weird thread...

minority opinion but...
i just got thru watching TLC the other day, and i'm really starting to become sick of Spielberg (i've been sick of Lucas since ROTJ).
the film, apart from the grail-ending which was ok, was pretty bad- full of forced & cutesy humour, shameless (and un-earned!) schmaltz, and plain stupidity.
TOD is atrocious on almost every level.
by 1984 Ford had become little more than a stock collection of facial muggings and the lines he spouts here are so damned annoying in their desperation to project a Bogey-like sense of cool (We're not going to Delhi , doll...we're going to Pankot Palace!").
but everything is undercut by the most obnoxious and annoying female lead that ever hit the screen ( yes, even shriller than Ethel Mermen in "Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World" , if you can believe that!) and, in another effort to pander to little tykes, a kid side-kick.

and of course, even the filmmakers have no real conception of the character beyond his costume, which is why in the TOD his driving force is the , near ruthless pursuit of "Fortune and Glory"
and in the back-story of TLC he is now shown as a teen-ager with a stick up his a$$ "it belongs in a museum!"
the character changes to fit the dictates of the material.


two sour after-taste follow-ups to a damn near perfect film.
add to that a bonus disc that is just no big deal,
menus that are really low class cheesy,
and transfers that are NOT exceptional and in no way justified taking so many years for these films to see a release (the least impressive , of course, is the only film worth owning), and you have three primarlily useless amrays hogging shelf space.

Temple of Doom is a very troubled film. Short Round is obnoxious, the film's tone is too dark and doesn't fit with the other two, and Kate Capshaw is BEYOND AWFUL. But upon seeing the stunning DVD I do have to give credit where credit is due to TOD having beautiful photography and a truely stunning look. The story is great, but it's told using some of the most annoying characters ever.

By the way ckolchak, there is absolutely nothing wrong with any of the transfers, they look fantastic.

rushmore223...kidding about what?

I was debating whether to get it as well after all the times i watched them on tv. But you know what... they're all good enough to buy, especially since they work out to be under 15 bucks a movie depending on where you get the set.

Oh, and the box feels cool.

I think Temple is probably my favorite...one reason is because it is darker and more serious in tone and such...and its just such a hardass flick...I love it!

Thought asking if indiana Jones Trilogy is worth buying must be a joke... to me like asking if the Original Star Wars trilogy were worth buying.

Pants,
the transfers for all three films are good (the last one looks best), but ultimately nothing special.
my definition of special would be the new copy of Alien.
i would say Raiders looks as good as the original legacy copy of Alien, maybe a hair or two better, which in itself was a fine disc (for 1999), but the new one is state of the art.
i look at Raiders and i see nothing in the PQ or SQ that couldn't have been achieved 3 or 4 yrs ago-especially since the discs are basically bare bones anyways.
with all the technology at Lucasfilms disposal, and the fact that they were making a big deal about the restorative efforts the films (at least Raiders) were undergoing, i expected something a little more impressive.
what we get is fine, but unspectacular.
i just watched Harryhausens Jason and The Argonauts last night.
this is a film from the late 50's and , excepting the optical shots, the film looks like it was made yesterday. the colors pop off the screen, and the print is exceptionally crisp and clean.
compared to the new Alien and JATA, Raiders just isn't anything special.

i still love the first film, but i have to call it like i see it.


the problm with TOD lies mostly with Spielberg (as they admit in the doc, in a roundabout way). Bloody, ancient cults were a pulp magazine staple and having a more vicious, colorful adversary for the sequel was an interesting, valid decision, in and of itself.
the problem was that Spielberg had issues with the darker tone, second guessed it, and ultimately tried to undermine it at every possible opportunity, which means we are left with a primarily ugly, mean-spirited film, with juvenile gross-out scenes, a pandering to youngsters in the audience vis a vis the Short Round character (not to mention the shameless 'children in bondage' that Indy must rescue *gag*) and an obnoxiously cartoonish female lead that is only amusing if you aren't into double digits yet.
the inconsistencies of tone throughout the film are a sign of weak direction.
i like the cliff hanger ending, but the film is excrutiating for me to sit thru due to Willie Scott, Short Round, Fords mugging, and the desperate attempt to always seem more sensational than Raiders.

if you like TOD, good for you.
i'm just laying my opinion which is worth what you paid for it.


three films witht the same director and character, does not a cohesive trilogy make.

two great films and a third one that desperately works to undermine two very significant plot points established in the previous (superior) films
- there really is no romantic conflict after all!
- And The Big Villian isn't such a bad guy either!

Good God i hope to never see another trilogy that shamelessly $hits upon itself like SW did.
i'll buy the first two if released seperately, if not i'll have to think long and hard about spending money on one that ihave to work so hard to forget ever existed.

I definitely thought it was. Indiana Jones was one of the great trilogies and should be in any collection. If you really liked these movies, go for it and buy it.

I bought the boxset, but to be honest with you, I have no desire to watch them again..at least not anytime soon. I really enjoyed them back in the day, but time has changed my thoughts on the films....the funny thing is, Crusade is my favorite now, which was my least favorite in the past.

I hear people say this a lot, so I've been dieing to ask: How can you call it "dark" when so many of the characters are so clownish and over the top? How can you call it "serious in tone" when Willie runs around like a psycho, screaming at everything?

Well..its official..I GOT IT!! Just picked it up at Circuit City for free with the gift card and thanks to all your comments and strong opinions I am actually really looking forward to seeing the whole thing..it looks real nice next to my Alien Quad set...I may even watch ROTLA for the 101x tonight..after the Sugar Bowl that is.
But seriously, thanks to all for the posts..I appreciate them all!

I think that heart pulling out of the chest thing might have something to do with it. Evil god, evil cult, etc.

Generally credited (along with Gremlins (1984)) with the introduction of the PG-13 rating, as many felt the scenes of violence in both movies were too much for a PG rating, but not enough for an R rating. It is also widely believed that had Steven Spielberg's name not been on both movies, they may have received an R rating. - www.imdb.com

Yes, it is worth it.

If you like the movies and wanna watch them again, BUY!

Yeah, it's awful when the Nazis are made out to be bad guys.

Is it worth it to breathe? Is it worth it to buy the IJ trilogy on DVD?

the answer to both is a resounding YES!

I'm waivering and leaning toward NOT buying the trilogy. I loved Raiders, couldn't stand ToD, and thought that TLC was pretty good.

What I'll probably end up doing what I did for Back to the Future....waiting for them to appear on the used rack or in pawn shops, and then buy #1 (and maybe #3).

I thought Temple of Doom was PG-13 as well because of the heart and such..why on the disc is it rated PG..what makes this PG and Last Crusade PG-13..please tell me??

If you love the movies, buy it.

If you do not love the movies, do not buy it.

Do you really need a bunch of DVD junkies telling what to do with your money?

1. You already know they have great video transfers
2. You already know the story/plot/history of the movies
3. You know what kind of extras come with the set
4. You know how much it costs
5. You have read many review on the internet/forums

What else do you really need to know?

If you enjoy Raiders, there is a good chance you will like the other two. They are both similar in the adventure/action way that Raiders is. If the set is $45, then it makes each movie $15 and you get a bonus disk of material. $15 is a good price for a movie. If you don't like the other two, sell them on eBay.

Should I get dressed today?

Dude. You did the right thing. It was only the most anticipated release besides SW and Godfather. It's a no brainer.

i'm glad someone reads the complete thread..

The PG-13 rating didn't exist when ToD was released.

As mentioned, this film (along with Gremlins, around the same time) resulted in the MPAA creating the PG-13 rating for films that were more intense than standard PG fare, but not up to the level of an R.

Congrats on the purchase. You won't regret it.

How long have we waited for this set?? Since 1997? Too freikin long. This set was worth every penny.

doc

Looks like the decision's been made. Closing thread. - Static