Rank The Indiana Jones Films

[Bespin 8,483]

Sorry, I don't rank anymore.

[Chen G. 3,949]

1. Indiana Jones and The Last Crusade: the introduction of a father figure gives this film a real sense of stakes and moments of true drama, while also being exceedingly comedic (in the best possible sense). It’s not only the best of the series - it’s the pinnacle of its genre.

 

2. Indiana Jones and Raiders of the Lost Ark: It just doesn’t click with me the way The Last Crusade does. I think Spielberg and the cast were still figuring out how to homage the style of acting of the old serials, and it doesn’t click quite as well as even Temple of Doom in that regard. Still, the action and adventure are great.

 

3. Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom: I’m not a huge fan, but there’s still great action and the character of Indiana remains compelling, even if those he shares the screen with don’t always do.

 

And than there’s another film, supposedly set in this series. It’s not truly terrible, it’s mostly just redundant, and the same can be said for that film’s upcoming sequel.

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

It's just Raiders of the Lost Ark.

[Nick1Ø66 4,718]

13 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

1. Indiana Jones and The Last Crusade: the introduction of a father figure gives this film a real sense of stakes and moments of true drama, while also being exceedingly comedic (in the best possible sense). It’s not only the best of the series - it’s the pinnacle of its genre.

 

2. Indiana Jones and Raiders of the Lost Ark: It just doesn’t click with me the way The Last Crusade does. I think Spielberg and the cast were still figuring out how to homage the style of acting of the old serials, and it doesn’t click quite as well as even Temple of Doom in that regard. Still, the action and adventure are great.

 

3. Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom: I’m not a huge fan, but there’s still great action and the character of Indiana remains compelling, even if those he shares the screen with don’t always do.

 

And than there’s another film, supposedly set in this series. It’s not truly terrible, it’s mostly just redundant, and the same can be said for that film’s upcoming sequel.

 

Rankings disqualified for referring to Raiders as "Indiana Jones and Raiders of the Lost Ark." 

 

In fact you should probably be banned for this.

[Bespin 8,483]

ban ban ban!

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

Kill him. Kill him now.

[John 2,032]

[Pellaeon 593]

The one with Eowyn

[Kasey Kockroach 2,344]

Minnesota Cuke and the Search for Noah's Umbrella

Minnesota Cuke and the Search for Samson's Hairbrush

 

There you go, that's how I rank them. 

[Holko 9,526]

Now this, I can't do. 

Raiders is bloody great.

Crusade is a bit weaker in almost every aspect but has the father-son dynamic to spice it up and I love the Grail in general.

Temple could be considered the least good, but it's so goddamn fun it makes up for everything.

 

On the last rewatch, I finally learned to accept Skull as an IJ movie, if a horribly failed and misguided one.

 

So I guess the best ranking I can do is Raiders, Temple, Crusade >>>>>Skull.

[publicist 4,643]

7 hours ago, Chen G. said:

2. Indiana Jones and Raiders of the Lost Ark: It just doesn’t click with me the way The Last Crusade does. I think Spielberg and the cast were still figuring out how to homage the style of acting of the old serials, and it doesn’t click quite as well as even Temple of Doom in that regard. Still, the action and adventure are great.

 

Have you ever actually watched old serials or just read about it and now drop these little pearls of wisdom? 

[Kasey Kockroach 2,344]

I eat old serials for breakfast!

[Nick Parker 3,040]

Temple of Doom channels that old pulp feel the strongest, but that's not necessarily for the best. I loved it as a kiddo, but watching it as an adult my major complaint is that the tone is all over the place. 

 

The Last Crusade is superficially a retread of Raiders, but as others have mentioned, there's an added layer of depth with Papa Jones. It's also crucial that Indy doesn't get the Grail at the end, showing that ultimately the movie was never about it, and it shows the true heart of The Last Crusade. As far as the whole serial thing, I do really like how a lot of it feels like a American propaganda film from the '40s.

 

And Raiders...is Raiders. I used to always go back and forth between it and The Last Crusade, but as an adult, I go with Raiders no question. It captures the dirty stubble feel of rough and tumble 30s movies, feeling almost like a Hammett novel come to visual life. The film is tons of fun, but has an earnestness and conviction in its story that makes it very hard to resist. 

 

I don't want to strike a stripped gold mine, but my biggest problem with Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is that it doesn't embrace the age of Indy, and its creators. It triesto follow the Indiana Jones template decades after so many films haven cue, and the result is a mashed potato dish where the OGs are playing catch-up with the many imitators and successors. 

 

Though the name David Koepp prevents me from being too hopeful, I'm hoping that the fifth one will feature an Indy that uses more his brains than his muscles in concession to his increasing age, and that Spielberg can find a way to mesh his modern sensibilities with Indiana Jones in an organic way.

17 minutes ago, kaseykockroach said:

I eat old serials for breakfast!

 

Zorro-Os, my favorite! 

[publicist 4,643]

59 minutes ago, kaseykockroach said:

I eat old serials for breakfast!

 

Get a dayjob!

43 minutes ago, Nick Parker said:

Temple of Doom channels that old pulp feel the strongest, but that's not necessarily for the best. I loved it as a kiddo, but watching it as an adult my major complaint is that the tone is all over the place. 

 

I never found that 'ode to old [Republic et al] serials' angle particularly convincing. It is superficially true when you only take into account the fantasy hokum, but the production values and writing are much closer to something like Huston's classic like 'Treasure of the Sierra Madre', as is Ford's iconic portrait of the character.

 

Even 'Temple of Doom' with its comic exaggeration has its David-Lean inspired tableaus that make that comparison dubious.

[Nick Parker 3,040]

7 hours ago, publicist said:

 

 

I never found that 'ode to old [Republic et al] serials' angle particularly convincing. It is superficially true when you only take into account the fantasy hokum, but the production values and writing are much closer to something like Huston's classic like 'Treasure of the Sierra Madre', as is Ford's iconic portrait of the character.

 

Even 'Temple of Doom' with its comic exaggeration has its David-Lean inspired tableaus that make that comparison dubious.

 

 Temple of Doom is the one of this series that I feel has a chance of being shown on a late night "movie show" with a campy host, I'll put it that way.

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

[Demodex 557]

Raiders > Last Crusade > Temple > the shitty one

[Pellaeon 593]

Crusade is the great sequel of Raiders

as

Empire is the great sequel of Star Wars

 

The difference is that Empire improves on the original by being a great film—impeccable pacing, script, acting—whereas Raiders is already that. When you watch Empire or Raiders, you get an incredible thrill, because every beat, every shot, every note is damned near perfect. It’s an experience you can get lose yourself in.

 

Where Crusade succeeds is that it brings back the fun and adventure of Raiders. If you like Raiders, you’ll like Crusade—it’s more of the same, plus it brings a lot of good new stuff to the table, getting deeper into Indiana’s history and character and his paternal relationship, albeit it’s obviously much less romantic. It’s only a slight notch below Raiders because, well, it’s not Raiders. Ford is older and less sexy. You know? You like it because it takes you back to the thing, but it is not the thing itself.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

I think she's a hunny... look at those jugs.

[theMaestraX 106]

My favourites in this order:

Indiana jones and the Last Crusade - Raiders of the Lost Ark - Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom - Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull*!

*Regarding the backlash for this one I seem to appreciate it more....gradually & is a tie with Doom!

[JoeinAR 1,949]

Raiders of the Lost Ark/Temple of Doom=great films

 

 

KOTCS is not very good 

 

And there is always Least Crusade, a film for millennials incapable of leaving things to the imagination. 

 

http://www.jwfan.com/forums/index.php?/topic/6473-21-reasons-least-crusade-stinks/

[Brundlefly 2,385]

12 minutes ago, JoeinAR said:

http://www.jwfan.com/forums/index.php?/topic/6473-21-reasons-least-crusade-stinks/

It's almost worse than any of the comments to The Last Jedi.

[John 2,032]

33 minutes ago, JoeinAR said:

KOTCS is not very good 

 

And there is always Least Crusade, a film for millennials incapable of leaving things to the imagination.

 

Ranking Crusade under Crystal Skull. Ballsy.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

Half the fun of pointing out the flaws of Least Crusade is that people really seemed offended that some people find the film to be flawed.  

While some of those 21 reasons are opinions some are inescapable facts.

 

I admit I have enough OCD that the machined bottom of the cup of Christ bothers me. I have no doubt SS and company knew it was visable but thought only an idiot would notice and be bothered. I'm that idiot. Guilteeeeeeeeeee.

[John 2,032]

10 minutes ago, JoeinAR said:

Least Crusade

 

Haha! So clever!

 

On ‎1‎/‎20‎/‎2005 at 11:21 AM, JoeinAR said:

Williams' lacks scoring effort, uninspired, but then look at what he had to inspire him

 

This alone invalidates your entire rant. Last Crusade has an excellent score, and is very effective in the film.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

Just now, John said:

 

Haha! So clever!

 

 

This alone invalidates your entire rant.

Have you heard the score? It is easily the 3rd or 4th best of the series. It has many skipable moments.

[John 2,032]

1 minute ago, JoeinAR said:

Have you heard the score? It is easily the 3rd or 4th best of the series. It has many skipable moments.

 

2nd best, actually, but let's agree to disagree.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

Raiders and TOD #1

 

I tend to lean towards KOTCS 3rd simple because LC has the worst/least interesting endtitles.

TOD has the best entitles hands down. Im talking Warriors over the Cavs here. Not even close.

[Demodex 557]

3 hours ago, JoeinAR said:

I admit I have enough OCD that the machined bottom of the cup of Christ bothers me.

 

Wait. What?!

[Holko 9,526]

I don't see it either.

[Nick1Ø66 4,718]

Machined what?!

 

I'm going to need to see pictures. And someone fetch my smoking jacket.

[Chen G. 3,949]

5 hours ago, JoeinAR said:

And there is always Least Crusade, a film for millennials incapable of leaving things to the imagination. 

 

 

The Last Crusade is the best of the bunch.

 

The father-son relationship imbues the film with both more weight and with more humor than Raiders.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

19 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

 

The Last Crusade is the best of the bunch.

 

The father-son relationship imbues the film with both more weight and with more humor than Raiders.

Wrong as usual.

Its actually the false cup the one donovan drinks from

You see the grind marks when he drinks. He chose poorly. So did SS for that shot

 

 

[Nick1Ø66 4,718]

Oh...yes, the "false" cup looks like a prop even without seeing the bottom (which yeah, you can't unsee). I've always thought it looked fake. But it's not the "cup of Christ" as you described it.

 

The "real" one is quite a good prop actually.

 

[John 2,032]

[JoeinAR 1,949]

Bingo. That kind of machining technology didn't exist at the time of Christ.

In the interest of transparency Im also the guy who gets pissed at the Kamikaze scene in Midway and in every movie where a 747 takes off then the next scene its a DC-10 or L-1011, then a 727 lands. 

[Holko 9,526]

To be slightly fair, it's supposed to be a fake and the real champion should be able to tell that, I guess the brothers made or brought all those decoy chalices there when they went there during the First Crusade.

[Chen G. 3,949]

Who cares?!

 

If I enjoy the story, I can't be bothered with each individual beat and  every little detail of production design. The question is whether the piece works as a whole, which it brilliantly does.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

28 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

Who cares?!

 

If I enjoy the story, I can't be bothered with each individual beat and  every little detail of production design. The question is whether the piece works as a whole, which it brilliantly does.

How convenient for you. 

[Chen G. 3,949]

Its not convenient, its the way films are evaluated. You think Roger Ebert fussed over such minute detail?

[JoeinAR 1,949]

6 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

Its not convenient, its the way films are evaluated. You think Roger Ebert fussed over such minute detail?

Actually he did at times. And please don't compare yourself to him. 

 

I suppose someone ignorant of the process of how metal is machined wouldn't be bothered but if there had been a Made in China sticker even you might be pulled out of the story for a minute.

[Naïve Old Fart 9,533]

On 04/06/2018 at 10:32 PM, Bespin said:

Sorry, I don't rank anymore.

 

Your husband must be disappointed.

 

 

 

 

Oops! Sorry..."rank". I need glasses 

[Nick Parker 3,040]

4 minutes ago, JoeinAR said:

Actually he did at times. And please don't compare yourself to him. 

 

I suppose someone ignorant of the process of how metal is machined wouldn't be bothered but if there had been a Made in China sticker even you might be pulled out of the story for a minute.

 

"Mommy, why is there a glass wall separating Indy and the snakes? And is that R2D2 and C3P0 on a pillar? My immersion is ruined!"

[JoeinAR 1,949]

No one saw the c3p0 but taking out the glass was a mistake.

And if you say you did well... i suppose you saw the sneaker in ROTJ too.

[Brundlefly 2,385]

2 hours ago, Chen G. said:

Who cares?!

 

If I enjoy the story, I can't be bothered with each individual beat and  every little detail of production design. The question is whether the piece works as a whole, which it brilliantly does.

If only more people would understand that...

2 hours ago, Chen G. said:

Its not convenient, its the way films are evaluated. You think Roger Ebert fussed over such minute detail?

Well, Ebert actually did that very often. Therefore, I'm not a fan of Ebert. After all, he was quite subjective.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

When emotions are involved people are rarely objective. Movies are made to move you in some way or another.

Here is an article about how  a scene can take you out of a movie.

 

 

https://www.google.com/amp/www.looper.com/11796/movies-ruined-one-scene/%3famp=1

[John 2,032]

But most of those are reputedly bad movies that (surprise) have terrible scenes...?

[JoeinAR 1,949]

Well good movies usually dont have them. I dont consider LC to be a good movie nor a bad movie. Its just mediocre imho.

 

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

I don't believe in reviewing a film objectively.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

i like indiana jone