 Unlike my previous 'Indiana Jones' reviews, this review is based on a one-and-only time viewing of a film. I, therefore, had to take a lot into consideration when I went in, and as a result, didn't actually terribly mind it. In fact, I enjoyed it! The two biggest considerations were between preparing myself to see some sort of time travel (which felt just about as out of place for Indy as Aliens did), and, to be frank, I didn't think it could be worse than 'Crystal Skull'. As I predicted from first trailer, this came out to be a pretty good "in-between" with (I think) much more good than bad to it.
Of course, this is gonna end up being one of those split-down-the-middle movies for a while to come for Indy fans. Right now, a lot of people are saying this is worse than 'Crystal Skull', but I have to disagree wholeheartedly. While the movie is by no means on par with 'Raiders' or 'Crusade', I might argue that I liked it a little better than 'Temple'. Unpopular opinion, maybe, but at least this didn't have a screaming damsel in distress the whole way through it. On the contrary, if this is indeed a passing of the torch to a new character, I think they picked a great person for the female role with Phoebe Waller-Bridge, who I knew from 'Fleabag' (which is a pretty solid show). Plot-wise, we open in 1944, when Nazis are in search of another ancient artifact of Christian symbolism in the French Alps. There, the Nazis capture Indy (Harrison Ford) and his accomplice, Basil Shaw (Toby Jones) while they attempt to intercept the relic from them. I won't go into spoiler territory here, but this all does lead to some true Indiana Jones-style action adventure involving a long chase on a train, which eventually leads to Indy getting his hands on this movie's central artifact; half of Archimedes' Dial, aka the "Antikythera", built by the one and only Archimedes. This device supposedly finds fissures in time, allowing for possible time travel. We then fast-forward to 1969, when an elderly Indy lives a lonely life in New York City. He has since separated from Marion (Karen Allen) for reasons involving their son, Mutt (Shia LeBeouff from 'Crystal Skull'), and it's all explained at one point in the film. One day, while teaching, he runs into his goddaughter, Helena Shaw (Waller-Bridge), daughter of Basil. She comes to study the dial, which Indy has in his possession after being given it by Basil, promising to destroy it, which he never does. Her actual plan is to sell the thing on the black market to help support herself and her own personal Short Round character, Teddy (Ethann Isidore). Of course, Indy won't be having any of that because something like this "belongs in a museum!" Before the trio (including Teddy) know it, however, they come face to face with Indy's old kidnapper; the Nazi, Voller (Mads Mikkelsen) who still looks quite young, and I guess it's supposed to be taken with a grain of salt. Anyway, this guy now works for NASA under the guise of "Dr. Schmidt", and he too is after the dial. The whole thing ends up being a pretty classic 'Indiana Jones' execution as it involves Indy (and company) keeping evil from getting its hands on something with great power. Along the way, we learn a thing or two, have some fun, and embrace a bit of true adventure. Now, as I said, the film isn't even close to being on par with 'Raiders' (which can be considered "classic" Indy) or 'Crusade' (which I consider "perfect" Indy). But personally, I might place it slightly above 'Temple' (which is "classic" Indy in its own, unique way to many, and I'm not here to undermine that). Aside from the aforementioned lead female character being a hell of a lot better here than in 'Temple', I also tend to prefer action/adventure 'Indy' as opposed to... shall we say... nightmare fuel 'Indy'. I even say that well-aware that the Thugee ceremony was placed #1 on my "Top 10 'Temple of Doom' Moments" list. But I mean c'mon, that's classic. I also appreciate how there's some fan service here, but I didn't feel like it really went overboard about anything. It was cool that you get a lot of that "classic" Indy through a lot of the movie. The chase scenes are fun, the dialogue is pretty humorous, and all in all, it's not a bad way for Indiana Jones to part ways with us once and for all (or so it is said). The only thing I really see irking people are the scenes and dialogue involving time travel, and maybe the character of Teddy (whom I didn't personally mind, but I can see him being a problem for some). I can't say I came out of it altogether "impressed", but I can say that I felt it was a satisfying step up from 'Crystal Skull'. 3/5
0 Comments
 I think there was a time when most 'Indiana Jones' fans considered 'Last Crusade' to be Indy's final project. It was good at bringing back old characters, it was about the search for the ultimate treasure, AND it ended with our heroes riding off into the sunset. It would have been a glowing film to leave the franchise on, and between that and this, there was a damn near twenty-year gap! However, with the big nostalgia boom of the time (which we still see a lot of today), it was only a matter of time before we started seeing the posters for a new 'Indiana Jones' movie.
Of course, I was 100% in for this and psyched as all hell. But it did soon teach me a thing or two about getting "overhyped". This was something I felt quite strongly didn't "fit" right with the rest of the series. Yet... I saw it three times. The first time was kind of a gimme, the second time was with some friends who paid my admission (thanks again), and the third was for Father's Day, which ultimately meant I DID still pay for three tickets. Anyway, when I first reviewed this over Facebook of all things (I used to be a little more "in your face" with these), the review didn't exactly glow as bright as the Shankara stones when you put them all together. I had a few choice words to say and wasn't as lenient with the way I reviewed things. Since I hadn't personally seen it since way back then, I decided to go into it with a much more open mind and look for the things that felt right this time. And I'm happy to say that while I still strongly consider this the weakest of the franchise, I was still able to find some things I liked about it. They all seem to present themselves in "moments", however, as I still have a very big problem with the film's overall style. However, I'm decidedly gonna be a little nicer about things this time and suggest what I "didn't like" rather than just tell everyone about how badly it sucked. With that, let's get to the basic central plot where we get Indy getting involved with an alien skull... which is something I feel any real Indiana Jones fan would read and have a less-than-positive response to. Taking place in 1957, 19 years after 'Last Crusade', Indy (Harrison Ford) is kidnapped by KGB agents, along with his partner, George "Mac" MicHale (Ray Winstone). The Russians, with these two in their trunk, infiltrate a secret government base in Nevada, labelled "Hangar 51". With this, you're pretty much there for it, or not, because this sets the tone for everything to come. This is not the typical Indiana Jones adventure, and you're gonna be in for something different than what you're used to if you're a fan. I will give the film a certain amount of creative credit in that it holds onto the supernatural element that tends to come with these films, and it does so in a solid way for the late 50s, considering the "Roswell Incident" that took place ten years earlier, and the idea that the 50s era does lend itself to a good sci-fi alien story. The Russians, led by Irina Spalko (Cate Blanchett) make Indy retrieve what seems to be an alien corpse from this facility, which he was forced to help retrieve from the UFO incident. A pretty decent fight ensues in which we get a good amount of Indy fan service, although, the Area 51 thing might feel a little too on the nose at times. Our hero does eventually escape, although it's revealed that Mac is a double agent, and we further learn that Indy has some kind of superpowers that keep him safe from nukes but... that's just a whole other thing I could write a load of paragraphs on that I won't get into. Let's fast-forward to the point where we meet "Mutt" Williams (Shia LaBeouf). You know his big reveal by how carelessly thrown together his nickname is if you remember a big end-of-film punchline from 'Last Crusade'. Mutt finds Indy and informs him that his former colleague, Harold Oxley (John Hurt) found a crystal skull in Peru, but has since been kidnapped along with his mother, Marion (Karen Allen, making her return). This ultimately sends Indy and Mutt on a mission to not only find and rescue "Ox" and Marion, but figure out what this crystal skull business is all about, and what the Russians want with it. One thing that occurred to me this time around is that some of the more obvious things I criticized it for before could have been written on purpose, not only to keep it relatively simple but again, to fit the supernatural element of the 50s era. Indeed, this does include the film being a bit cheesy at times. I think I feel a little better about it now than I did at first, understanding what Spielberg was really going for... but... that doesn't mean it's necessarily good either. Although I'm looking at this in a new light, there's still a good handful of issues with it that I can't overlook. The biggest thing for me was an overuse of CG, when we know full well that the practicality of the previous films was part of what made them so good. This felt much less "On-location" and much more "in our studio". Further to that, I wasn't a big fan of the dynamic between these characters, namely the fact that this does the whole "bickering couple for laughs" thing once in a while, which for me, ruins just about everything. It's always a cheap laugh in my opinion, much like farting just for the sake of making a funny noise. It's also just the stubborn Indiana Jones fan in me who ultimately feels that something's just off about this one, and it doesn't fall into place quite right. I can give it credit for what it tried to do, and for being different, but that doesn't mean the rest of it is necessarily good in its execution. 2/5  To many, the pinnacle of 'Indiana Jones' is 'Raders of the Lost Ark'. And who can argue the choice? 'Raiders' is a pretty damn awesome adventure, and it IS where you will see where most of Indy's farces come from. But for me, 'Last Crusade' is absolutely everything an 'Indiana Jones' film should be; taking everything good about 'Raiders' and just adding to it by bringing in new characters, bringing back old characters, and making it about the search for the Holy Grail - the ultimate find for any archaeologist. This is why some people refer to the most coveted item in their collections as their "Holy Grail".
I'm pretty certain that this was the first time I sat through an 'Indiana Jones' movie and thoroughly enjoyed it (except for the rapid aging scene which used to scare the hell out of me). I was introduced to this one through my brother, and it's one of the few movies that, to this day, we can both watch and have a totally equal amount of fun with. I could consider this title to be a sort of bonding experience for us, much like it probably was for my Dad and him when they caught it in theaters. I, meanwhile, stayed home with Mom because, at the age of 6, going on 7, it probably would have been a terrible idea. Regardless, when I did finally see it on VHS (now stone-aged tech), I had a lot of fun with it, and eventually, it became THE 'Indiana Jones' film that I wanted to watch more than the previous two. We open the film with a flashback in which we see, pretty much, everything that created the Indiana Jones character as we know him. One could almost consider it a fun pre-film short in which a young Indiana Jones (River Phoenix) gets chased by a few grave robbers, led by a man credited as "Fedora" (Richard Young - guess what Indy gets from him). They have found the golden cross of Francisco Vázquez de Coronado, Indy, afraid they'll take it for their own purposes, intercepts it, arguing that it "BELONGS IN A MUSEUM!". Through this chase on horseback and on a moving circus train, Indy also obtains his whip, complete with the explanation of his real-life chin scar which he received in a car accident. We also see why he hates snakes. It's perhaps a lot all at once, but it still does it all in pure Indiana Jones adventure style. Moving things along, however, we eventually get to 1938 where we get a very similar opening to 'Raiders'. We get Indy (now Harrison Ford) teaching a class of professor-crush-stricken girls, and to make it short, he's eventually approached by some people with an archeological "mission" He's seen by a collector of rare artifacts, Walter Donovan (Julian Glover), and told about the very real possibility that he could be on the right track to find the one and only Holy Grail. He just needs a little help. The Grail being Indy's father's obsession, however, eventually reveals that said father, Henry Jones (Sean Connery) has actually gone missing, being the guy Donovan hired before Indy. This is what gets Indy on his toes, and eventually, he and colleague and friend, Marcus Brody (Denholm Elliot) head to Venice, Italy to meet a contact named Dr. Elsa Schneider (Alison Doody) - a colleague of Henry's. Indiana is mostly there to find and rescue his father, but still has been tasked and financially backed by Donovan to locate the Grail, so Venice is pretty much where everything starts. Eventually, Indy finds himself up against a group of Nazis who are also interested in the Grail, along with the Brotherhood of the Cruciform Sword - an order who has protected the Grail from being found all of these years. We also get a complex relationship with his father, and it always strikes me as funny that the little old man Sean Connery plays here was my very first impression of him. He always does a great job, but one really can't help but appreciate the sense of humour he brings to this role. He and Ford play off each other incredibly well here! One may also appreciate the return of an old favourite here, as Sallah (John Rhys-Davies) makes a comeback as well! For my money, he's one of the more lovable characters in these films, providing a bit of comedy relief, but able to be serious when necessary. On that note, I have to say that I appreciate Brody here a lot more as well, as he's barely seen in 'Raiders'. I have to appreciate that they did more with his character here, even if they did make him a bit of a bumblebutt. It still lends itself to one of the funnier lines of the movie when Indy reminds his Dad that Marcus once "got lost in his own museum". This brings me to my next point, the sense of humour! I didn't fully realize how not only fun but funny this movie is! I'm not altogether sure, but there's a good chance this could be the most quotable of the 'Indy' titles. Something that makes this one so special is that it's an honest-to-God, somewhat light-hearted adventure. It's not intense like 'Temple of Doom', but it delivers all of the action-packed adventure you could want from an 'Indy' flick, in my opinion actually topping 'Raiders of the Lost Ark'. There's a damn-near perfect balance of elements here, bringing the story-telling, action, adventure, comedy and cast of likable characters together with just that little tiny dash of a horror element (which no 'Indy' film is complete without, mind you). It's a fine example of one of my all-time favourite films, and it may very well stand as my all-time favourite film in the "Adventure" category. They just (seemingly) don't make them THIS fun anymore. 5/5  Much like when it came to my childhood and 'Star Wars', I watched these "Lucasfilm" flicks totally out of order. I'm about 90% sure that it all started with 'Temple of Doom' for me, although I'm still not 100% sure. This is extraordinarily strange, as I was a kid who was afraid of just about everything growing up, and this is easily the most traumatic of the 'Indy' titles. Both 'Raiders' and 'Last Crusade' had scenes that would send me out of the room so I wouldn't have to watch them, but tearing someone's beating heart out of his chest - that was fine.
My only thought is that I simply didn't get what was going on at the time. Who knows if I knew what a human heart even looked like back then? Add to that the fact that Indy has a sidekick here who's a kid, which probably helped alleviate some of the more traumatic moments for yours truly, as there was a character I could directly relate to. Anyway, that's something personal that will always remain a mystery, as some REALLY tame stuff has scared the ever-living hell out of me as I grew up. As a result, I don't tend to be one to think of this title as being at all that bad, as it has been pointed out to be in recent years. However, I WILL say that as far as I'm concerned, it's the second-weakest overall... but so help me God, I think I like it better now than I ever did before. But more on that soon. Our film opens one year before the events of 'Raiders', in 1935 Shanghai, where Indiana Jones (Harrison Ford) is making a deal with crime boss Lao Che (Roy Chiao). Long and almost unnecessary story short, we are simultaneously introduced to nightclub singer, Willie Scott (Kate Capshaw) who ends up inadvertently in tow with Indy and his new sidekick, Short Round (Ke Huy Quan, in his introductory role). They board a trap of a plane, set up by Lao Che (and are guided to the plane by a very subtle and uncredited Dan Aykroyd) only to miraculously and frankly, impossibly survive a plane crash, ending up in the jungles of India. Here, a quaint village asks for their help in finding their village's sacred stone along with their missing children. Indy agrees to head to Pankot Palace, along with Willie and Shorty, and are greeted at the palace doors with open arms. The trio is then allowed to attend a banquet, hosted by the young Maharajah (Raj Singh), which has since become one of the more famous scenes of the film. Here, we get into Indy's theory that an ancient, evil cult known as the Thugee may be coming back into power, hence the missing children and sacred stone, which Indy theorizes as being one of the five Shankara stones. Of course, more famously standing out among this convo, is a great deal of disgusting food from "Snake Surprise" to "Chilled Monkey Brains". Later that night, Indy is attacked by an assassin but overwhelms him and his journey to find out what's at the bottom of all of this mystery is set in motion. So as not to go into a whole whack of detail here, I'll just say that the rest of the film is a sort of living nightmare, and easily makes for the most brutal of the 'Indiana Jones' titles, as it involves plenty of scary behaviour, including (as mentioned) heart-ripping, being sent into a pit of fire, child slavery, aspects of voodoo, and I would probably argue it's also where we see Indy at his weakest. Even our villain, Mola Ram (Amrish Puri) is, at least to me (and I'm gonna have to be careful how I say this), more frightening than any of Indy's main Nazi enemies. To put it another way, the Nazis are always looking for dark magic in these films. Mola Ram just plain has it and knows exactly how to use it. Just bear in mind I'm speaking of the fictional aspects of these stories because obviously, real Nazis are far scarier than any work of fiction. Today, the biggest problem I have with the movie is trying to wrap my head around why it didn't scare me as a kid. Nowadays, I see it as something closer to a cult horror movie than an action/adventure, considering the dark themes it involves. But that's not to say it's not without a healthy dose of adventure either. The mine cart scene is still amazing, and I don't care how unrealistic it is. Otherwise, my only REAL issue here is the character, Willie. When you analyze the situation, Willie is actually just kind of there, and she's by far the most irritating of the "Indy Girls". I won't say much more about it, but I will say there's a 'Family Guy' joke about her presence in the film and... I don't wanna be a jerk about it but... yeah. It's hard not to imagine that being accurate. As far as this being an overall bad film, however, I kinda have to disagree with most critics. Although I admit some bias coming from a healthy amount of nostalgia, there are other aspects of this I like a lot. For starters, I feel like the "hero" aspect of Indy really shines through here, as part of his mission is to free enslaved children on top of searching for some kind of relic. I also still enjoy the fact that they gave a kid the time of day to be a proper sidekick. His presence also gives us a better look at the kids' perspective, ultimately making him just as big a hero as Indy (without spoilers). Once the climactic stuff gets going, it's hard not to route for these guys. It's a far from perfect film, and still pretty weak as far as 'Indy' titles go. But I still have something of a personal connection to this one, and still have a lot of fun watching it despite its flaws. 3/5  Hello everyone and welcome to the very FIRST written review of 2023. I've been gone for a little while now, and I've been contemplating a few reworks of this Blog site of mine. The first big one is to actually have a project for every month instead of a whole whack of almost daily reviews that I can't keep up with. We kick it all off with a look back at the 'Indiana Jones' franchise, starting with 'Raiders of the Lost Ark'.
The film opens in 1936 with one of the most epic adventure scenes of all time, as we follow our favourite archeologist, Indiana Jones (Harrison Ford) and some guy named Sapito (Alfred Molina) through a heavily booby-trapped Peruvian temple. This is a great chunk of scene that tells the audience what they're in for with this lead character. He's clever, he's cunning and he's a badass. But he can still make mistakes that send giant boulders chasing after him. He soon bumps into a fellow archaeologist named René Belloq (Paul Freeman) who we see very quickly provides Indy with a worthy rival for this film. Back home in America, Indy lives his life as a university professor who is heavily "crushed on" by his female students. His classroom is one day visited by friend and colleague, Marcus Brody (Denholm Elliott) who takes him to meet a couple of Army Intelligence agents. The pair are told that Nazi forces are in search of something of significant power which we find out is most likely the one and only Ark of the Covenant. With it, Hitler's armies could have the potential to be unstoppable, so it's now up to Indy to intercept the artifact before the Nazis get hold of it and unleash a potential Hell on the Earth During this race, Indy reunites with a couple of old friends; characters we have grown to love over the years. First is Marion Ravenwood (Karen Allen), with whom Indy once had a secret relationship. She happens to have a medallion that Indy needs to find the Ark's location and she soon partners up with him. Second, once the two reach Cairo, Egypt, is Sallah (John Rhys-Davies); a dear friend of Indy's, and known to be one of the best diggers in Cairo. It's not long before the trio find themselves stuck, not only in a race against Nazi forces claiming the Ark, but with these Nazis and other mercenaries trying to kill them in the process. Perhaps most notable among these villains isn't even the lead villain, Belloq. For yours truly, my appreciation for Belloq came over time. Nowadays, I appreciate his almost gentlemanly charm that contrasts with his sleaziness in that he's aiding the Nazis in their search. But when I was a kid watching this, the big baddie to me was always Gestapo Agent Arnold Toht (Ronald Lacey). He had this extremely evil look to him, and it was easy to tell that he was just a sinister human being. He also had a wee bit of a Peter Lorre thing going on in my opinion, which always adds an element of creepiness. Nowadays, I see him much more as the side character he is - although he probably does have the worse personality between the two. It had been quite a while since the last time I saw this, so I had a lot of fun with it this time around. It seems no matter how many times I watch this movie, certain scenes will always hit me with that feeling I had when I was a kid - cheering on Indy as some kind of superhero without a cape. The whole opening scene has become synonymous with what the "Adventure" genre should look like. The car chase scene with its practicality, lack of CG, and real stunts holds up FAR better than anything they did similarly in 'Crystal Skull'. Even the big, climactic scene that DOES look a little bit cheesy by today's standards reminds me how 'Indiana Jones' is probably the most responsible property for my first little toe-dips into the horror genre. I mean all of these have something along those lines. Perhaps the boldest statement I can say about this film is that I would probably consider it to be the best adventure movie of all time. I always come away from this movie thinking about whether the adventure genre would quite be what it is if it weren't for this movie. If I was to give a defining example for each stand-alone genre, this would be my go-to for "Adventure" without hesitation. I do sometimes wonder how I'd feel if this was all new to me, but the fact of the matter is, Indiana Jones was pretty big in our household. Perhaps more of my brother's thing than my own, but I still liked to sit and watch these with him - even if it did get downright terrifying sometimes... (those faces melted, man. Melted!) 5/5 |
RSS Feed