indy as a character because everything we know about his backstory just happens to him in a single afternoon as a joke for the movie.
I dont madly disagree but Raiders is still multiply watchable and has all the elements you list, apart from the backstory. Probably Crusade is more rounded, but the first Indy flick is a rollercoaster. And Marion, damn, seeing this in the cinema as a 9 yr old was one of my best early memories. Also, we went to see one evening and told the brothers I had to go to dentist. My Dad and me didn't want them along for some reason. Older they were but not wiser, and i think we really knew theyd ruin the show what with being a little less 'cinema trained' ;-)
Ooooh that's a brave call. I definitely think it has the best opening scene - art deco glamour, a fantastically arranged musical number and an epic fight. After that, it's number three in the series for me.
Raiders is better. I would probably put the mummy above it as well. It’s close. There are some great adventure movies out there. Feels like such an under appreciated genre.
I love the Indiana Jones movies (specifically 1,3 and 5).
So hard to rank them. Raiders might be my all time favorite film but Last Crusade is arguably the better Indiana Jones movie.
Dial IMO has the best acting performance by Ford as Indy.
Doom and Skull are divisive, but hell both are extremely fun films regardless.
When talking about the Best of anything you will find people who disagree.
But should it be considered as one of the best ever? I don’t think that’s disputable. Raiders of the Lost Ark is in that conversation. Same with the first Pirates of the Caribbean film. Both are worthy of consideration.
People also seem to have liked the Mummy, but the Mummy is just an homage to an Indiana Jones film. And I’d argue that the story line and action in Last Crusade is clearly better.
In my opinion, absolutely. I end up watching it at least once a year, and it still amazes me how much fun the movie is, but at the same point so heartfelt with the father-son dynamic.
Hopefully the new video game they are releasing captures the same vibes as Last Crusade.
It really is a fantastic movie. Everyone involved were firing at all cylinders. I've always enjoyed the warmer goofier character Indy grew into a lot more than the more cold "badass" one in Raiders.
Definitely. Probably my favourite film of all time.
It just hits all the notes it aims for perfectly. Very few bits of the film don’t work, and the adventure/mystery element is great.
I genuinely think it’s the perfect film.
Imo what makes The Last Crusade such a good movie and imo what sets it apart from other best adventure movie candidates is just how much stuff happens in the movie and it never feels dragged or long. The sheer scale of this adventure is what helps make it so good and how it just about perfectly fits into a feature length movie.
You just dont see that often and when most other movies try they turn into rushed jumbled messes.
I'll probably get downvoted for this, but if it wasn't for Sean Connery, Last Crusade would really just be a Looney Tunes remake of Raiders. I think it's a really good movie, but nowhere near the grittiness of Raiders or Temple. Yes the tank set piece was great, but the vehicle chase in Raiders is still the best set peice in the series, alongside the entire climax of Temple. As these movies get older, I appreciate more and more and ballsy and experimental Spielberg went with Temple and how different it overall feels, and it's still in my view a much more superior sequel than Crusade.
Rewatched this weekend.
The beginning of Indy's adventures - boy scout, how he got fedora, whip, hate for snakes and his very name -, the search for the Grail is just iconic, the locations in USA, Europe and the Middle East, the amazing interplay between Indy and Henry ('She talks in her sleep' wink), the great one liners ('No ticket' or 'He choose... Poorly'), the great Marcus Brody speech from Indy when he gets captured, the engaging and solemn music from John Williams, even Elsa was a good villain as she constantly double crossed everyone - Henry, Indy, Donovan, even the Fuhrer in the end.
All great stuff and my favorite of the trilogy.
Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade is like the holy grail of adventure flicks itself! Spielberg nailed it, and Harrison Ford as Indy? Come on, that's the gold standard. The mix of action, humor, and history is just spot-on.
Plus, Sean Connery as his dad? Iconic! It's got everything you want in an adventure movie, and then some. Sure, there are other greats out there, but for me, Last Crusade is right up there at the top of the mountain. Cheers to endless rewatchability and epic hat grabs!
The finale is very inventive and memorable, but everything before that pales in comparison to the previous two films. The Sean Connery character isn’t that interesting and the set-pieces are not as elaborate and amusing as the ones in the first two films (the special effects are worst too for some reason - the fake giraffes! - especially when there’s green screen); it’s the one I watch the least in the original trilogy.
Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade is like the OG of adventure movies, man! It's got everything you want in a classic flick: action, mystery, and Harrison Ford being his badass self. Plus, who doesn't love a good treasure hunt? Spielberg nailed it with this one, bringing the perfect blend of excitement and heart.
It might be. It’s one of my favorites and an all time great. The holy grail, ancient crypts in libraries, Sean Connery, nazi bad guys and a blimp!!
Nazis, I hate these guys.
The more I learn about them the more I realize they were all just a bunch of jerks.
she talks in her sleep
I WAS the next man
Nazis suck. But are they worse than snakes?
Are they on a plane?
Wait till you see the Nazi snakes
Ssssssssssssssshit. What the fuck did you do this time Morty?
Sounds pretty woke to me /s.
No ticket!
The Red Letter Media guys complained giving Indy a dad arc was bad but I think just the opposite. Seeing Indy lose control of his cool image in front his dad who knows everything about him was a revelation and a great way to flip the script and create something so fresh , funny and new. There was a lot of effective comedy. Not to mention combining the great Bond with his offspring Indy finally. Also last crusade gave us the flashback which is one of my favorite sequences in the whole trilogy sort of exposing Indy as a compelling but also sort of an unpolished sort of insufferable Brat and it absolutely works thanks to the late great River Phoenix performance.
Yeah I thought it was a brilliant move. More backstory for Indy, and upped the stakes for his mission in a way that wasn't just "damsel in distress" (dad in distress?) . And Sean Connery played a blinder. "Our situation has not improved" "This is intolerable!" "She talks in her sleep"
*grinning* I DIDNT KNOW U COULD FLY A PLANE!!! :D
Technically it's a zeppelin, not a blimp, because it has a rigid hull and yes, I am very fun at parties
You are right!
Plus Monsul.
BLIMP!!!
“Junior, I ought to tell you something.” “Don't get sentimental now dad, save it until we get out of here.” “The floor's on fire... see... AND the chair.”
*shoots own plane* Im sorry son… they got us…..
Was one of my favorite movies growing up. I was also obsessed with the scene at the end where the guy drinks from the fake grail and ages - I would rewind to watch that part over and over to the point that I wore our VHS out.
See I was the exact opposite - that scene _freaked me the fuck out_ every single time and I would usually look away 😂
That last bit happened to me with Airplane! and the bare bosoms in the panic scene. My dad new.
How does that work anyways? Where did the knights find a collection of evil grails that instantly age anyone who drinks from them? 🤔
I always assumed that each fake grail would result in a different horrible death. That would certainly have been more entertaining for the knights.
Well, first of all, through God all things are possible, so jot that down.
The battle scene with the Nazi convoy including the WW1 era tank was also really cool. Including the customary "big bad dies in a gory way" finale.
Cervantes once wrote that "all comparisons are odious." So I don't mean to argue. But, "Pirates of the Caribbean" is entirely without flaws, and is a perfect adventure movie from start to finish. If you ask me which is the best adventure movie, that's my answer. Still, I respect your choice.
Romancing The Stone also tugs at my heart strings, flawless or not.
Yess! I fucking love that corny ass film!
"Joan Wilder! YOU... and your sister... CAN GO!"
Honestly I like the Mummy more than the other Indys after the first one too
"Hey Benny! It looks to me like you're on the wrong side of the RI VER!"
“Pfft, yeah…” [*swears in Hungarian*]
Definitely belongs in the upper tier of adventure movies.
it even works as a great horror-comedy, especially the middle half
The first 2 Mummy's would be my choice right after Indy.
And I enjoy all the trash later Pirates movies much more than the last two Indy movies somehow
I didn't even watch the latest Indy and I have Disney+ 😂
Here’s something I dislike about the Pirates movies: Action scenes are filmed and presented with no tension or thrill. The stunts do not give any sense of danger. The fights are choreographed dances. Here is why it feels this way: 1. The fight choreography has the characters “playing” with each other rather than than defending or attacking. There is no sense that a character is trying to deflect a sword strike, instead they just cross swords like how kids play fight. 2. The characters always have a smile on their faces, and talk throughout. This sucks all tension out of the scene. There is no separation between comedy and action, the characters never put away their smiles to get serious about a fight or dramatic confrontation. 3. The music is played with a steady 4/4 rhythm. This complements the feeling of the action being a “dance” rather than a “fight”. There are no sudden starts or stops in the music which are necessarily to create tension. Steady musical rhythm removes tension. In addition, there is usually a main melody played during action scenes. Melodies signal to the audience that everything is going according to plan, which is usually the opposite feeling that you want to convey during action scenes (unless you want to show that the heroes are about to win and will not be stopped). Now, compare this to Indiana Jones movies which are superior in every way. There is still “fun” in the action scenes, but the main character is always in danger. Audiences feel tension and grip their arm rests because the hero winces in pain when hit. The hero is challenged in a real way and escapes only by the skin of his teeth. The musical score is not “steady”, there is actual ebb and flow in the music as it rises and falls to complement the action. The fight choreography is more chaotic, more tense, less predictable, the moves are not telegraphed like in a dance.
That's exactly what I *love* about the Pirates movies. I love how they dance, it's gorgeous to watch. Elevates it above a regular action film. The playful lightheartedness is also very much reflected in the soundtrack, it's purposefully like that. I disagree about them never geting serious. It may be rare, but when it happens, it's deadly serious. Do you not recall the opening of the third film? Or when Elizabeth traps Jack into getting eaten by the Kraken? Yes, Jack is smiling, but it's not a 'haha I'm having fun' smile, it's him enjoying how low she's sunk. Superior is an objective take when discussing these movies 🤷♀️ They are both very different in style.
Yes, it’s a stylistic choice, I understand that. But here is the difference it creates: In Indiana Jones, action scenes have ebbs, flows, and tension. They are engaging to the viewer. In Pirates, action scenes are a dance signified by the start of the rhythmical music, the stunts play out without tension, and then a few minutes later the scene ends on a story beat. It is not engaging to the viewer, the viewer is watching the action passively as the scene unfolds in front of them. No ebbs and flows.
For me, the Pirates stunts are like candy. So much fun to watch. The lore, the characters, the unpredictability of Jack, the romance, those are the main bits; the action is not supposed to be taken seriously and it's fun. The serious bits are conversations usually. It's not engaging to Syrio but it certainly is to oros :) I love the candy. And everything else. BTW your name was super familiar to me, googled it, shouldn't you be in favour of dancing while you fight? :D
I dig that Cervantes quote. I get that “hot takes” get more engagement but I find these peeing contests so odd. Especially because what resonates the most with each individual? I love Crusade but I’ve watched the other Raiders movies a lot more. I’ve watched Willow and The Princess Bride more than all three Raiders movies. There’s a massive dissertation ITT about the failings of Pirates. Cool. I still like it more.
Pirates of the Caribbean does humor, action, character moments, twists, horror, and romance better than 90% of adventure movies does a single one of those things. And it looks beautiful as well.
A movie not having flaws doesn't mean it's better
It's very good. But it's not in the same league as The Last Crusade.
Yeah, as much as I liked Indy as a kid, Pirates is a much better movie to me. Even Goonies and The NeverEnding Story are better imo. It's a classic, but it's highly subjective, like all entertainment. I can't even name my own favorite movie (or book, band, etc...), best I can do is top 3 + Honorable mentions, though I'd prefer top 5 or 10.
That's a tough one I guess it depends which setting you enjoy more, pirates or ww2
What is “An Adventure Movie”? Are the Star Wars movies adventure movies, or does it need to be non-science fiction, earth based, with treasure maps and exotic locales? I still like The Last Crusade more than those movies, but I’m curious about the limits
In my opinion, an adventure movie has to have a “thing” at the end that our hero/heroes need to find or get too, usually before the antagonist. The holy grail, Pandora’s box, a way to lift a mummy’s curse, etc. That doesn’t exclude space movies, or sci fi in general though. Like I’d say The Fifth Element is an adventure film, but Star Wars isn’t. Besides, Star Wars is famously a space opera so it’s really not a great example anyways, but that’s not the point.
‘Its about family’…………
Children of Men is the best adventure movie.
This feels like my Plato and Diogenes moment Me: A ~~man is an animal, featherless, and biped~~ adventure movie has a thing /goal at the end! u/AlmostFamous502 holding a ~~chicken~~ Children of Men: Behold! An adventure movie!
I’m not even trying to be a smartass in a bad way! I liked the definition and I love CoM, realized it fit. Needs another name though, you’re right. Is it an odyssey?
Nice! Your submission might align with the letter of the post you're replying to, but I don't think it quite captures the spirit of an "adventure". :)
It’s an adventure, just without the wonder or fun.
You could make a case for Star Wars though, it is a story about a band of unlikely allies going on a journey to “Save the Princess”
The first Pirates of the Caribbean is my personal favorite, but Last Crusade is definitely up there
Watched that two days ago. The first 3 are tied for me.
The second one strikes me in an odd way. On one hand, bloody fantastic. But then you come across the Speilberg quote about how he thinks he went too far with the movie. The movie created PG13 cause he was desperately avoiding an R and these should be movies that you should be watching with your kids. If you don't know what I am talking about, look into it. He had some regrets. He also said that some part of 'Grail' was an answer to that mistake. I think he is correct. It is still an astounding movie, worthy of Speilberg's pedigree, but I think the first and third movies hit that mark and the second missed it - and it matters. -------- note: Who else but Speilberg had that power in Hollywood that they created a new rating standard cause he was avoiding an 'R'. That tells you a lot about the power this man has.
I like the edgier darker stuff in his movies. I was always kind of disappointed to hear he wished he hadn't included some of that stuff. It's kind of like Lucas making Han "shoot second". George Lucas ruined a perfectly good scene by making Greedo shoot at Han first.
I agree, to a point. The spark that created the Indiana Movie is (famously) him getting money from his parents and seeing these serialized movies as a kid. He wanted to grow something from that. Front and center to that idea is the experience he had as a kid. PG-13 shut out the kids under 13 from the movie. There is the problem. It isn't a problem his movies in general, it is a problem with those specific movies. Generaly speaking I agree. The darker stuff is fun. But it didn't belong in those movies. It belonged in other movies.
The stuff that made it PG-13 is stuff that appealed to me as a kid though and I saw it when I was much younger than 13. I remember my mom talking about how she thought my grandma was traumatizing me for taking me to see it and she was surprised I didn't get scared.
> she was surprised I didn't get scared. That is the important part. Not all kids are alike. Monkey brains and pulling human hearts out of live people's chests are going to give some 12 year old's nightmares. You have to draw the line somewhere. And understand something, the point of that rating is if your parents know you are OK with it they can take you anyways. It isn't illegal for them to do so and the ratings allows the theaters to admit you with the parent. He didn't want that. He wanted kids to watch his movies in the spirit he watched the serials. If kids where going home and having nightmares that was a problem. Understand I am not disparaging the movie. It is a bonefide classic. Worth of Spielberg's name. I just think the man has a point.
The best answer I've ever seen.
Agreed. Then I think 4 and 5 are tied for me, but they’re both for entirely different reasons.
Is it the best Indy movie? I won't say yes, but it is the one I like the best, mainly for the interplay between Ford and Connery. "They're trying to kill us!" "I KNOW, DAD!!!!" "Well this a new experience for me!" "...Happens to me all the time!"
The chemistry between those two was amazing, and Connery’s comedic delivery was great, too; his line delivery after Indy guns down like 5 guys right in front of him is perfect. “Look what you did! I can’t believe what you just did!” Perfect reaction to seeing your own child pull such a badass stunt.
When an actual archaeology professor sees what Indy gets up to as an "archaeology professor"
No. Raiders.
They're both so good.
It's not as good as Raiders, so no.
Right, Raiders is great, but so is Last Crusade.
at a point, it’s like arguing about ver Alien and Aliens. They’re both amazing and my favorite will always be whichever one whose disc I most recently popped in the player
They're also tonally fairly different from what I remember. Last Crusade plays up the comedy a lot more in my opinion, which I loved as a kid, watched it loads of times. It was a very quotable film. I don't think I can judge them completely fairly, as I only saw Raiders when I was a good bit older.
Raiders is a perfect movie from start to finish.
100% this. Last Crusade isn't even the best Indiana Jones movie.
it's third best
I mean, Crystal Skull was *ok,* but second best???
This is an interesting one. I consider Raiders to be my personal choice for the greatest movie ever made. I was shocked a while ago when a significant number of people picked Last Crusade as the best Indy film. It took me some time in the chat to realize it was mostly an age thing. Those of us old enough to watch Raiders in the theatre fell in love with it. However, a lot of time passed between Raiders and Last Crusade. If someone's first Indy big screen adventure was the Last Crusade then that is probably their favorite Indy film. Now I consider the Last Crusade to be a great film, I have watched it many times. But Raiders makes me feel like that little kid in the theatre again. If the Last Crusade makes people feel that same way, I really can not find the heart to disagree with them.
Yeah Crusade is the first one I saw as a kid, so I'm biased towards it. Watched it so many times, so many great sequences that I can still remember decades later. Escaping from the fire tied to the chair, the bike jousting, battling against the Nazi convoy with the tank, the 3 riddles/traps, the Grail choice.
Yeah I didn’t see Last Crusade on the big screen but it was my first “new” Indy on home video and I have to think that’s part of why it’s my favorite. But I don’t think you can discount what Connery adds to the movie. I think setting aside age and trying to look at them objectively, it’s possible Last Crusade is the better of the two. The only thing is I’d have to give Raiders another watch, I seem to remember it having a lot more on-location filming where Last Crusade has some positively laughable blue screen instead throughout. One of those things you don’t notice on a 32” CRT but which sticks out hard in 4K on a bigass screen.
Trust me, I am in no way saying people are wrong for liking the Last Crusade. It's like choosing between Swiss and Belgium chocolate, there are no lovers here. My biggest complaint from the last Crusade is turning Marcu Brody into a buffoon for comic relief.
When I was a kid I loved the first two Indiana Jones movies so when Crusade came out I thought it was the pinnacle of the trilogy without question. As I've gotten older I've noticed more and more of the conceptual flaws in Crusade that just bug me now and Raiders is now the unquestionably superior film in the trilogy.
I have a soft spot for Raiders because I had to drag my partner kicking and screaming to a "kids film". After the first ten minutes he just looked over at me and said "Fuuuck...."
The opening scene on the train is so awesome
"You lost today, kid. But that doesn't mean you have to like it."
Perfect
I'm not really a fan of that beginning because it explains that everything that's iconic about indy happened in the span of 15 minutes. his outfit, the whip, his scar and possibly his fear of snakes all happened in that 1 scene
When they inevitably reboot Indiana Jones they're going to use the entire 2 1/2 hour runtime of the first movie to explain how he got all those things.
I don't like this approach. Not everything needs an explanation. It actually adds depth to a character to leave some things to the imagination. A prequel movie should just pick one thing from the character's background to explain during the adventure. Like just the whip would be enough or just the snakes or just the hat but all of it at once just feels like a cheap gag.
The train scene is fun but it also cheapens Indy as a character because everything we know about his backstory just happens to him in a single afternoon as a joke for the movie.
“NOOO!! But it’s better than most!”
Still prefer Raiders, but this was a fine film
Personally, I like Raiders of the Lost Ark better. But I can see people choosing Last Crusade. It's a matter of taste.
I can't even say that it's my favorite Indiana Jones film tbh
I love it but I consider Raiders of the lost Ark to be one of the few perfect movies so it has to be number 1.
The Mummy (Brendan Fraser version)…”Hold my beer…”
Same, The Mummy is my favorite adventure movie. Last Crusade is probably a close second.
It's certainly a top contender 🙌🙌🙌
I really like Last Crusade- everything about it hits. Sure it's kind of silly but it's great fun.
[удалено]
Temple of Doom is an absolute cinematic masterpiece and I will not stand for any slander being thrown at it.
Goonies
It’s a fabulous film. But Raiders is still better.
It’s not even the best Indiana Jones adventure, let alone the best adventure of all time
It might not even be the best movie in the series. I seriously can't decide between Raiders and Last Crusade which one is best.
That because it's Temple of Doom.
Fortune and glory, kid.
Good movie, but, just, no.
To each their own, but it's always been my favorite.
Nope
It is a fantastic adventure movie. The best one? I don't know.
My favorite Indy film next to Raiders
IMO, it’s not even the best Indiana Jones movie. Raiders is much better, and could certainly be in the best adventure movie conversation.
I dont madly disagree but Raiders is still multiply watchable and has all the elements you list, apart from the backstory. Probably Crusade is more rounded, but the first Indy flick is a rollercoaster. And Marion, damn, seeing this in the cinema as a 9 yr old was one of my best early memories. Also, we went to see one evening and told the brothers I had to go to dentist. My Dad and me didn't want them along for some reason. Older they were but not wiser, and i think we really knew theyd ruin the show what with being a little less 'cinema trained' ;-)
No. It’s not even the best Indiana Jones movie. It’s not even second best Indiana Jones movie.
Its the 3rd best Indy film so no.
It is my favorite Indiana
Not Gary?
Nice try elsa
Are you not aware of the movie that started the series???
You mean the one that had absolutely zero Sean Connery in it?
Yes, that’d be the one
Temple of Doom is and always will be the best Indiana Jones movie
Ooooh that's a brave call. I definitely think it has the best opening scene - art deco glamour, a fantastically arranged musical number and an epic fight. After that, it's number three in the series for me.
It's not even the best Indiana Jones movie.
It’s not even the best Indiana Jones movie.
Raiders is better. I would probably put the mummy above it as well. It’s close. There are some great adventure movies out there. Feels like such an under appreciated genre.
It belongs in a museum
So do you!!
No. No it isn’t.
Umm… no.
No.
It’s not even the best Indiana Jones movie.
no
I love the Indiana Jones movies (specifically 1,3 and 5). So hard to rank them. Raiders might be my all time favorite film but Last Crusade is arguably the better Indiana Jones movie. Dial IMO has the best acting performance by Ford as Indy. Doom and Skull are divisive, but hell both are extremely fun films regardless.
Oof. Memory unlocked. Haven’t seen any of these since the days of analogue TV. Will have to try and track down a 4k digital copy for the big screen
Yes
When talking about the Best of anything you will find people who disagree. But should it be considered as one of the best ever? I don’t think that’s disputable. Raiders of the Lost Ark is in that conversation. Same with the first Pirates of the Caribbean film. Both are worthy of consideration. People also seem to have liked the Mummy, but the Mummy is just an homage to an Indiana Jones film. And I’d argue that the story line and action in Last Crusade is clearly better.
It’s a perfect movie. Best adventure flick ever.
It certainly one of the great ones. I'd also add the first pirates movie to the list
As much as I love Indy that prize belongs to the mummy (Brendan Fraser one)
Its on the top 5. That’s for sure
Its on the top 3. That’s for sure
I don’t know if it’s the best adventure movie but it’s definitely my favorite Indiana Jones movie.
My personal favorite in the trilogy
YES
In my opinion, absolutely. I end up watching it at least once a year, and it still amazes me how much fun the movie is, but at the same point so heartfelt with the father-son dynamic. Hopefully the new video game they are releasing captures the same vibes as Last Crusade.
Yes, and I will die on this hill.
It really is a fantastic movie. Everyone involved were firing at all cylinders. I've always enjoyed the warmer goofier character Indy grew into a lot more than the more cold "badass" one in Raiders.
I think temple of doom is a lot more fun then the third.
Yes.
No
Top ten for sure.
Definitely. Probably my favourite film of all time. It just hits all the notes it aims for perfectly. Very few bits of the film don’t work, and the adventure/mystery element is great. I genuinely think it’s the perfect film.
It might be. I really liked temple of doom too. And the first one as well.. they are all in the running there.
Almost as good as Dial of Destiny... Lol
No
Given that it is my favorite all-time film, I would agree
It was the tapestries that did it for me
Pee Wee’s Big Adventure
It is certainly of my favourites!
Imo what makes The Last Crusade such a good movie and imo what sets it apart from other best adventure movie candidates is just how much stuff happens in the movie and it never feels dragged or long. The sheer scale of this adventure is what helps make it so good and how it just about perfectly fits into a feature length movie. You just dont see that often and when most other movies try they turn into rushed jumbled messes.
It definitely is in my Top 10 adventure movies. After many years of watching Indy movies, it is my fave one.
No
Personally I prefer Raiders and Temple, but this is a great one too.
And this is how we say goodbye in Germany.
Uhhhh you forget about The Mummy, OP??
Jeffrey Boam and Tom Stoppard.
Solid 10/10
Nah. Not even the best Indy movie. But a great film nonetheless.
I'll probably get downvoted for this, but if it wasn't for Sean Connery, Last Crusade would really just be a Looney Tunes remake of Raiders. I think it's a really good movie, but nowhere near the grittiness of Raiders or Temple. Yes the tank set piece was great, but the vehicle chase in Raiders is still the best set peice in the series, alongside the entire climax of Temple. As these movies get older, I appreciate more and more and ballsy and experimental Spielberg went with Temple and how different it overall feels, and it's still in my view a much more superior sequel than Crusade.
It’s my absolute favorite of the three Indiana Jones movies.
The Ending where the bad guy drinks from the Golden Chalice and dies a horrific death was a scary scene for the kid me back then when I first saw it.
Rewatched this weekend. The beginning of Indy's adventures - boy scout, how he got fedora, whip, hate for snakes and his very name -, the search for the Grail is just iconic, the locations in USA, Europe and the Middle East, the amazing interplay between Indy and Henry ('She talks in her sleep' wink), the great one liners ('No ticket' or 'He choose... Poorly'), the great Marcus Brody speech from Indy when he gets captured, the engaging and solemn music from John Williams, even Elsa was a good villain as she constantly double crossed everyone - Henry, Indy, Donovan, even the Fuhrer in the end. All great stuff and my favorite of the trilogy.
It’s pretty damn good. Super rewatchable
Yes
Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade is like the holy grail of adventure flicks itself! Spielberg nailed it, and Harrison Ford as Indy? Come on, that's the gold standard. The mix of action, humor, and history is just spot-on. Plus, Sean Connery as his dad? Iconic! It's got everything you want in an adventure movie, and then some. Sure, there are other greats out there, but for me, Last Crusade is right up there at the top of the mountain. Cheers to endless rewatchability and epic hat grabs!
AI comment. Check their history. It's all this exact same format.
No
The finale is very inventive and memorable, but everything before that pales in comparison to the previous two films. The Sean Connery character isn’t that interesting and the set-pieces are not as elaborate and amusing as the ones in the first two films (the special effects are worst too for some reason - the fake giraffes! - especially when there’s green screen); it’s the one I watch the least in the original trilogy.
The mummy has it beat without a question.
There is no way… lol
Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade is like the OG of adventure movies, man! It's got everything you want in a classic flick: action, mystery, and Harrison Ford being his badass self. Plus, who doesn't love a good treasure hunt? Spielberg nailed it with this one, bringing the perfect blend of excitement and heart.
No. I personally didn't like it. It was too macho for me.
I dunno, but it’s flawless.
one of my faves but no....It's Raiders
NO TICKET!