|
|
Post by Popeye Doyle on May 22, 2018 19:17:12 GMT
Pros - The lighter tone makes it much more a natural follow-up to Raiders, which extends to bringing back Sallah and Brody. Keep in mind, Temple of Doom was a prequel as well. The great chemistry between Connery and Ford. The comedy bits, like the loud library stamp or knowing how she was a Nazi, work pretty well. The fedora transition from 1912 to 1938. Love it. River Phoenix. Indy meeting Hitler. "We're pilgrims in an unholy land."
Cons - Coming on the heels of the fast paced batshit insanity of Temple of Doom, this film can feel tranquil by comparison. Why be punished for drinking from the wrong grail? When the Knight arrived to the temple centuries earlier, did he pack a bunch of extra grails for the day someone had to choose? Jones Sr. says the obtaining on the grail by the Nazis will have the armies of darkness march across the face of the earth. Does this contradict when the Knight later says the price of immortality is to not go beyond the seal? A perfect ending to the series spoiled 19 years later. Spielberg again working through his daddy issues.
|
|
|
|
Post by Spike Del Rey on May 22, 2018 19:20:08 GMT
I guess maybe to see if whoever showed up was worthy, or some such thing?
|
|
|
|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on May 22, 2018 19:31:14 GMT
Another negative: no Pat Roach fight.
What happened? You see him approaching the zeppelin--I assume they shot something and cut it out?
I didnt like the way the birds were used to stop the plane. That was an asshole move.
It's not Spielberg's daddy issues since the same theme shows up in Star Trek, Star Wars, and other series (even Terminator 2 had it).
It's a system-wide message--cannot have independent traditional pale male authority figures. Even IJ's father is suggested to be a bad husband responsible for his wife's death.
There were lots of movies about adventurers who were not bad husbands and fathers. It used to be that such things were completely irrelevant to the main plot of the story.
As for the "armies of darkness" line, either Jones Sr was exaggerating due to his anti--fascist bias, or maybe the idea was that just reaching the Grail would spark a lot more enthusiasm for Nazism?
I guess the idea is that if they found the Grail, then Christians all over the world would regard the Third Reich as being on God's side etc and it would encourage them to fight etc.
|
|
ravi02
Sophomore
@ravi02
Posts: 795
Likes: 418
 
|
Post by ravi02 on May 22, 2018 21:41:07 GMT
Cons -Spielberg again working through his daddy issues. But here it works greatly because of the great performances by Ford and Connery and their great chemistry. They put them through scenes of peril, emotional (the discussion in the zeppelin), humor (the escape from the castle) and serious matter (when Henry's been shot) that give the film an emotional heft the other sequels never match.
I also feel this is the funniest film Spielberg ever made. Sometimes when he attempts comedy it falls flat (see: 1941 and Hook), but here the humor works to great effect and fits with the action-adventure bits. The "No Ticket" bit or the transition to Marcus stumbling about in Cairo ("Can anyone speak English") still crack me up on countless viewings.
While Raiders is easily the flawless classic of the series, Last Crusade is my personal favorite due to how well it mixes action adventure, character-driven drama & humor and investigation sequences. It may have some similarities to Raiders, but it has enough of its own flavor to stand on its own two feet.
If I had to pick some "Cons", I'd have to say that Donovan isn't as colorful as Belloq or Mola Ram and some of the FX (like when Colonel Vogel falls to his death off the cliff) have aged, but when a film gets everything else from story, characters and emotion right, so what?
|
|
