or Connect
CHUD.com Community › Forums › SPECIFIC FILMS › The Franchises › Indiana Jones
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Indiana Jones

post #1 of 956
Thread Starter 
Just thought I'd start a thread about the existing films so that we can discuss them without people obsessing over Ray Winstone's magical pants.

This is partially a marketing gimmick because I just finished a 2 and a half thousand word blog on the entire series which can be found HERE.

I hadn't seen the films since Christmas 2003, and I was shocked by how much I still liked them. I was also surprised at the amount of violence on display, it's kinda ridiculous how bloody and nasty Raiders is, and to be honest some of the scenes in Raiders make the supposedly darker Temple of Doom look like a kids film.

I was discussing this in chat but it seems odd that the 80s had this string of Family Films which in terms of violence are up there with the latest Die Hard film.
post #2 of 956
Raiders would easily get an "R" rating today.
post #3 of 956
I re-watched Temple of Doom over the weekend, and while Short Round doesn't bother me nearly as much as he used to, I still think the film sort of falls apart once they get to India. The Club Obi Wan sequence is flat-out fantastic, but I feel the whole Thugee cult is not a very compelling threat, the Shankara Stones don't have the same intrigue or stakes as the Ark, and the whole thing feels too insular and confined after the globe-spanning nature of Raiders.
post #4 of 956
I've maintained for some time now that the opening credits sequence in Temple of Doom is one of the best I've ever seen.

That's all I have to say about that. I enjoy all three movies however Raiders is really kind of beyond comparison.
post #5 of 956
I watched Raiders as part of our "manly movie night" at work a couple weeks back, and the turnout was really great. Everyone was surprisingly into it, and they laughed and cheered at all the big moments. Since Indy is the one franchise that has managed to hold onto my geek love through infatuations and disillusionments with Star Wars, Trek, and LOTR, I think I'll always have that soft spot for it. Mostly because I wouldn't be into a lot of stuff, like history or jazz, if it weren't for the movies and the tv series. (I actually watched the tv series first, as it was "Educational" in a way that the movies weren't, according to my old man.)

The thing that surprised me most about watching Raiders with an audience was what moment got the biggest laugh. It was "hahaha...sonofabitch."
post #6 of 956
Thread Starter 
I love that "hah...hah...sonofabitch".

Whenever I show it to kids they always love the Sword/Gun sequence, but they love Toht's coat hanger.
post #7 of 956
I just read your blog entry, Spike, good work. I think that "hahaha" moment is another one of those reasons why we love Indy like you described -- because in Raiders, he has no clue whatsoever how he's going to get out of each mess he finds himself in. The whole "I don't know, I'm making this up as I go along" thing.
post #8 of 956
The first thing that comes to mind with these films is that as a kid I wanted to be Indiana Jones more than anything else. God, I love that series. Can't wait for Crystal Skulls in the coming months...
post #9 of 956
Thread Starter 
It's why Doom Indy is so odd, because he's so knowledgable and so in control for a lot of the runtime.

Also, what's up with Doom being before Raiders?

It just makes no sense at all.
post #10 of 956
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spike Marshall View Post
Whenever I show it to kids they always love the Sword/Gun sequence, but they love Toht's coat hanger.
Showed Raiders to my nephew for the first time about a month ago, and he loved the coat hanger. The movie really stuck with him, and whenever I see him, he begs me to let him see Temple of Doom. I really thought it would be too much for him (hearts being ripped out and all), but maybe I should reconsider...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spike Marshall View Post
Also, what's up with Doom being before Raiders?

It just makes no sense at all.
It doesn't make much sense. Especially referencing gags from Raiders like you said in your blog (nice write up). I'm curious as to why they did that.
post #11 of 956
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spike Marshall View Post
Also, what's up with Doom being before Raiders?
Probably Lucas' little way of seeing if it'd work for the Star Wars prequels (since he'd already made it known to the public that he'd be making em in the coming years!)
post #12 of 956
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spike Marshall View Post
Also, what's up with Doom being before Raiders?

It just makes no sense at all.
I always figured it was to give Indy a different love interest without implying that he and Marion broke up. But then Last Crusade came along and ruined that...
post #13 of 956
Thread Starter 
I think for kids Doom is nastier, but I think from an adult standpoint (because we're more aware of certain things and have more empathy generally) Raiders is a more vicious film.

Indiana getting his bulletwound punched over and over again is a prime example of a scene that is actually kinda nasty.
post #14 of 956
I think it was Dickson who said something to the effect that Doom works on one level as a prequel because it's about the "fortune and glory" Indy learning the real value of the artifacts he's hunting for. One of the reasons he has so much contempt for Belloq in Raiders is because in Doom, he basically is Belloq.
post #15 of 956
Raiders will always be my favorite of the series, and by far one of the first movies I put in when i'm in a shitty mood... and when ever I get the chance I'm always using the line ha ha ha ha...sonofabitch.. just love it

on a side note, i never got the "magical pants" what on earth is everyone talking about?
post #16 of 956
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin K View Post
I always figured it was to give Indy a different love interest without implying that he and Marion broke up. But then Last Crusade came along and ruined that...
I thought the same. And I've always been disappointed with Last Crusade because of Marion's absence. Exploring Indy's relationship with his father was a fine idea, but not at the expense of his relationship with Marion, given that I thought the third film was the final chapter in the series.

I'm glad they're bringing her back, and that we'll see Abner Ravenwood in the new film. Those are the only things that have me interested in Crystal Skull.
post #17 of 956
Quote:
Originally Posted by RathBandu View Post
I think it was Dickson who said something to the effect that Doom works on one level as a prequel because it's about the "fortune and glory" Indy learning the real value of the artifacts he's hunting for. One of the reasons he has so much contempt for Belloq in Raiders is because in Doom, he basically is Belloq.
I don't recall saying that, but I wish I had, because it makes a lot of sense.

My main beef with the logic of Doom being a prequel is that Raiders Indy scoffs at Marcus' warnings about the Ark as a bunch of mystical nonsense when chronologically he just had an adventure stuffed to the gills with mystical nonsense.
post #18 of 956
I can buy that, though, because that's part of the arc of each Indy movie -- going from non-believer to believer. They handled it better in Crusade, though, with "Are you sure?" "Pretty sure."
post #19 of 956
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Dickson View Post
My main beef with the logic of Doom being a prequel is that Raiders Indy scoffs at Marcus' warnings about the Ark as a bunch of mystical nonsense when chronologically he just had an adventure stuffed to the gills with mystical nonsense.
Maybe he believes in Hindu mystical nonsense but not Judeo-Christian mystical nonsense?
post #20 of 956
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Dickson View Post
I re-watched Temple of Doom ... and the whole thing feels too insular and confined after the globe-spanning nature of Raiders.
Ebert said it in his review, but that's the appeal of TOD. It's like Indy's Really Bad Night. It's what would happen if Indiana Jones was the lead in AFTER HOURS. If anything, I don't think it takes it far enough. It never quite feels like the ordeal it should.

Other TOD shit:

* I think Kate Capshaw's great in the role, and don't find the character at all annoying, but she looks too much like some permed 80s soccer mum, not the nightclub siren she was clearly scripted as.

* The sad face Indy makes in the spike chamber is hilarious, like an outtake they just decided to leave in the film. We... are going... TO DIE... ;_;
post #21 of 956
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul McCartney View Post
Ebert said it in his review, but that's the appeal of TOD. It's like Indy's Really Bad Night. It's what would happen if Indiana Jones was the lead in AFTER HOURS. If anything, I don't think it takes it far enough. It never quite feels like the ordeal it should.

Other TOD shit:

* I think Kate Capshaw's great in the role, and don't find the character at all annoying, but she looks too much like some permed 80s soccer mum, not the nightclub siren she was clearly scripted as.

* The sad face Indy makes in the spike chamber is hilarious, like an outtake they just decided to leave in the film. We... are going... TO DIE... ;_;

That whole spike chamber sequence is great. I especially like the shot where Indy's fist does the acting: "DO IT NOW!"
post #22 of 956
I never understood the arguement of Doom being darker than Raiders... just because someone's looking a heart?

It probably has darker subject matter (the children being captured and worked as slaves), but the tone of the film stays pretty consistant with the other two. How about that comical shot of a rock hitting one of the slave kid's heads? The stuff with Indy changing over through the Kalima passes by like breeze. The film is rarely serious, just like the others.

I just love how the ending with the bridge you get wide shots showing the river down below is perhaps a shallow creek... but they try to make it seem gargantuan, as well as being 1000 feet below the the bridge itself.
post #23 of 956
Quote:
* The sad face Indy makes in the spike chamber is hilarious, like an outtake they just decided to leave in the film. We... are going... TO DIE...
I think I've quoted "We...are going...to DIE" more than any other line from any movie I can recall. Although, there was a month straight where whenever my friends or I would see a writing utensil we'd pick it up and say (in our most exaggerated, delirious Denholm Elliot impersonations) "The pen...is mightier, THAN THE SWORD!"

Anyway, I think the Jones movies have the most re-watchability out of any of the trilogies I own. I do have to say that although I hold Raiders in the highest regard out of any of them, I have the most fun with Crusade. Perhaps it's because it was the one my friends and I re-enacted the most as kids, or maybe some part of me gets giggly over goofy Marcus Brody. I don't know. Doom was the one that I feared as a youngin' (I could never stay calm around insects after seeing that and I'm still more than slightly entomophobic) and I would watch the "Raiders face melt" repeatedly as well, but Crusade was the one I would watch from start to finish multiple times in one day. I still pop that one in the most when I'm jonesin' for some Jones, but I've come to recognize Raiders for the masterpiece it is.
post #24 of 956
Thread Starter 
The thing which irritates me about Doom, Indy sees a swordman and reaches for his empty gunholster as if he was experienced in shooting swordsmen like that. It's a throwaway gag to Raiders but it's another moment of oddness in a film which can barely keep itself together.

Paul absolutely nails it though, it's like a non-canon Indiana Jones. A wacky standalone adventure, which is removed from the main mythos (Raiders, Crusade and presumably Skull).
post #25 of 956
See for me, the mythos just expands with TOD - just another Indy adventure but more like a horror film, with a completely different vibe. I adore it tho I'll be honest ("We are going to DIE" is my favourite Indy line ever) for me Indy is the mythos, regardless of what setting he's in.

That said Raiders for my money is a near-prefect film.

More to come on this when I have more time
post #26 of 956
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carnotaur3 View Post
I just love how the ending with the bridge you get wide shots showing the river down below is perhaps a shallow creek... but they try to make it seem gargantuan, as well as being 1000 feet below the the bridge itself.
From what you can see on the DVD, it looks like that bridge was pretty high up - I don't think it was trick photography (the wide shots).

That moment right after Short Round says "Hang on lady, we go for a ride!" when Indy has a crazy ass look in his eye before he cuts the bridge is probably my favorite moment in the trilogy. Just a great job by the editor in the build up during that scene...
post #27 of 956
Quote:
Originally Posted by RathBandu View Post
I think it was Dickson who said something to the effect that Doom works on one level as a prequel because it's about the "fortune and glory" Indy learning the real value of the artifacts he's hunting for. One of the reasons he has so much contempt for Belloq in Raiders is because in Doom, he basically is Belloq.

Except that the opening to Last Crusade posits that young Indy is already well aware of the historical value of the Cross of Coronado and that it belongs in a museum.
post #28 of 956
Quote:
Originally Posted by WayDen View Post
From what you can see on the DVD, it looks like that bridge was pretty high up - I don't think it was trick photography (the wide shots).

That moment right after Short Round says "Hang on lady, we go for a ride!" when Indy has a crazy ass look in his eye before he cuts the bridge is probably my favorite moment in the trilogy. Just a great job by the editor in the build up during that scene...
There's actually alot more iconic stuff in Temple of Doom than there is in all three of the films. That shot of Indy holding the machete over the bridge is just a fucking awesome shot... as well as the tracking shot of Indy in the mines looking on right before he sucker punches one of the Thugs.
post #29 of 956
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amphibatron View Post
Except that the opening to Last Crusade posits that young Indy is already well aware of the historical value of the Cross of Coronado and that it belongs in a museum.
Yeah they kinda screwed the pooch there.
post #30 of 956
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ratty View Post
That whole spike chamber sequence is great. I especially like the shot where Indy's fist does the acting: "DO IT NOW!"
I hadn't thought of that in a long time. I'm no fan of TOD but that scene and Club Obi Wan probably make it worth owning.
post #31 of 956
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul McCartney View Post
* The sad face Indy makes in the spike chamber is hilarious, like an outtake they just decided to leave in the film. We... are going... TO DIE... ;_;
Quite possibly my favorite moment in the entire series with the exception of the iconic "Mola Ram, prepare to meet Khali... in HELL!" scene. Absolutely adore Kamakaze Indy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spike Marshall View Post
The thing which irritates me about Doom, Indy sees a swordman and reaches for his empty gunholster as if he was experienced in shooting swordsmen like that. It's a throwaway gag to Raiders but it's another moment of oddness in a film which can barely keep itself together.
I've seen this sentiment numerous times on these boards and I still don't get it. It's not like he pointedly references the events of Raiders before reaching for his gun. It's not some "Family Guy"-esque: "Hey, Short Round, this reminds me of the time I..." scene. It's for the audience alone and, as you said, it's a throw-away gag. I've got no beef with it and probably have laughed each of the dozens of times I've watched the movie.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amphibatron View Post
Except that the opening to Last Crusade posits that young Indy is already well aware of the historical value of the Cross of Coronado and that it belongs in a museum.
Conversely, young Indy goes through the ordeal of trying to save the Cross only to have it snatched away by the thugs (who have, by the way, the stamp of authority embodied by the Sheriff). I suggest that this would go a long way to making Indy more cynical: a sort of "if our supposed protectors and civil leaders don't care, why should I?" attitude. And it's this attitude on display until the climax of Doom.
post #32 of 956
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattioli View Post
Conversely, young Indy goes through the ordeal of trying to save the Cross only to have it snatched away by the thugs (who have, by the way, the stamp of authority embodied by the Sheriff). I suggest that this would go a long way to making Indy more cynical: a sort of "if our supposed protectors and civil leaders don't care, why should I?" attitude. And it's this attitude on display until the climax of Doom.
Also, the obvious daddy issues on display in both the opening to Crusade and peppered throughout the canonical tv series (I think there's one episode dealing with the result of the death of Indy's mother, and it's implied that Indy and his father went years without speaking at one point*) probably didn't make Indy too keen on living up to the old man's expectations. You could also make the argument that Indy's experience from Doom to Raiders is necessary for Crusade -- having realized that his father was right, and become in part, the man he thought his father would want him to be, Indy's able to repair his own relationship with his father in the third film. With that in mind, it'll be interesting to see how Kingdom plays out the next part of that story: Indy (apparently) having to deal with his own absent fatherhood.

*Maybe it's because I was exposed to the tv series first rather than the films, but I loved the actor playing Indy's father in the series much more than Connery.
post #33 of 956
The biggest "fuck yeah" moment in the series is Indy waking up from the voodoo attacks and punching that thug. It's my favorite use of the Indy theme in the entire series. Fuck the haters. Temple of Doom is great, certainly better than rehash city Last Crusade.
post #34 of 956
I don't think there is a better series of films than Indiana Jones. Each film is fun in their own way, and the fact that we got something that exciting and fantastic on three different occasions (and a fourth on the way) is a pretty amazing achievement.

And really, the heart-ripping sequence isn't nearly as fucked up as the face-melting in Raiders. It isn't even the face-melting that really gets me; it's the face of that spirit changing from angelic to demonic carnie that does it.

Time to break out the box-set again...
post #35 of 956
The "darkest" moment in DOOM is in the first few minutes, when it's implied that Indy actually cut off some poor bastard's fingers in some offscreen fracas as some sort of "punishment". Casts him in a whole new light.

DOOM is otherwise pretty mild, I find. It's more shrill and graceless than it is "dark".
post #36 of 956
The Indy trilogy is great because each movie has it's own personality, Temple of Doom is like Raiders' hyper, obnoxious little brother. Last Crusade is its gentler sentimental dad. I remember the prequel aspect of Temple of Doom being known in the years leading up to its release, then downplayed when it came out. I had marvel comics circa 1982 mentioning "Raiders of the Temple of Death" taking place before. I think it works, Indy is humbled by the experience, he wants the Ark for the museum, not fortune and glory. Yet just look at his rep, Indy is "nefarious" and has "fallen from the pure faith" of archeology. (And in Doom he's been called a graverobber)
post #37 of 956
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul McCartney View Post
* The sad face Indy makes in the spike chamber is hilarious, like an outtake they just decided to leave in the film. We... are going... TO DIE... ;_;
Yep.
post #38 of 956
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spike Marshall View Post
I hadn't seen the films since Christmas 2003, and I was shocked by how much I still liked them. I was also surprised at the amount of violence on display, it's kinda ridiculous how bloody and nasty Raiders is, and to be honest some of the scenes in Raiders make the supposedly darker Temple of Doom look like a kids film.
Doom is a kids film ... I was 13 when I saw it in the theater and loved it. My younger brother actually shouted "Jump!" during the bridge sequence. He wasn't playing to the audience, he was just genuinely excited and forgot himself for a moment. I still give him shit for it.

My favorite moment in Doom is when Short Round realizes Indy's really going to cut the rope bridge. Indiana Jones was explicitly crazy in this film.
post #39 of 956
So - does anyone watch the series in chronological order rather than order of release or is that just me?
post #40 of 956
Isn't there a young Indiana Jones show out now or something? I wonder if its as lame as it certainly could be.

"We named the DOG Indiana"
post #41 of 956
I watched Raiders... last night.
I had forgotten what an excitable bunch the egyptians were in this film.

If I ever go to Kairo, I'm gonna try running through the streets to see if I can get a crowd to follow me, or at least cheer wildly as I pass by.
post #42 of 956
Quote:
Originally Posted by umakeme23 View Post
Isn't there a young Indiana Jones show out now or something?
Out now or something? It's not a new show first of all and I feel the Emmy's were well deserved (namely for art direction, costume design, etc). It's really different than the movies though, and not in a Indy as a Kid going on adventures with his stupid fat friend sort of way.

There's some pretty great episodes, for the most part I found it boring though. Not great. But not at all cheesy like you might expect it to be.
post #43 of 956
I can't remember much about the show, aside from I watched whenever I could when I was a kid. Wasn't Sean Patrick "Powder" Flannery Henry Jones Junior?

I think I may have to pick this up sometime soon.
post #44 of 956
Since this thread is here, I have something I've always wondered about:

In Raiders, when we meet Sallah on the rooftop of his home, he mentions there being a French archeologist supervising the dig at Tanis, and when Indy asks "What's his name?" Sallah replies "They call him Bellosh." And then Indy laughs uproariously -- too uproariously -- and corrects him. I've always found Indy's amusement at Sallah's mispronounciation kind of baffling. Is there a joke here I'm missing? Or is Indy simply that asshole who laughs at foreigners for mispronouncing things?
post #45 of 956
It's a combination him enjoying of a goofy nickname for somebody that he really doesn't like and that he's probably stunned that he's going to have to deal with this asshole again.
post #46 of 956
That's how I always took it. He's laughing because his nemesis just happens to be after the same thing he is...again.
post #47 of 956
Someone mentioned this is the only solid all the way through Trilogy while I agree Indy is, I would add Back To Future to that elite club, although both are highly subject to personal opinion on being in that club. That being said I find it interesting to compare and contrast the similarities between the first and second movies of each trilogy and how each dealt success, and how each went different routes in their third act.
post #48 of 956
Just to jump in on this, you all have to read the EW this week, with Indiana Jones on the cover. The article gives the all three films big sloppy blowjobs, and it all kind of comes off more like reading a message board than EW. It will make you even more excited for the new one, which, by the way, is only just over two months away.

Personally, I love all three films and can't pick a favorite. When it comes to this franchise, saying one is better than another feels like splitting hairs. I'll watch any one of them gladly at the drop of a hat.

One thing I am concerned about though. Indiana Jones has somehow stayed cool, or at least not dorky, ever since Raiders. The same was true of Star Wars until Phantom Menace came out. Is that gonna happen this time? Or will it happen only if the new one sucks?
post #49 of 956
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin K View Post
Since this thread is here, I have something I've always wondered about:

In Raiders, when we meet Sallah on the rooftop of his home, he mentions there being a French archeologist supervising the dig at Tanis, and when Indy asks "What's his name?" Sallah replies "They call him Bellosh." And then Indy laughs uproariously -- too uproariously -- and corrects him. I've always found Indy's amusement at Sallah's mispronounciation kind of baffling. Is there a joke here I'm missing? Or is Indy simply that asshole who laughs at foreigners for mispronouncing things?
It has nothing to do with how Sallah called him.

Indy laughed because of the irony of the situation. (i.e. he's up against Belloq again)
post #50 of 956
If Adventure has a name.....its definately not VAN HELSING.



INDIANA JONES & THE TEMPLE OF DOOM (1984) - **** out of 5

I know now, and perhaps always did, that RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK is the best picture of that franchise, and a perfect masterpiece of action cinema.

But I actually prefered this movie as a kid.

Much like another 1984 release in THE LAST STARFIGHTER, Steven Spielberg's INDIANA JONES & THE TEMPLE OF DOOM is a juvenile boy's adventure, except its as well-made as such a creative endeavor could possibly be.

The tough hero has his shirt open, fist fights everyone, with a useful junior sidekick tagging along. The baddie is wild-eyed in his cartoonish yet evil presence. There is teases of sex everywhere, subliminal or overt. Henchmen are killed in creative ways. The chases and thrills are wonderfully over the top.

Adults and girls are revolted when monkey heads and snakes are eaten for lunch, and shriek as hearts are brutally ripped out of people's chests, while us boys are just loving it.

If RAIDERS was saturday matinee serials retooled and disguised as A-level filmmaking craft, TEMPLE OF DOOM is very frank and honest of its B-movie reality, and so very much in punch drunk love with its pulp trash roots.

To make my point more clear, let's use a metaphor for the Indiana Jones trilogy.

RAIDERS is the well-loved guy Valedictorian/High School Quarterback that is neat, clean, and perfect in an Aryan sort of way. LAST CRUSADE is the geek kid that imitates the RAIDERS guy in everyway, but falls well short and is sorta hollow.

Then there is TEMPLE OF DOOM is the motorcycle-riding gang leader of a badass with a chilling charisma that people either dig or fear. He stays out partying late with his drinking and smoking, he beats up the LAST CRUSADE kid because the latter is a dork, and doesn't give a goddamn if the RAIDERS guy has a problem with that.

Most people seem to hate TEMPLE OF DOOM, or at least well-prefer LAST CRUSADE, and I hang my head. TEMPLE OF DOOM has the action and popcorn one would expect from an Indiana Jones picture, but tries to be its own creature, a more dark and funhouse-quality brother to RAIDERS that is more rich and rewarding than LAST CRUSADE.

It also succeeds because its the closest time that Spielberg, Harrison Ford, and George Lucas have come in producing a James Bond picture, and TEMPLE OF DOOM is their cinema-surrogate to play 007.

There is the tension-filled opening at the Shanghai nightclub where Ford lavishes up his own Sean Connery persona. Indy Jones may be a rugged layman, but he can also be classy and slick when he wants to be. What follows is the first major action sequence, which is totally unrelated to the movie's plot.

Nevermind the hero's own calm penetration entrance into (and explosive exit from) the villain's massive stronghold fortress, intercut with sexual innuendo and spectacular stunts.

If TEMPLE OF DOOM is an unofficial Bond movie, then Amrish Puri is the essential Bondian villain. Full of dreams where his evil death cult wipes the other great world religions off the globe, a bald head covered with red paint, a menacing laugh, and he scared the hell out of me as a kid.

Imagine if Osama Bin Laden ever had a personality.

Besides his ultra-deadly fundamentalism, he also kidnaps children for slave labor. Much like Luther in THE WARRIORS, he's a great Crazy Asshole.

What surprised me though in rewatching DOOM is the surprising chemistry that Jonathan Ke Quan had with Ford as Short Round. From playing cards to teaming-up in battling guards, he is like Dick Grayson in being a good surrogate-son/sidekick outlet for boys who wish they were out there kicking ass with Indiana Jones. Sure he gets whipped and beaten, but that's the prize to be paid.

As much as I love TEMPLE OF DOOM, its not perfect. Some of the "comedy" falls flat, though they don't bother me as much as the gags in LAST CRUSADE. Kate Capshaw may be the doll, but she screams way too much at times for my liking. Plus I must admit, this is great trash...but its still trash.

But this is a rare movie where Spielberg is obviously having a great fun time with the material, almost as much as I did.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: The Franchises
CHUD.com Community › Forums › SPECIFIC FILMS › The Franchises › Indiana Jones