The Last Crusade

[Goldsmithfan 6]

I've listened to the OST for The Last Crusade two days in a row now and I've got to say that it's definitely the most satisfying of the original releases in my opinion. It reflects the overall musical tone of the film perfectly. I have the 2 disc complete version, but the quality of the unreleased tracks is so terrible that I only gave it two listens before deciding that the legit release was the only way to go.

So anyway, I've got a couple of questions...

Firstly, and most obviously, during X Marks the Spot, when Indy spots the big X on the floor and the orchestral statement builds to enhance the moment, isn't that the Keeping up With the Joneses theme? Or is it? (Also, the transition from that statement to the music for Indy blowing the dust from the crack in the floor is wonderful. I don't know what it is about it that grabs me, but it does.)

Secondly, there's the powerful (possibly overly powerful being more likely the reason it was mixed down in film) and European sounding brass material for the ships converging on Indy and Elsa during Escape from Venice. If I recall correctly, the first of these statements is five notes (don't quote me). In any case, it reminds me a lot of stuff from Grievous and the Droids. Or should I say that Grievous and the Droids reminds me of that passage during Escape from Venice.

Lastly, and most likely me just hearing things where there are no connections, we have Indy's Very First Adventure and Belly of the Steel Beast. Toward the end of the former (on the OST version anyway) there's a nice orchestral flourish for the bit when young Indy swings off of the train and back on again. It's a nice, little statement. Then, flash forward a couple of decades (and to the middle of side B) and I hear a statement a lot like that one during Belly of the Steel Beast right before the highly rhythmic motive that ends the track. Now, is it just me or is there a similarity here? Maybe it was Williams trying to connect the old Indy adventure with the new one? Maybe I'm just hearing things! In any case, I wouldn't even ask this question if it weren't for having heard the eight note motive from Slalom on Mt. Humol in the middle of The Mine Car Chase.

Oh and I lied... That wasn't my last question. This one is. I promise. Though I'm sure it's been addressed before I don't think I've ever seen it directly mentioned here, or anywhere else for that matter. Getting to the point, is Keeping up With the Joneses a concert arrangement or was it intended for use in the film? It sounds as if it were meant to synch up with a scene's events but I'm obviously no expert. And one of the passages toward the end sounds like the statement heard when Indy and Henry discuss Indy's mother after the scherzo scene.

Anyway, I'll appreciate any answers I get. And I can't wait for the box set. But now I'm just stating the obvious.

[Ollie 1,059]

Wasn't it determined that "Keeping Up With The Joneses" was meant to underscore the sequences that followed the escape from the Blimp?

[Jay 37,377]

is Keeping up With the Joneses a concert arrangement or was it intended for use in the film? It sounds as if it were meant to synch up with a scene's events but I'm obviously no expert. And one of the passages toward the end sounds like the statement heard when Indy and Henry discuss Indy's mother after the scherzo scene.

"Keeping Up With The Joneses" is William's original cue for the end of the biplane escape, through the "birds of charlemagne" sequence, ending with the transition to Dovoan and Vogel in Hatay

You can sort of line it up starting around when Henry Sr shoots the tail of the plane they are in, but the film was obviously edited further after the recording of the cue so it doesn't line up perfectly.

Anyway, Spielberg didn't like it or something, so a new cue was recorded to replace it, which was not on the OST or the new Concord set (it was on some bootlegs as either "Keeping Up With The Joneses (Film Version)" or "Birds Of Charlemagne"), but that only covered the second half of the scene as it was decided to play the first half with no music

In the final film, the new cue was mucked around further, partially replaced with tracked music

[Goldsmithfan 6]

Thanks Jason, that was really, really helpful. I feel like an idiot having forgotten to note that I heard the same/similar transition music at the end of the cue as you hear in the film. I always thought it sounded like something for the biplane chase. Personally, I think that scene needs all the help it can get. Those mattes are terrible!

[Jay 37,377]

I know I'm surprised they weren't cleaned up for the DVD release

[crumbs 14,319]

I've got no doubt Lucas begged Spielberg to let him clean it up.

[Ollie 1,059]

The LC has some suprisingly sloppy visual effects.

[Luke Skywalker 1,796]

everyone of them have. LC maybe more so.

[Nick Parker 3,040]

Yes, I noticed that yesterday when I watched the film. Half of the time (in the "biplane escape, anyways), the mattes did not match with actual location shots. Ah, well. I still think that film is excellent.

[Marc402 0]

Yes, I noticed that yesterday when I watched the film. Half of the time (in the "biplane escape, anyways), the mattes did not match with actual location shots. Ah, well. I still think that film is excellent.

agreed i especialy think the plane sequence (mate) in LC and the Mine car chase (miniature) than again some movies nowadays have bad cgi.

I know Dennis Muren can't wait to get his hands on th original 3 for an SE. i was always dead set against it before. I know i watch the original E.T. over the 20th Anniversary any day for instance. But if it comes up and they still want to do ít i'm oke with it but ONLY if the originals say available not alla star wars

Raiders doesn't need any more tempering as far as i'm concerned

[Goldsmithfan 6]

None of them need any tampering as far as I'm concerned. All visual effects look fake in one way or another. "Updating" older films with CGI merely makes them look fake in a different way.

And if they ever touch the miracle of the Ark sequence I'll slaughter every one of them. That scene has the best depiction of ghosts I've ever seen put to film.

[Jacob 0]

Just update the wax dummies...

... or not.

[John Crichton 4]

The LC has some suprisingly sloppy visual effects.

Yes, it has the feel of a rushed production.

[Hitch 57]

Sloppy work doesn't come easily at ILM. I suppose with Ghostbusters II that year they were probably under a wee bit of pressure.

[Charlie Brigden 7]

Still, it looks like ESB-quality compared to STAR TREK V's from the same year. Ouch.

[Luke Skywalker 1,796]

i still dont know why they couldnt use mannequins or real people 'bodies' in the ark opening, and superimpose the fire.

The action figures are as awful as Vogel.

[Henry B 50]

Yeah, Luke, they should redo that all with CGI, right? It would look much better.

[Ollie 1,059]

Sloppy work doesn't come easily at ILM. I suppose with Ghostbusters II that year they were probably under a wee bit of pressure.

Which is odd because Ghostbusters II has much better visuals. You would think a Lucas film would take priority.

Of course Shatner didn't think ILM could handle the effects for ST V since they were busy with the two films. I'm sure ILM's left overs could have done a much better job than what he got.

[indy4 155]

The only bad SFX moment in LC is the tank going off the cliff. The rest is on par with the other Indy films. But the Leap of Faith bridge is probably the cleverest SFX moment in the entire Indy series.

[Luke Skywalker 1,796]

Yeah, Luke, they should redo that all with CGI, right? It would look much better.

they should have f*cking made it right it the 1st time.

[Charlie Brigden 7]

Of course Shatner didn't think ILM could handle the effects for ST V since they were busy with the two films. I'm sure ILM's left overs could have done a much better job than what he got.

I thought it was ILM that turned him down, because the A team was working on TLC and the B team was working on GB2.

Either way, the STV effects are diabolical. Even worse because they're juxtaposed with some shots of ILM's fine work from the end of THE VOYAGE HOME.

Yeah, Luke, they should redo that all with CGI, right? It would look much better.

they should have f*cking made it right it the 1st time.

I really was going to put some choice words, but I'll just state facts: You clearly have no idea or concept of just how cutting edge that work was at the time and you really should stop before you embarrass yourself further. Either that or research ILM's techniques in those times and similar effects work and get some perspective.

[Ollie 1,059]

According to Shatner, he was the one who determined the "C" team would not be able to handle the effects. But given the complaints about the lack of enough cash in the budget it wouldn't suprise me.

The airplane sequence in LC is rather poor. I think ILM could have done better.

[Henry B 50]

Yeah, Luke, they should redo that all with CGI, right? It would look much better.

they should have f*cking made it right it the 1st time.

I honestly have no clue what you are talking about. The climax of Raiders is one of the most thrilling, macabre sequences ever put to film. The dummies used are a hundred times more realistic than any computerized effect you'd see today. I'm guessing you thought Spalko's death scene was classic.

[Red 75]

The only bad SFX moment in LC is the tank going off the cliff. The rest is on par with the other Indy films. But the Leap of Faith bridge is probably the cleverest SFX moment in the entire Indy series.

The leap of faith is great, but I don't know about it being the single best special effect in the films. That would probably have to go to the ark opening.

[Luke Skywalker 1,796]

Yeah, Luke, they should redo that all with CGI, right? It would look much better.

they should have f*cking made it right it the 1st time.

I really was going to put some choice words, but I'll just state facts: You clearly have no idea or concept of just how cutting edge that work was at the time and you really should stop before you embarrass yourself further. Either that or research ILM's techniques in those times and similar effects work and get some perspective.

I honestly have no clue what you are talking about. The climax of Raiders is one of the most thrilling, macabre sequences ever put to film. The dummies used are a hundred times more realistic than any computerized effect you'd see today. I'm guessing you thought Spalko's death scene was classic.

Did you both read what i wrote?

I'm complaining only about the dead soldiers that are no less than unarticulated figurines. The fire and ark is fine.

I'm just saying that they could have filmed lying people in a set and then superimpose the fire explosion (done in a miniature of the set) or something similar to evade puting small figurines in front of the camera in 1st plane. Wasnt it the 'real sets' era, afterall?

Dont tell me those figurines are realistic because they arent. Neither is Vogel figurine in the fallen tank. If you really think that, you are the ones embarrasing yourselves.

And no i dont think Spalko's death was handled well (everything was fine until her dissintegrated).

[John Crichton 4]

According to Shatner, he was the one who determined the "C" team would not be able to handle the effects. But given the complaints about the lack of enough cash in the budget it wouldn't suprise me.

Yes, I always thought it was budget problems more than anything else.

[Charlie Brigden 7]

Did you both read what i wrote?

I'm complaining only about the dead soldiers that are no less than unarticulated figurines. The fire and ark is fine.

I'm just saying that they could have filmed lying people in a set and then superimpose the fire explosion (done in a miniature of the set) or something similar to evade puting small figurines in front of the camera in 1st plane. Wasnt it the 'real sets' era, afterall?

Dont tell me those figurines are realistic because they arent. Neither is Vogel figurine in the fallen tank. If you really think that, you are the ones embarrasing yourselves.

And no i dont think Spalko's death was handled well (everything was fine until her dissintegrated).

Films like RAIDERS aren't about realism. They're about creating an illusion through storytelling which makes you believe what you are seeing, whether it's spirits coming out of the Ark or AT-ATs walking across the plains of Hoth. If the story is good enough, the effects should not matter one iota. As it is, RAIDERS was not a huge budget film (as STAR WARS wasn't) but the effects were brilliant because they served the story. It's like JAWS. Does the shark look real? No. But the story is good enough, and it looks as effective as a fake shark in 1975 could have done, that it works, even to the ludicrous conclusion (not a dig, as it's awesome, but it's such a ludicrous concept).

[Richard Penna 3,696]

Pretty much everything from the moment the room starts to move in KotCS made me cringe - the merging aliens, the moving head, Spalko's death. Nothing in that sequence had to be CG imo - a lot of the spider stuff in CoS was practical effects for example.

I still believe that Spielberg's statement that it would all be old school stunt work and practical, real sets was a load of crap, and I put a lot of blame on Lucas personally.

Charlie - I agree 100% about the story making you forget you're watching effects. In that sense, I would say they resoundingly failed for me. Pity, because until the ending, I was quite liking the film for all its other flaws.

[Charlie Brigden 7]

I haven't seen KOTCS since the cinema, although I plan to revisit it this weekend. I'm looking forward to it but mildly apprehensive at the same time.

[Mr. Breathmask 555]

I was impressed by the huge amount of CG work there is in the jungle chase that goes by unnoticed. Some if it really added to that scene.

Sadly, some of it also didn't.

But in those cases, the scenes themselves were bad to begin with. I have no problem with ILM adding digital foilage to make the jungle seem more denser in a traditional chase. But two characters having a perfectly balanced swordfight on top of two moving vehicles, followed by some bad slapstick comedy is just poor poor poor, regardless of the approach taken with its effects.

[Ollie 1,059]

But in those cases, the scenes themselves were bad to begin with. I have no problem with ILM adding digital foilage to make the jungle seem more denser in a traditional chase. But two characters having a perfectly balanced swordfight on top of two moving vehicles, followed by some bad slapstick comedy is just poor poor poor, regardless of the approach taken with its effects.

Well said.

The fact that it's in an Indiana Jones film makes it even more ridiculous.

[Luke Skywalker 1,796]

Yeah, so the classic pirate movies, where they duel in rock and forth battleships are bullcrappy?

On a side note, I'm impressed about huge ammount of real sets, stunts and practical effects KOTCS has.

[Mr. Breathmask 555]

Yeah, so the classic pirate movies, where they duel in rock and forth battleships are bullcrappy?

Don't know, haven't seen any.

All I know is the Spalko/Mutt fight looked like baldercrap to me.

[Ollie 1,059]

I don't remember Erroll Flynn get whacked in the nuts 3 times in a row.

[Luke Skywalker 1,796]

I don't remember Erroll Flynn get whacked in the nuts 3 times in a row.

I was just refering to the 'duel' part.

Dont mention the crappy monkeys either...

[Ollie 1,059]

Actually getting hit below the belt was part of duel.

[Luke Skywalker 1,796]

Actually getting hit below the belt was part of duel.

I was defending dueling on top of two moving cars, which marc has an issue with.

[Mr. Breathmask 555]

I do when it looks like the characters are unaffected by the physics of actually dueling atop two vehicles moving seperately at high speed over a bumpy road.

I also already mentioned I have a problem with the slapstick that followed (i.e. Mutt getting hit in the nuts). That made it even worse.

[Luke Skywalker 1,796]

OK

BTW, its not high speed. In 4x4 vehicles, you shouldn't go over the 3rd gear in this kind of terrain. and that's 50-60 kph as much.

[publicist 4,643]

I do when it looks like the characters are unaffected by the physics of actually dueling atop two vehicles moving seperately at high speed over a bumpy road.

I also already mentioned I have a problem with the slapstick that followed (i.e. Mutt getting hit in the nuts). That made it even worse.

If he really feels like defending such junk, there's no way a law-of-physics argument can convince him otherwise.

With so many movies with irritating computer effects, there really should be an CG-Rating: 'Don't see this film when you are easily offended by bad computer-generated scenes which defy any common sense'. This rating was initiated by 'Van Helsing'.

[Luke Skywalker 1,796]

I do when it looks like the characters are unaffected by the physics of actually dueling atop two vehicles moving seperately at high speed over a bumpy road.

I also already mentioned I have a problem with the slapstick that followed (i.e. Mutt getting hit in the nuts). That made it even worse.

If he really feels like defending such junk, there's no way a law-of-physics argument can convince him otherwise.

Look, mister, i have used the physics arguments countless of times, specially in the LOTR franchise.

There are far worse physics-challenged scenes there and people see that as perfection.

Now, you have some true CG junk there.

[Wojo 2,453]

As soon as the movie established that Indiana Jones could survive being tossed by a nuclear blast via refrigerator, it was no longer obligated to follow any law of physics. If Mr. Lucas wanted Indiana Jones to twitch his nose or think happy thoughts, and be able to fly high above the jungle to find the lost city, why, it would have been perfectly acceptable.

[indy4 155]

Films like RAIDERS aren't about realism. They're about creating an illusion through storytelling which makes you believe what you are seeing, whether it's spirits coming out of the Ark or AT-ATs walking across the plains of Hoth. If the story is good enough, the effects should not matter one iota. As it is, RAIDERS was not a huge budget film (as STAR WARS wasn't) but the effects were brilliant because they served the story. It's like JAWS. Does the shark look real? No. But the story is good enough, and it looks as effective as a fake shark in 1975 could have done, that it works, even to the ludicrous conclusion (not a dig, as it's awesome, but it's such a ludicrous concept).

Agreed 100%.

As soon as the movie established that Indiana Jones could survive being tossed by a nuclear blast via refrigerator, it was no longer obligated to follow any law of physics.

I'm sorry, but the laws of physics were disregarded in the Indiana Jones universe the second Indy, Willie, and Shorty landed uninjured on the snowy mountain.

[Henry B 50]

I'm sorry, but the laws of physics were disregarded in the Indiana Jones universe the second Indy, Willie, and Shorty landed uninjured on the snowy mountain.

By the same token, Indy could pick up the earth like Apollo and hurl it into the sun. I mean, why not? If we're disregarding the laws of physics, then there aren't any limits, right?

[indy4 155]

I'm sorry, but the laws of physics were disregarded in the Indiana Jones universe the second Indy, Willie, and Shorty landed uninjured on the snowy mountain.

By the same token, Indy could pick up the earth like Apollo and hurl it into the sun. I mean, why not? If we're disregarding the laws of physics, then there aren't any limits, right?

So are you admitting that ToD and KotCS have equally cheesy moments (at least in terms of stunts)? Falling off three giant waterfalls is just a believable as following out of a plane in a life raft and then off a huge cliff. And actually, Indy and friends acted more affected by the waterfalls then they did the life raft.

[Henry B 50]

No. I meant that surviving a nuclear blast is far and away more unbelievable than anything that happens in the first three films. By the way, the raft stunt

.

I didn't have a problem with the first waterfall in KOTCS. But with three the scene became a self parody. It's as if Spielberg and Lucas are saying to the audience, "Hahaha, look how much ridiculous stuff we can get away with! Isn't Indiana Jones just invincible?"

[indy4 155]

No. I meant that surviving a nuclear blast is far and away more unbelievable than anything that happens in the first three films. By the way, the raft stunt

.

It may be technically possible, but it is still a very "eyebrow raising" moment in the film. And it requires a great deal of luck to be survivable.

And the fridge has yet to be tested. The only major problem with that scene is when Indy gets out, as he would die of radiation. But the actual flying through the air in the fridge is as believable as the raft scene.

I didn't have a problem with the first waterfall in KOTCS. But with three the scene became a self parody. It's as if Spielberg and Lucas are saying to the audience, "Hahaha, look how much ridiculous stuff we can get away with! Isn't Indiana Jones just invincible?"

You could say the same about the fall from the cliff in ToD.

[Henry B 50]

And the fridge has yet to be tested. The only major problem with that scene is when Indy gets out, as he would die of radiation. But the actual flying through the air in the fridge is as believable as the raft scene.

Well, let me clarify this, then: it's beyond impossible. The fridge would have been incinerated. The fridge flying through the air and landing at such incredible speed would have broken every bone in Indy's body (killed him). Indy would have gotten radiation poisoning right away and died. Every aspect of it is just way, way out there.

I didn't have a problem with the first waterfall in KOTCS. But with three the scene became a self parody. It's as if Spielberg and Lucas are saying to the audience, "Hahaha, look how much ridiculous stuff we can get away with! Isn't Indiana Jones just invincible?"

You could say the same about the fall from the cliff in ToD.

The cliff, not three cliffs. Also, everybody would have died at the third waterfall when they fell out of the vehicle (the shot actually makes it look like the vehicle is going to fall on top of somebody). Also, why doesn't anyone even attempt to brace themselves when they go over the waterfalls? Indy just holds his hat. Ha, ha.

[Mr. Breathmask 555]

BTW, its not high speed. In 4x4 vehicles, you shouldn't go over the 3rd gear in this kind of terrain. and that's 50-60 kph as much.

Oh ffs.

As for the fridge thing, I somehow wasn't as bothered by it as other people were. At that point in the film I still had enough good will towards the movie. And one could even defend it as fitting with the movie's attempt of being a '50s film: the era when people were told to "duck and cover" in the event of a nuclear blast.

Also, in the raft sequence in ToD, the movie established at least some sort of physics rule within its own universe. You could believe that sequence. The waterfall sequence in KotCS just goes too far. I can live with the first one, even the second. But the third fall is just so rediculously huge, and with no indication of what the hell happened whatsoever, even within the rules of that film's universe, it just comes off as a lame schtick.

[MissPadmé 17]

The fridge would have been incinerated. The fridge flying through the air and landing at such incredible speed would have broken every bone in Indy's body (killed him). Indy would have gotten radiation poisoning right away and died. Every aspect of it is just way, way out there.

aaaaha.

and the raft? falling from such a height to the hard snowy Icy ground? you tell me that doesn't breake bones? or that they atleast fell out of it when bouncing from the ground?

guys seriously you are discussing the realism of insane-iana jones movies??? you must be very desperate