INDIANA JONES AND THE LAST CRUSADE
A film review by Mark R. Leeper
Copyright 1989 Mark R. Leeper
Capsule review: Forget that Indian thing. This is the
*real* RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK II. Slightly more realistic
than RAIDERS, a little more concentration on character, and
less on chases, this is a solid action adventure film putting
the series back on track. George Lucas needs a hit and for
the first time since RETURN OF THE JEDI he deserves one.
Rating: high +2.
It is no real secret. The Hollywood wonder-boy of twelve summers ago and much of the time since, George Lucas, is hurting for money. Things have not really panned out for him. HOWARD THE DUCK, which featured the greatest technological duck special effects the screen has ever seen, laid an egg. And it was NOT a golden egg. That was only one of several projects that have enhanced neither Lucas's fortune nor his reputation. Lucas needs a hit. That much seems to be fact. My opinion is that Lucas knows how to have a pit if all he wants is a hit rather than trying something new and original. He just makes another one of his series films. It takes too long to do a STAR WARS film, so he did another Indiana Jones film instead. The one drawback is INDIANA JONES AND THE TEMPLE OF DOOM was a disappointment and done much more in the Spielberg style than in the style Lucas put into RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK. Spielberg directs all the Indy films, of course, but I suspect some of the exaggerated cartoonish feel of the second film was Spielberg's. And many of the fans preferred the style of the first film. All Lucas really needed for a hit was to do again what he did with RAIDERS. And he did. The style of the first film is back. Welcome back.
INDIANA JONES AND THE LAST CRUSADE semi-fulfills Lucas's unrealistic promise that each episode would be a prequel to the one made before it. Harrison Ford is not getting younger. So of the three films, this takes place the latest, but there is an extended flashback in which we learn a lot of H=how Indiana Jones became Indiana Jones. The young Indy is played by River Phoenix, who almost resembles a young Harrison Ford, and in fact played Ford's son in MOSQUITO COAST. In Indy's early adventure we see where he got a lot of what he becomes and even what he wears. When he gets older we also get introduced to his father (voiced, and in later scenes played, by Sean Connery). Indy is once again after a Biblical treasure. Earlier it was the greatest prize of the Old Testament, the Ark of the Covenant. This time it is the greatest prize of the New testament, the Holy Grail.
Do you remember what you liked about the first film? If you said Karen Allen, you are out of luck. This time Indy's female sidekick is Elsa Schneider (played by Alison Doody), the most attractive of the traveling companions of the three films, but also the one with the least real personality. That means in this aspect, as in most aspects, this is better than the second Indy film but not up to the original. If you said you liked just about anything else about the original--the gritty chases, the fights, the baroque Nazi military equipment, the ancient sites that are gamuts of booby traps, the snakes, whatever--you are in luck. It is all back and more. You also get Indy's love/hate relationship with his father. You get to see more of Sallah and Marcus Brody (played by John Rhys-Davies and Denholm Elliot respectively). One disappointment is that they did a Nigel- Bruce on Denholm Elliot's character (i.e., they turned a perfectly serious and interesting character into a buffoon). But for almost any reason that you liked the first Indy film, you will also like the third. On the -4 to +4 scale, I give RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK a +3, INDIANA JONES AND THE TEMPLE OF DOOM a flat 0, and INDIANA JONES AND THE LAST CRUSADE a high +2, missing a +3 only for its lack of originality.
Mark R. Leeper
att!mtgzx!leeper
leeper@mtgzx.att.com
The review above was posted to the
rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup (de.rec.film.kritiken for German reviews).
The Internet Movie Database accepts no responsibility for the contents of the
review and has no editorial control. Unless stated otherwise, the copyright
belongs to the author.
Please direct comments/criticisms of the review to relevant newsgroups.
Broken URLs inthe reviews are the responsibility of the author.
The formatting of the review is likely to differ from the original due
to ASCII to HTML conversion.
Related links: index of all rec.arts.movies.reviews reviews