The Last Crusade appreciation thread.

[Henry B 50]

And I agree with others that the Crusader Knight ending was just bizzare and really made the experience go sour, for me.

Overall I thought the Knight was well done, but you just reminded me of the worst moment in the film: when the Knight takes a swing at Indy and falls over backward and disgustingly cute music sucks the tension completely out of the scene. It's only a few wind notes ("The Keeper of the Grail" 0:35), but it's really bad.

[MrScratch 294]

MrScratch, I apologise for calling you dense last night, I was tired and I lost my patience when you said that comedy action and comedy horror movies are 'lame'. To me that was just a bad throwaway remark with no basis in fact whatsoever, hence it just came across as stupidity or ignorance on your behalf. I'm sorry, but it just did.

I already said that 'lame' was a poor choice of words, my point was that action comedies aren't exciting and horror comedies aren't scary, they're funny - the good ones anyway.

Why on earth would I want to "stop and think about the ending of LC", when I'm far too busy being thoroughly and gleefully entertained? To stop and think about ANY Indiana Jones movie would be completely defeating the purpose of what these films are about. Indy would have drowned aboard the submerged submarine in Raiders if I was that anally retentive in my viewing habits.

I don't know about you, but I don't watch a movie and forget about it as soon as its over. I do think about them and discuss them. Isn't that why we are all here?

[Quintus 5,399]

And I agree with others that the Crusader Knight ending was just bizzare and really made the experience go sour, for me.

Overall I thought the Knight was well done, but you just reminded me of the worst moment in the film: when the Knight takes a swing at Indy and falls over backward and disgustingly cute music sucks the tension completely out of the scene. It's only a few wind notes ("The Keeper of the Grail" 0:35), but it's really bad.

A typically expected film score enthusiast's break down of a single filmic moment. But then, what else did I expect, from a member of this board?

The truth of the matter is the Knight's tumble backwards was just a straightforward way of showing the man's long spent guard over his sacred keep. The general audience accepted it, as did I. John Williams matters not in such trivial things.

I know most here cannot accept that. Tough huh.

[MrScratch 294]

We're arguing over a point neither of us understands - the unintended joke in Last Crusade - so why don't we just wait for MrScratch to explain himself?

The joke is how lame the traps are and how easily it would be for the truly evil to get by them, as witnessed by Elsa and Donovan making it through. That's all I mean, the traps are weak - the whole climax is weak.

The general audience accepted it, as did I. John Williams matter not is such trivial things.

I know most here cannot accept that. Tough huh.

Great Eye, you seem unable to accept that people have different opinions on this film. You started this thread and actually invited in those who loved the film and those who don't love it. Yet, you act like there is something wrong with those of us who don't like this movie as much as you. When you start a debate, please be prepared for opinions that don't gel with your own.

[Quintus 5,399]

We're arguing over a point neither of us understands - the unintended joke in Last Crusade - so why don't we just wait for MrScratch to explain himself?

The joke is how lame the traps are and how easily it would be for the truly evil to get by them, as witnessed by Elsa and Donovan making it through. That's all I mean, the traps are weak - the whole climax is weak.

The fact that Elsa and Donovan make it through matters not, in the scheme of things. The vast majority didn't even stop to think about it. Job done! Please try not to miss the point of these films.

It is a shame you have issues with that stuff, but nothing I can ever say will ever change a thing for you.

Great Eye, you seem unable to accept that people have different opinions on this film. You started this thread and actually invited in those who loved the film and those who don't love it. Yet, you act like there is something wrong with those of us who don't like this movie as much as you. When you start a debate, please be prepared for opinions that don't gel with your own.

Then I am misunderstood, since I actually welcome a view which strongly differs to my own, as long as it is a reasoned argument and not one based upon endlessly pedantic 'problems' and an insistence on pointing out bothersome 'issues' to the point of tiresome dreariness.

I cannot believe I'm using such vocabulary in a discussion about Indy movies.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

I thought the traps were rather clever to a point (except walks in the name of God), but since Indy basically disables them....evil follows afterward.

The leap of faith would be spectacular in the new 3d formats.

Joe, surprised he's defending Last Crusade.

[MrScratch 294]

I thought the traps were rather clever to a point (except walks in the name of God), but since Indy basically disables them....evil follows afterward.

The leap of faith would be spectacular in the new 3d formats.

Joe, surprised he's defending Last Crusade.

Are the traps supposed to be magic or are they supposed to be mechanical/optical? They fail miserably as good traps in either circumstance.

I'm just not in to pedants and grey dreariness.

More insults. There must be something wrong with me because I don't agree with you. I must be dreary because a particular movie doesn't entertain me like it does you. I give up, enjoy your one-sided debate without me.

[Quintus 5,399]

I tried that earlier. Giving up, I mean.

Are the traps supposed to be magic or are they supposed to be mechanical/optical?

Who the hell really cares?

Whoops, apparently you do.

...they fail miserably as good traps in either circumstance.

For many* they succeeded as an age old and long proven script device, yet for you they failed miserably.

Hmm, do you see where I'm going with this...

*I hate that I keep saying 'for many' and 'the majority', but do your research and you will find that bland wording like that can somewhat unsurprisingly be completely backed up. In fact I'd be surprised if that aspect was ever in question to begin with.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

strictly mechanical and optical, the magic is saved for the obviously made in the 1900's Grail itself. Oops those sloppy production values

[Limbonaut 2]

The "Scherzo for Motorcycle and Orchestra" is one of my favorite Indy tracks and scenes.

[Delorean90 42]

I really don't see this. TOD had a lot of action/adventure, but it certainly had a lot more humor/gags than Raiders....all of them are laced with if not driven on humor.

This is where I disagree with you, I feel that LC is driven by the humor whereas TOD is not. I don't disagree that there is lots of humor in TOD, most of it in the first half and most of it is the playing up of the three radically different characters interacting in an exotic setting. Chattar Lal summed it up nicely: "I cannot imagine where the three of you would seem at home." That's the basic theme of the first half of the film until the real action kicks in, but boy once it does it is quite a ride. I just cannot say the same thing about LC.

LC was not trying to be the gruelling-but-fun roller coaster that TOD was. It's a different films--in fact, each of the Indy films have their own tone, their own feel.

And LC wasn't driven by humor--most of the humor driving comes in the middle section of the film with Indy and Henry on the run--but I'll save further analysis for the next set of remarks.

There are very few truly serious moments until you get to the the heart scene--a good deal of the village sequence (which also has the "eat it" bit and Willie trying to get on the elephant), and the statue in the jungle are the primary instances.

And where are the serious moments in LC? There aren't many, not as much as either TOD or Raiders. You practically said it yourself, the humor of TOD is in the first (expositional) half of the film and once they get to the actual Temple of Doom it is a grueling action flick and an exciting ride the whole rest of the way. LC never lets up on the humor until perhaps the very final scene in the canyon. Sallah and camel jokes, Marcus being a fish out of water are all STILL being overplayed well into the third act. All action scenes are laced with humor, the action scenes in the other two films are not. I'm not saying there is no humor whatsoever in Raiders and TOD actions scenes, but they are more subtle touches instead of vaudeville style routines. The characters are basically cracking jokes during the chase scenes in LC.

Never lets up, eh? Not as many serious moments as the previous films? Well...

The opening sequence was light, and had moments of humor, but it wasn't as tongue-in-cheek as TOD's. The next scene with Indy in the class isn't funny, the following moment with Marcus has the more subtle humor of the "my treat" moment, but no more. The scene with Donovan isn't humorous, nor is the following scene where Indy and Marcus check out Henry's house, nor is the trip to Venice. The meeting with Elsa, again, has only the more subtle sense of humor present. The library scene has the stamp gag, and the deadpan Raiders reference and "Oh, rats" remark. The motorboat chase has only the dry "Ah, Venice" line at the start and the "Don't go between them" bit. Indy and Marcus's conversation about Alexandretta is serious, and the conversation with Elsa has something of a humorous undertone to it. The moment when they arrive at the castle isn't humorous. It's once they get inside that the humor really begins. You have the bit with the butler, and then it's not too serious, not humorous as they look for Henry. Even when he meets with Henry, after the initial humor, we see Henry's realization that his life-long passion (obsession?) is being realized. Then you have the "Don't call me Junior" sequence, which does speak for itself, immediately followed by the non-humorous scene of Elsa's betrayal. The only humorous bits are "She talks in her sleep," and the lead-in to the largely humorous Iskenderun sequence. The whole fire scene is full of humor, but there is intensity mixed in with the humor, and it's a well-paced, well-shot scene. I won't touch on whether the motorcycle scene is effective as an action/chase scene, but there are moments of humor mixed in. It's hardly a Three Stooges short. The following conversation with Indy and Henry is anything but humorous. Aside from the meeting Hitler moment, the book-burning isn't humorous. Up until the "No ticket!" bit, the airport scene isn't really humorous. The conversation at the table is certainly a quieter, non-humorous scene, and well-done at that. The following escape sequence (plane/car/umbrella) is more humor-centered. The scene at Haiti has a nice little bit of humor with the ruler's appreciation of the Rolls Royce. The desert sequence is laced with humor--"We're well out of range," "I said no camels"...--and the belly of the steel beast has its share of humor, but much of it isn't as whimsical as, say, the underground heroics scene from TOD. The cliff scene has been mentioned as one of the emotional highlights, with the appreciable hat moment. The canyon scene isn't humorous. Marcus's reaction to the soldier's beheading is humorous. From the shooting of Dad up until they leave the Grail temple, it's fairly straight-up (aside from the knight falling). The finale has a good sense of humor with the revelation of the origin of "Indiana" and Marcus's "Follow me! I know the way!"

It seems like the ratio of serious/subtler to humorous/over-the-top is pretty healthy.

And the humor in the action scenes of TOD or more subtle touches? Bug Tunnel and Death Trap? Pat Roach beaning the worker with a big hammer--complete with sound effects? Short Round pulling his karate moves? Water? Were we watching the same movie?

In reality, Raiders has been the closest to a pure action/adventure film of the three. But I don't see any of the Indy films in the same light as something like Ghostbusters. I'm not too familiar with that film, but it's clear from the word "go" that it's a comedy--bordering on a spoof. And if you do find them to be in the same realm as each other, then I'm not sure what else can be said.

No, I don't. I see Raiders and TOD as action and adventure, Ghostbusters and such as pure comedy. LC, frankly, is somewhere in the middle and seemingly steering the franchise in the direction of farce and humor. I wish it were more of an action movie and less of a comedy. It's the one-liners and silly banter that just makes the humor overbearing. And I wish the artifact were given a little more respect. We're talking about the Holy Grail, and they don't even bat an eye at it. In Raiders, there is serious talk of the Ark not being disturbed and how dangeroud it is. The Grail, the HOLY Grail, is never talked about like this in LC.

Don't get me wrong, I do like LC. On the surface, its a fun action movie but it is not without problems that simply don't hold up to repeated viewings unlike the other two. The more I see the finale with the three traps and the Knight, the less sense it makes. Really, stop and think about the ending of LC and how it makes almost no sense whatsoever. The three traps are a joke, an unintended joke at that.

Your last point has pretty much been discussed. As far as the importance and respect for the Grail, I hadn't really noticed a lack of it. It seemed fairly well handled to me.

Raiders is a classic, as close to perfection as you can get. Temple is a great action flick, a great followup to an unbeatable classic. LC is just a good above-average movie, but a clear and disctinct notch down in quality for me.

I simply disagree. I will say that it carries less of the serials/exploring ancient ruins material, but it does have a lot of the period feel going on.

[Jacob 0]

strictly mechanical and optical, the magic is saved for the obviously made in the 1900's Grail itself. Oops those sloppy production values

That sloppy production value recently sold on ebay for $35,000.

But seriously, I can't tell either way.

[MrScratch 294]

The next scene with Indy in the class isn't funny,

He climbs out the window to "escape" from his students, got a big laugh in the theatre.

The scene with Donovan isn't humorous, nor is the following scene where Indy and Marcus check out Henry's house, nor is the trip to Venice.

All exposition, but this brings up another point since you mention these scenes. In all this talk, nobody talks about the dangers of unearthing the Grail. Why all the concern over finding the Ark but not the Grail?

The library scene has the stamp gag,

Yes, and its TERRIBLE.

Indy and Marcus's conversation about Alexandretta is serious,

And still nothing from Marcus or Indy about unearthing the Grial. In Raiders remember all the talk about what a badass relic it was? Remember the big thunderstorm in the desert when Indy and Sallah got within reach of the Ark? Yeah, nothing like that in LC.

The moment when they arrive at the castle isn't humorous. It's once they get inside that the humor really begins. You have the bit with the butler, and then it's not too serious,

Um, the moment they arrive at the castle (dialogue in the car/he looks at her hat) is a setup for the ridiculous butler/Mickey Mouse bit. Terrible! I can't believe you are defending this.

Even when he meets with Henry, after the initial humor,

I like how you gloss right over the comedy routines.

we see Henry's realization that his life-long passion (obsession?) is being realized. Then you have the "Don't call me Junior" sequence, which does speak for itself, immediately followed by the non-humorous scene of Elsa's betrayal. The only humorous bits are "She talks in her sleep," and the lead-in to the largely humorous Iskenderun sequence. The whole fire scene is full of humor, but there is intensity mixed in with the humor, and it's a well-paced, well-shot scene.

Hmm, lots of humor there.

I won't touch on whether the motorcycle scene is effective as an action/chase scene, but there are moments of humor mixed in.

I never understood Henry's disapproval of Indy's actions during this chase scene. They are running for their lives aren't they? Against the very people who were holding Henry captive? This chase scene is ok, great music though.

Aside from the meeting Hitler moment,

Yeah, aside from a silly cameo by a ruthless dictator...

Up until the "No ticket!" bit, the airport scene isn't really humorous.

The whole airport scene is built around "No Ticket!"

The conversation at the table is certainly a quieter, non-humorous scene, and well-done at that.

Non-humorous? In this scene, the humor actually works. It's the first time the two characters have had a chance to sit and talk. This scene, humor and all, is very good.

The following escape sequence (plane/car/umbrella) is more humor-centered. The scene at Haiti has a nice little bit of humor with the ruler's appreciation of the Rolls Royce. The desert sequence is laced with humor--"We're well out of range," "I said no camels"...--and the belly of the steel beast has its share of humor

Hmm, quite a bit of humor as we enter the third act. Also, quite a bit of humor for such a huge action setpiece. During the desert chase of Raiders I'm on the edge of my seat, during the tank chase I'm chuckling at silly old Henry and Marcus.

The cliff scene has been mentioned as one of the emotional highlights, with the appreciable hat moment.

A very good scene, the only way it could be improved is if it followed a more exciting action scene.

The canyon scene isn't humorous.

No, but the set design of the cave is laughable.

The finale has a good sense of humor with the revelation of the origin of "Indiana" and Marcus's "Follow me! I know the way!"

Good: I named the dog Indiana. That works quite well here at the end of the film.

Bad: Marcus' "Follow Me" an unnecessary and one more tiresome fish out of water gag.

It seems like the ratio of serious/subtler to humorous/over-the-top is pretty healthy.

It seems like you pointed out quite a bit of humor.

And the humor in the action scenes of TOD or more subtle touches? Bug Tunnel and Death Trap?

The perfect balance of humor and suspense for a scene that comes this early in the movie. The characters are arguing while the clock is ticking on their impending doom. The characters aren't acting silly in the context of the situation, they're arguing with each other unaware of eachothers predicament.

Pat Roach beaning the worker with a big hammer--complete with sound effects?

This is after seeing him whip defenseless children and before seeing him die a bloody death in a rock crusher. Anything like this in Last Crusade to counter balance all of the humor there? Nope.

Donovan doesn't count, that is on par with Belloq's face exploding and Mola Rams feeding to the alligators.

Short Round pulling his karate moves?

A great moment after seeing him fight his captors after having been enslaved and beaten.

Water?

After the pulse pounding mine car chase, a humorous release works great right there, it also gets them out of the cave and onto the bridge. You actually failed to mention the one thing that does bug me about TOD, when the mine car jumps off and lands back on the track. Not exactly humorous, but really pushes the believability factor.

Were we watching the same movie?

We must be, because you listed a lot of humor from LC and not too much from the second half of TOD. You pretty much proved my point.

[Toontje 0]

Toontje

Toontje

and yes it is more comedy, But since TLC I can't imagine indy not being comical. That's why raiders lost a bit of it's glory after seeing TLC. Still movie-wise raiders is a better film. Music on TLC is better imho, it sounds more refined, more thought of, or how the maestro himself would say it : It sounds like every note is inevitable!

[JoeinAR 1,949]

strictly mechanical and optical, the magic is saved for the obviously made in the 1900's Grail itself. Oops those sloppy production values

That sloppy production value recently sold on ebay for $35,000.

But seriously, I can't tell either way.

if you've watched the film you can clearly see the bottom is a machined part, and I don't think even Jesus knew how to run an endmill.

[Delorean90 42]

The next scene with Indy in the class isn't funny,

He climbs out the window to "escape" from his students, got a big laugh in the theatre.

Good for them. It's hardly the "vaudeville routines" that you speak of. It's more of a character touch than anything--he needed to get out for a little while. Light-hearted/somewhat humorous, yeah, but not gut-busting material here.

And, that's after the class scene I was speaking of--the lecture and Marcus and Indy meeting up.

The scene with Donovan isn't humorous, nor is the following scene where Indy and Marcus check out Henry's house, nor is the trip to Venice.

All exposition, but this brings up another point since you mention these scenes. In all this talk, nobody talks about the dangers of unearthing the Grail. Why all the concern over finding the Ark but not the Grail?

What dangers? There are two negative effects even remotely related to the grail: you must stay behind the seal to stay immortal, and even the knight shows that he's no spring chicken despite the Grail's effects. That's more long-term, though. The Grail itself isn't actually killing anybody. The false grails would, but did you expect them to have any knowledge of that beforehand? The Ark had the reputation for bringing destruction to the Israelites' enemies--it is directly responsible for the danger.

Henry talks to Indy about the dangers of it falling into the wrong hands--and again, Marcus has the line when they're in the convoy about the powers of the Grail. There wasn't the kind of inherent danger in the Grail that there was in the Ark, though.

And, it is exposition...which isn't a funny part. Hmm...

The library scene has the stamp gag,

Yes, and its TERRIBLE.

Well, I'm sorry you feel that way. It's pretty darn funny.

Indy and Marcus's conversation about Alexandretta is serious,

And still nothing from Marcus or Indy about unearthing the Grial. In Raiders remember all the talk about what a badass relic it was? Remember the big thunderstorm in the desert when Indy and Sallah got within reach of the Ark? Yeah, nothing like that in LC.

Previously addressed.

The moment when they arrive at the castle isn't humorous. It's once they get inside that the humor really begins. You have the bit with the butler, and then it's not too serious,

Um, the moment they arrive at the castle (dialogue in the car/he looks at her hat) is a setup for the ridiculous butler/Mickey Mouse bit. Terrible! I can't believe you are defending this.

The non-humorous setup is terrible? Geez, man... And I don't follow what's so ridiculous about the butler/Mickey Mouse bit. It's funny. Haha. And it's also a connection to Indy's actual Scottish roots through his father, which a lot of people may not get. The only thing that would have made it better in that regard is if he had made it more similar to Connery's accent, only sans the sh's.

Even when he meets with Henry, after the initial humor,

I like how you gloss right over the comedy routines.

You said there were rarely serious moments and it was overloaded with humor. I think we know what the humorous beginning of that scene is, and that I didn't need to recite the humor line-by-line.

we see Henry's realization that his life-long passion (obsession?) is being realized. Then you have the "Don't call me Junior" sequence, which does speak for itself, immediately followed by the non-humorous scene of Elsa's betrayal. The only humorous bits are "She talks in her sleep," and the lead-in to the largely humorous Iskenderun sequence. The whole fire scene is full of humor, but there is intensity mixed in with the humor, and it's a well-paced, well-shot scene.

Hmm, lots of humor there.

Yeeaahh...and? There's a lot of non-humor in there, too. The aforementioned section of Henry's realization, the whole scene of Elsa's betrayal, the revelation of Donovan's allegiances...

I won't touch on whether the motorcycle scene is effective as an action/chase scene, but there are moments of humor mixed in.

I never understood Henry's disapproval of Indy's actions during this chase scene. They are running for their lives aren't they? Against the very people who were holding Henry captive? This chase scene is ok, great music though.

Agreed.

iAside from the meeting Hitler moment,

Yeah, aside from a silly cameo by a ruthless dictator...

Well, I mean he wasn't exactly jumping around singing "Make 'Em Laugh." Think about the significance of the scene. There are so many levels to that. Indy is face-to-face with the guy causing the world serious problems--under the right conditions, he could just shoot the joker. Hitler is face-to-face with Indiana Jones, whose has been a serious thorn in his side--and he doesn't know it. The Grail diary is literally in his hands, and he doesn't know it. Now, this kind of humor/suspense may not have worked for you, but "Springtime for Hitler" it ain't.

Up until the "No ticket!" bit, the airport scene isn't really humorous.

The whole airport scene is built around "No Ticket!"

Really? Indy and Henry walking through the airport, talking about the first flight out of Germany, and arriving at the zeppelin to one of the darkest (and best) statements of the Nazi theme, though it is expositional setup (not gag setup), is yet another non-humorous moment, of which there are apparently so few in the film...Hm. Maybe I should have worded it the airport terminal scene. I dunno.

The conversation at the table is certainly a quieter, non-humorous scene, and well-done at that.

Non-humorous? In this scene, the humor actually works. It's the first time the two characters have had a chance to sit and talk. This scene, humor and all, is very good.

Sorry. Non-humorous is indeed poor wording in this particular case. There are some humorous bits (Henry's face after he asks Indy what he wants to talk about is priceless), but it isn't quite the same vein of humor as most of the film--not quite as "jokey" if you wanted to put it that way. I agree, it is indeed a terrific scene.

The following escape sequence (plane/car/umbrella) is more humor-centered. The scene at Haiti has a nice little bit of humor with the ruler's appreciation of the Rolls Royce. The desert sequence is laced with humor--"We're well out of range," "I said no camels"...--and the belly of the steel beast has its share of humor

Hmm, quite a bit of humor as we enter the third act. Also, quite a bit of humor for such a huge action setpiece. During the desert chase of Raiders I'm on the edge of my seat, during the tank chase I'm chuckling at silly old Henry and Marcus.

Not an exorbitant amount of humor as we enter the third act. I don't think any of it's really inappropriate.

As for the setpiece, part of it depends on where you start. A lot of the setup to the attack on the tank is rather serious, such as the death of Khazim. All the humor is pretty much the camels joke and the old college greeting. Once the scoring starts, there isn't anything humorous until the bullet gag. That's several minutes into the sequence. Then you have a good bit of action until the periscope bit. Some more action, and then the "pen is mightier than the sword" moment. Quite a bit more action until you have the "You call this archeology?" and "How does one get off this thing" lines, and then right back into the rest of the sequence. So, if you just count the scored section, you have four-five humorous bits which last a few seconds in a sequence which lasts over nine minutes. Quite a bit of humor? Mmm...no. And looking back at it, it's a pretty good sequence. I still don't get the dead-on comparison with the Raiders chase. The tank sequence isn't even a chase, it's a rescue. And it's centered around a lumbering tank, not a speeding truck. It's pretty well done, I'd say. Good sequence.

The cliff scene has been mentioned as one of the emotional highlights, with the appreciable hat moment.

A very good scene, the only way it could be improved is if it followed a more exciting action scene.

Well, I'm sorry you don't like it. Aside from the removal of the humor (which would amount to a minimal amount of it), what else would you have done for that situation?

The canyon scene isn't humorous.

No, but the set design of the cave is laughable.

I thought it was fine, but that's beside the point.

The finale has a good sense of humor with the revelation of the origin of "Indiana" and Marcus's "Follow me! I know the way!"

Good: I named the dog Indiana. That works quite well here at the end of the film.

Bad: Marcus' "Follow Me" an unnecessary and one more tiresome fish out of water gag.

It worked for me. I don't see what's so terrible about it.

[bruckhorn 105]

bruckhorn

bruckhorn

Of course, that might have something to do with my father issues...

BTW: While waiting in vain for The Great Eye to PM me (guess I'm not one of his peeps-- which I'm okay with, providing he doesn't post the final score of the UEFA Championship game before I get a chance to watch it), I had the joy of having a front row seat for this. Ahh, the joys of working on Main Street.

[Delorean90 42]

It seems like the ratio of serious/subtler to humorous/over-the-top is pretty healthy.

It seems like you pointed out quite a bit of humor.

Look back at the humor I pointed out, and think about how much of the movie isn't what I posted. I could take the time to line out the non-humorous/joking moments, but I'd really rather spend all that time on something else.

And the humor in the action scenes of TOD or more subtle touches? Bug Tunnel and Death Trap?

The perfect balance of humor and suspense for a scene that comes this early in the movie. The characters are arguing while the clock is ticking on their impending doom. The characters aren't acting silly in the context of the situation, they're arguing with each other unaware of eachothers predicament.

Um...yeah. And Henry and Marcus are out of their element, but of course in that case, then it's not a good reason for the humor, it's just stupid.

It's a great scene, but a heck of a lot of it is humor--even comedy. And that seemed to be kind of your point about LC, that it had a lot more humor and a lot fewer "serious" moments. And I'm saying that's ridiculous.

Pat Roach beaning the worker with a big hammer--complete with sound effects?

This is after seeing him whip defenseless children and before seeing him die a bloody death in a rock crusher. Anything like this in Last Crusade to counter balance all of the humor there? Nope.

Are you saying it's appropriate in the context of the character, or just in the ratio of serious to humorous? In the tank sequence in LC, a Nazi truck gets impaled by one of its own trucks, and is then shot off and crushed by said tank, with the soldiers inside. Indy gets mercilessly choked with a rusty length of chain. Another Nazi falls onto the treads of the tank and is run over by the tank. Indy's face nearly gets pressed into the tread. Etc., etc.

Short Round pulling his karate moves?

A great moment after seeing him fight his captors after having been enslaved and beaten.

Sure, but it's still another humorous moment.

Water?

After the pulse pounding mine car chase, a humorous release works great right there, it also gets them out of the cave and onto the bridge. You actually failed to mention the one thing that does bug me about TOD, when the mine car jumps off and lands back on the track. Not exactly humorous, but really pushes the believability factor.

Again, another humorous moment. I don't see why these are so appropriate in TOD when they're often more over the top, and LC's is ridiculous and stupid.

Were we watching the same movie?

We must be, because you listed a lot of humor from LC and not too much from the second half of TOD. You pretty much proved my point.

Do you really want me to go through TOD like I did LC? I will if you want me to. I just hit some choice highlights. Again, I'm pointing out how, when you put said gags in the context of the rest of the film, it's actually not such a ridiculous proportion. Think about it.

[Elmo Lewis 6]

This thread makes me like the Indy sequels less and less.

[Bryant Burnette 654]

The Holy Grail is THE most sought after artifact in history and how is it treated by the script? Answer: as a pawn between Indy and his father, little more than a MacGuffin.

You're judging the movie based on what it isn't, when you would probably be better off judging it based on what it is. It's a movie about faith and about reconciliation. The Grail is a MacGuffin; no need to qualify it as "little more" than one, it's full-on. MacGuffins tend to be symbols. Spielberg or Lucas (can't remember which, despite having watched this only a few hours ago) point out that the quest for the Grail is the quest for the Father. This movie is a character piece with action scenes, not action scenes with plot threads to link them (which is what Temple of Doom is, not that that's a criticism, because it isn't). Furthermore, that theme is a culmination of what's happened to Indy in the first two movies. He's come face-to-face with proof of the divine, but his faith is still shaky. Here, that is paid off.

I do agree, however, that Last Crusade is the weakest of the three. Not weak; just the weakest. The villain is terrible, mostly because Julian Glover was (a) miscast and (b) given terrible exposition-filled dialogue. Some of the effects work is shoddy (not all, though; the rock bridge remains a marvel). The set pieces aren't as ingenious conceptually, nor are they as well-executed by Spielberg or by the second unit. And in comparison to the masterpiece scores of the first two, the third score is merely very, very good. However, there is a lot of extremely successful comedy, and the casting of Sean Connery is one of the most successful jobs of casting ever; just perfect. So if I'm grading them, I'd go A+ for Raiders, A for Temple of Doom, and A- for Last Crusade. Not too shabby at all.

I really, really admire how different all three movies are from one another. Certain elements get rehashed, but each movie really has its own distinctive identity. It makes for a very satisfying series; hopefully, Crystal Skull can continue that trend.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Temple of Doom has obviously acquired much appreciation over the last few months.

[Bryant Burnette 654]

Um, the moment they arrive at the castle (dialogue in the car/he looks at her hat) is a setup for the ridiculous butler/Mickey Mouse bit. Terrible! I can't believe you are defending this.

Some people think that's a funny scene. Including me. As a matter of fact, I'd gamble on saying that most people find that scene to be funny.

For one thing, Ford's terrible Scottish accent is funny because it's supposed to be terrible. Indiana, despite having a Scottish father, can't do a Scottish accent. The butler isn't fooled for long, if he's fooled at all; you get the feeling that he was so stunned by the sight and sound of this guy that he let him in almost mistakenly. A big part of the charm of Indiana Jones is that he's really not always that great at things, but he typically manages to be just good enough to get the job done. That character trait is frequently mined for comedy, and it frequently works, like here.

As for the Mickey Mouse comment, remember that during the Nazi years, Mickey Mouse was the most popular and well-known "actor" in the entire world. So not only is this an acknowledgment of the cartoonishness of the scene, it's also a nice throwaway period detail. I might also point out that Hitler was a big Mickey Mouse fan, so it works on that level, too.

Aside from the meeting Hitler moment,

Yeah, aside from a silly cameo by a ruthless dictator...

Is it silly? It's comedic, but "comedic" and "silly" aren't the same thing. It's actually taking quite a stab at Hitler, who is shown to be so daft and self-obsessed that he mistakes an obvious interloper for a star-struck fan, and signs an autograph in the book he has agents scouring the world looking for!

Again, this is something that works on an entertainment level AND on a thematic level.

Like the first two Indy movies, The Last Crusade is much more thoughtful than most people give it credit for being.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

I might also point out that Hitler was a big Mickey Mouse fan, so it works on that level, too.

He had a crush on Snow White too.

[MrScratch 294]

Do you really want me to go through TOD like I did LC? I will if you want me to. I just hit some choice highlights. Again, I'm pointing out how, when you put said gags in the context of the rest of the film, it's actually not such a ridiculous proportion. Think about it.

Most of the humor in TOD is in the first half before any real action begins, if LC had done the same thing perhaps I wouldn't mind as much.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

much of the problem with Last Crusade is that it belittles the audience. The movie is right to the point, the audience is stupid, so we're going to deconstruct the Indy mythos piece by piece. Along the way it uses some of the lamest comedy.

The Nazi's are keystone cops. Marcus Brody is now just a loveable very STUPID person. How does one that stupid make it as a Professor. As I've said before the few good ideas that are unique rather than a retread of Raiders are barely developed. The Brotherhood of the Cruciform Sword is one of them. Guardians of the Holy grail over the centuries, and they are dispatched rather quickly. The tank sequence is a sad attempt to recreate the desert chase. Try watching one sequence and then the other back to back, and you'll see just how bad it is. BB mentions the lack of a decent villian...I've pointed this out for years, Indy must be balanced for the film to be truly successful.

Raiders of the Lost Ark ****, TOD ***-1/2, LC **-1/2

[Luke Skywalker 1,792]

I've seen worse Proffesors than Marcus in my short life.

Decent Villain?

Crusade has three, Donovan, The nazi officer and even the 'indy girl' is a badguy.

[Henry B 50]

Three villains? Raiders had Belloq, Toht and Dietrich, and Temple of Doom had Lao Che, Mola Ram and Chatter Lal. I didn't care much for Donovan - he's boring - but Elsa was a pretty good villain/pseudo-villain. I felt she was characterized very well, and her inner conflict with the Nazis was interesting.

Nah, I'm kidding. Alison Doody's just insanely hot.

[Luke Skywalker 1,792]

Nah, I'm kidding. Alison Doody's just insanely hot.

Thats something Belloq, Toht and Dietrich, Lao Che, Mola Ram and Chatter Lal arent.

[Henry B 50]

That's a good point.

[Quintus 5,399]

A fantastic villain. He holds his own in a trilogy full of great baddies.

[AzOutcast 122]

A fantastic villain. He holds his own in a trilogy full of great baddies.

I agree. He was the best Nazi villain in my opinion. He just has that look about him.

[Delorean90 42]

much of the problem with Last Crusade is that it belittles the audience. The movie is right to the point, the audience is stupid, so we're going to deconstruct the Indy mythos piece by piece. Along the way it uses some of the lamest comedy.

The Nazi's are keystone cops. Marcus Brody is now just a loveable very STUPID person. How does one that stupid make it as a Professor. As I've said before the few good ideas that are unique rather than a retread of Raiders are barely developed. The Brotherhood of the Cruciform Sword is one of them. Guardians of the Holy grail over the centuries, and they are dispatched rather quickly. The tank sequence is a sad attempt to recreate the desert chase. Try watching one sequence and then the other back to back, and you'll see just how bad it is. BB mentions the lack of a decent villian...I've pointed this out for years, Indy must be balanced for the film to be truly successful.

Raiders of the Lost Ark ****, TOD ***-1/2, LC **-1/2

I didn't really notice the problems with the Nazis, but I won't necessarily say you're wrong...

HOWEVER, I've already addressed the points of Marcus and the tank sequence. Marcus doesn't get mixed up until he's put into the middle of the danger and the action. He's still quite competent until then, and very much in line with his role in Raiders. And he's a museum curator, not a professor.

As far as the tank sequence goes, I don't understand why people insist on comparing it to the truck chase in Raiders. It's simply the Indiana Jones vehicle set piece that comes shortly before the climax. Raiders has the truck chase, TOD has the mine cart chase, and LC has the tank sequence. Notice that I don't even call it a chase, because that's not what it is, nor is it what it's trying to be. It's a rescue mission. Now, when we see KOTCS, that would probably be a more apt comparison, because if the footage we've seen is any indication, it's far more similar to Raiders than either the mine cart chase or the tank sequence. But don't belittle the tank sequence in a comparison to the truck chase, because they are simply two different things, and are only comparable in their function in the story, which is a set piece that also serves as the next-to-last step to the climax.

MrScratch, I'll get back to you, but I don't have the time to go over TOD--even just the last half--right this second.

[MrScratch 294]

I didn't really notice the problems with the Nazis, but I won't necessarily say you're wrong...

I never had a problem with the villains in LC, though I do think the villains of Raiders and TOD are better. Compare Donovan to Belloq, Belloq and Indy have a history with each other and they're few scenes together are great. Donovan is just an old guy who turns out to be a traitor, not bad but not great either. Compare the Nazis between the two films, Wolf and Toht are downright evil and creepy. The Nazi's of LC just aren't as menacing, but I also don't feel they are a detriment to the film either.

MrScratch, I'll get back to you, but I don't have the time to go over TOD--even just the last half--right this second.

Pat Roach throwing the hammer is the only real silly thing in the last half of TOD, I agree its kind of stupid. Other than that, all the touches of humor are perfect - I especially love Indy throwing a punch at a thugee who isn't there, then one appears and Willie gets him. Great moment!

[Bryant Burnette 654]

A fantastic villain. He holds his own in a trilogy full of great baddies.

I'll agree that this particular character is effective. However, Donovan is just not a good villain at all. And I think it was primarily in the casting where the character went wrong. Julian Glover exudes ZERO menace, which is a problem. Plus, Glover's American accent is not much better than Ford's Scottish accent.

Elsa is better. She is actually a pretty good character, and if the movie had focused on her a bit more -- she never manages to come to the forefront in the way that she ought to -- then I think it would have been a stronger movie. (Please note, by the way, that I love the movie. I think that all of the problems are minor ones.)

Glover was not the only poor casting choice, either. Whoever the guy is who plays the archeologist who gives young Indy the fedora . . . he's pretty lousy. A lot of this is due to the screenplay, which gives him a non-role. Visually, we see that he's an inspiration to Indy, something he chases after and eventually turns himself into. That's a pretty significant role, even if it is a brief one. You'd think Spielberg and Lucas could have cast somebody memorable. Tom Selleck would have been a great choice; that would have given the film some added depth that it now must forever lack, thanks to indifferent casting.

[MrScratch 294]

Elsa is better. She is actually a pretty good character, and if the movie had focused on her a bit more -- she never manages to come to the forefront in the way that she ought to -- then I think it would have been a stronger movie. (Please note, by the way, that I love the movie. I think that all of the problems are minor ones.)

I don't have much of a problem with Elsa either, she's one of the things they got just right. She's very much in the mold of a Bond girl, which I don't mind since Bond played a part in the creation of Indiana Jones. I think her role in the film is perfect as is, no need to make her more of a villain than she was. She was torn between good and evil, and became obsessed with the Grail. I merely like the movie, and think all these little problems keep the film from being elevated to the status of a great adventure movie.

[Quintus 5,399]

Pat Roach throwing the hammer is the only real silly thing in the last half of TOD, I agree its kind of stupid. Other than that, all the touches of humor are perfect

Wha??? The hammer on the head joke is freaking hilarious. Its pure slapstick and it works perfectly, so long as you're a fan of that brand of humour of course, as I am. It seems Spielberg is too. *DONK!*

ToD is easily as much of an all-out comedy adventure as LC, I don't see a difference and I don't have problem with it either.

Julian Glover exudes ZERO menace, which is a problem. Plus, Glover's American accent is not much better than Ford's Scottish accent.

I found Glover's character to be quite ruthless and menacing, in his final scenes. As for the accent, I always assumed he was American, until I saw the interviews on the dvd. It might be a bad impression of what an intelligent conservative American sounds like, but he had me convinced for many, many years. I like and appreciate what Julian Glover brought to the trilogy.

[Jacob 0]

A fantastic villain. He holds his own in a trilogy full of great baddies.

I agree as well. But I had to look up his name: Colonel Vogel.

More menacing than Herman Dietrich. Had to look up his name too.

Pat Roach throwing the hammer is the only real silly thing in the last half of TOD, I agree its kind of stupid.

I don't really have a debate with you on this, but what about when Indy sandwiches him with those two buckets and then he drops the rock on his own head? Pretty goofy in my book. Not that I really mind either of those gags.

And, it's more of a pet peeve, but some of Shorty's karate antics make me cringe. Namely when he knocks over 3-5 Thuggees domino style with one kick. I really like his character, but kids unbelievably beating up adults just raises my hackles.

[Quintus 5,399]

it's more of a pet peeve, but some of Shorty's karate antics make me cringe.

Me too, but hey, it's for the kids, who love little corny moments like that. No major harm done to the movie.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

A fantastic villain. He holds his own in a trilogy full of great baddies.

see I didn't even remember him, but I wont forget the two in Raiders.

Donovan has a great demise, and I love the line, He chose poorly, but there are so few gems like that in LC. I really don't want to compare it directly to TOD, because it rightfully should be compared to Raiders as its the only direct sequel to Raiders until next week.

BTW Im still eager to hear the score and see the film, and then combine the two in my head.

[Quintus 5,399]

A fantastic villain. He holds his own in a trilogy full of great baddies.

see I didn't even remember him, but I wont forget the two in Raiders.

Donovan has a great demise, and I love the line, He chose poorly, but there are so few gems like that in LC. I really don't want to compare it directly to TOD, because it rightfully should be compared to Raiders as its the only direct sequel to Raiders until next week.

BTW Im still eager to hear the score and see the film, and then combine the two in my head.

It's a shame you don't remember Vogel, I think he's ace. The fact that he has one of the best lines in the entire trilogy helps a lot I guess. "Der Kubelwagon sprengen!"

He chose... poorly is indeed a great line, but it should not be the only good line said in association with Donovan. In fact another of my favourite lines is attributed to Walter himself. "Germany, has declared war on the Jones boys". I love the delivery of that line.

The moment when they arrive at the castle isn't humorous. It's once they get inside that the humor really begins. You have the bit with the butler, and then it's not too serious,

Um, the moment they arrive at the castle (dialogue in the car/he looks at her hat) is a setup for the ridiculous butler/Mickey Mouse bit. Terrible! I can't believe you are defending this.

How Darrre He?!

Love that bit, I hope Indy IV has stuff like that in it.

[MrScratch 294]

I don't really have a debate with you on this, but what about when Indy sandwiches him with those two buckets and then he drops the rock on his own head? Pretty goofy in my book. Not that I really mind either of those gags.

And, it's more of a pet peeve, but some of Shorty's karate antics make me cringe. Namely when he knocks over 3-5 Thuggees domino style with one kick. I really like his character, but kids unbelievably beating up adults just raises my hackles.

I don't mind either one, the boulder/bucket thing isn't something that stops the action. There are no reaction shots the fight just keeps going, if any of the characters had any kind of reaction to it or the action came to a halt to acknowledge the gag it would hurt the scene. Only the hammer toss does that, the cutaway to the guy who gets it on the head. What was that guy doing there anyway?

Shorty taking on the thugees I don't mind either, at that point on the film its rousing to see the heroes fight back. The thugees surely underestimated the kid and he got the better of them.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

one last thing, don't you love the indian at the beginning of the movie, he looks like someone from brooklyn in glasses and wig

[Delorean90 42]

I always thought he looked kinda like Jeff Goldblum with long hair.

[FattyMcButterpants 1]

I never understood why people in general are dismissive about the humor in LC (or movies in general). Last Crusade has more than enough realism to remain a valid and dramatic story, and the humor, which I absolutely love - Connery and Ford are perfect together - doesn't take one bit away from it.

[Delorean90 42]

Agreed.

And I love your avatar.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

I never understood why people in general are dismissive about the humor in LC (or movies in general). Last Crusade has more than enough realism to remain a valid and dramatic story, and the humor, which I absolutely love - Connery and Ford are perfect together - doesn't take one bit away from it.

thats because the humor is always forced, instead of it being of the moment, the moment is created to be humorous.

[Bryant Burnette 654]

thats because the humor is always forced, instead of it being of the moment, the moment is created to be humorous.

It's not exactly a cardinal sin for for a scene to be created with the specific purpose of being funny. Is it "forced"? Well, yeah, but so what? Obviously, for you, the payoffs aren't funny. However, for a great many people, they do. (I feel your pain, though. I complained nonstop last summer about how incredibly unfunny Transformers was, but I seem to be in a tiny minority on that one.)

I think that most of the humor in the movie works just fine. I agree with you that Brody is too big of a boob, but at least it's not a blatant contradiction of anything in Raiders. After all, some people really do fall apart if you take them out of their comfort zone. Denholm Elliott is funny in the movie, one way or the other; I'll accept it for that reason, if for no other.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

I don't disagree with you about Transformers, I saw it once, and that was enough

[BurgaFlippinMan 7]

We're arguing over a point neither of us understands - the unintended joke in Last Crusade - so why don't we just wait for MrScratch to explain himself?

The joke is how lame the traps are and how easily it would be for the truly evil to get by them, as witnessed by Elsa and Donovan making it through. That's all I mean, the traps are weak - the whole climax is weak.

Didn't Indy disable the first, Connery remark about the Jehovah one and Indy throw sand across the invisible bridge?

BTW Im still eager to hear the score and see the film, and then combine the two in my head.

I suspect you might be disappointed in Williams...

[Luke Skywalker 1,792]

We're arguing over a point neither of us understands - the unintended joke in Last Crusade - so why don't we just wait for MrScratch to explain himself?

The joke is how lame the traps are and how easily it would be for the truly evil to get by them, as witnessed by Elsa and Donovan making it through. That's all I mean, the traps are weak - the whole climax is weak.

Didn't Indy disable the first, Connery remark about the Jehovah one and Indy throw sand across the invisible bridge?

exactly, i dont know what he meant with that.