#140RVW
Now that’s more like it! Shrugging off joylessness of Temple of Doom, fun-loving but not slight. Still as much fun as it was 25 years ago…
What’s more:
After the mine cart wreck that was Temple of Doom, virtually everyone involved realized that if the franchise was to continue, a return to form was necessary. (Spielberg wanted “to apologize for the second one”.) One of the ideas frequently suggested by Temple of Doom supporters is that the Indy trilogy closely mirrors the Star Wars Trilogy. That is to say, Raiders was the fun-loving adventure in the vein of Star Wars (1977) and so Temple of Doom followed the mold of The Empire Strikes Back, in that it was darker and more serious. I don’t doubt that was the intent – Lucas has stated as much – but it falls apart for two principal reasons.
- The first is that Empire had to be darker as it was the second part of a three-part story and so needed to develop and raise the stakes; that’s not what Temple did – it was a prequel so the chronology doesn’t make sense. (Besides, Empire is the greatest sequel ever made and Temple sucked – not because it was dark, but because it was poorly conceived and executed.)
- The second reason is that The Last Crusade is by extension the Return of the Jedi of this series, which is nonsense. I know, Last Crusade has some cutesy moments and if you liked Temple you would necessarily regard this third installment as a dumbing down or retread of the original, much as Jedi is (rightly) accused of. But while The Last Crusade is certainly the most family friendly, humorous and accessible of the series, that isn’t actually supposed to be a bad thing. You get that, right? Trying to make crowd-pleasing movies isn’t in of itself a flawed plan. If you sacrifice the character of your story (or your characters) in order to appease, well, yes, that’s pandering and shame on you. But I reject the idea that The Last Crusade does this. On the contrary, I believe it to be nearly as good of a film as the original Raiders, and if it lacks the edge of the original (and it does), so did all of the parties involved. Everyone was 8 years richer and fatter and more content.(Besides, if this is Jedi, where are the Ewoks? If anything, Short Round is the Ewok of this series…)
No, the two big trilogies have some significant differences to go with their many similarities, although it is certainly difficult to not think of these franchises as relatives. (Note: I wonder if one of the reasons that Temple is so divisive as a film is because it was released after Jedi? Certainly you brought your feelings about the final SW film into the theater with you when you saw Indy 2.) Last Crusade needs to be judged on its own merits. And how does it fare? Wonderfully…
Writing this installment was a circuitous journey; Chris Columbus first sent Indy to Africa to battle the Monkey King. Wisely passing on the chance to insult all of African descent as they had recently those of Indian descent, Spielberg came up with the introduction of Henry Jones, Sr. and worked with first Menno Meyjes, then Jeffrey Boam (Innerspace, The Lost Boys) to come up with the screenplay. (They weren’t done there, though, as Tom Stoppard did an uncredited rewrite of almost all of the dialogue and some of the scenes.) None of this is visible on-screen, as the story feels very streamlined and direct.
It’s a funny movie, which may be one reason so many people count this as their favorite. It had been five years since the humorless 2nd film, and during that time Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home (or as it seems generally to be known “the one with the whales”) had come out and made fans of even non-Trek moviegoers. I can’t help but think that was noted by Lucas & Spielberg, but in truth, all of their films had a great deal of humor.
The simple fact is that this is just a very good story. Yes, the tone helps, but at the end of the day it has a better story than Temple, if not quite as good as Raiders. (And heaps better than Skull…)
The actors are great, with Connery as Indy’s dad a brilliant coup. (Even if Connery is actually only 12 years older than Ford and 58 at time of filming, they were projecting the character as approximately 75.) Rhys-Davies is back as Sallah & Elliot as Brody and that’s just all kinds of good. Their inclusion in Temple wouldn’t have saved it but could have made quite a bit of difference. Kevork Malikyan has a small but important role as Kazim, some consolation for being passed over for Rhys-Davies as Sallah in Raiders. I’m a little surprised that they didn’t try to shoehorn in some cameo or mention of Short Round. If Crusade is really the family-friendly cop-out that some claim it to be, why wouldn’t they have included the precocious kid?
While I still don’t consider The Last Crusade to be the equal of Raiders, it is only because nothing can top the original. Besides, the first of anything is always special in a way that can’t be replicated. Nevertheless, I know many consider this the best installment in the franchise – I can’t agree with them, but I certainly see where they are coming from. There’s a lot to like.
Play by play (thoughts written down as I watched the movie):
- Casting for this movie is inspired; Connery & Phoenix, both.
- Opening scenes in Utah so gorgeous.
- This started off the excitement for Young Indiana Jones – such a great series…
- Phoenix eerily good as the early Indy, so many mannerisms from Ford’s portrayal of the character.
- “Everybody’s lost but me.”
- I wonder if Douglas Slocombe has switched to digital photography – I doubt it – can’t get much better than this…(Note: looked this up later – this was actually the last film in the nearly 50 year career for the truly gifted Slocombe, who was responsible for the cinematography of all three of the original Indy films.)
- Usually I think these kind of explanatory backstory flashbacks are cute and gimmicky, and this one is, too, but it’s just so well done that it doesn’t matter.
- What is also wonderful about the opening is that, similarly to the 1st movie, it sets not just the tone for the film, but provides significant story and character insight.
- 1938? That’s only two years after Raiders. Not the years, honey, it’s, ah, you get it…Only eight years in real life time between films 1 & 3 but that’s a long time in grumpy actor years…
- I don’t really get the whole rock star treatment for a professor, but then I guess I’m a long time removed from academia.
- Ah, Julian Glover makes the transition from Star Wars (Ep. V) to Indy. Great choice.
- They just get to the point so quickly in this movie. Such a streamlined plot makes for a fantastic film.
- Wonderful exposition scene. Write great dialogue and give it to skilled actors.
- More Denholm Elliot? Yes, please…
- Alison Doody as Dr. Elsa Schneider is a good pickup. She works very well here. Cute banter between the two makes sense because they are both very smart. She’s not too squeamish, either. Breath of fresh air after Willie Scott.
- Henry Jones Sr. is afraid of rats. Classic…
- Boat chase straight out of a Bond movie; brilliant.
- “Ah, Venice.”
- “Nazis. I hate these guys.”
- I love the interplay between Jr. & Sr. Every scene from now until the end of the movie with these two is a treat. Just the looks between the two…
- Sallah!
- “Our situation has not improved.”
- So much fun with something as simple as a revolving secret door. Comedy genius…
- Motorcycle joust – make this happen now…
- “My boy, we are pilgrims in an unholy land.”
- Good effects on the zeppelin.
- “Ships that pass in the night…”
- The dialogue for the conversation on the zeppelin is some of the best in the series.
- Connery’s best on foot battle against a plane since From Russia With Love…
- Another great action sequence in the canyon. Temple of Doom didn’t have a single scene as good as this – Last Crusade has several of them.
- “You call this archeology?”
- “I thought I’d lost you, boy.” Connery is just so good. You can forget sometimes because he is such a familiar sight, but he is truly a great actor.
- The whole “three tests” sequence is well thought out.
- Just gushing now – it’s just a great movie, ok?
Poster:
Trailer:
Bechdel Test:
Fail
The Representation Test Score: D (3 pts)
(http://therepresentationproject.org/grading-hollywood-the-representation-test/)
| Main Cast | Harrison Ford Indiana Jones, Sean Connery Professor Henry Jones, Alison Doody Elsa, Denholm Elliott Marcus Brody |
| Rating | E |
| Release Date | Wed 24 May 1989 UTC |
| Director | Steven Spielberg |
| Genres | Action, Adventure |
| Plot | When Dr. Henry Jones Sr. suddenly goes missing while pursuing the Holy Grail, eminent archaeologist Indiana Jones must follow in his father’s footsteps and stop the Nazis. |
| Poster |  |
| Runtime | 127 |
| Tagline | He’s back in an all new adventure. Memorial Day 1989. |
| Writers | Jeffrey Boam (screenplay), George Lucas (story) … |
| Year | 1989 |
