Temple of Doom :: Harrison Ford :: The Last Crusade

Harrison Ford from Temple of Doom to Last Crusade gives me one last visit with Indiana Jones, because, no, I will never own "Crystal Skull."

Ahh, Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade.  I love this one.  I might even love it more than Raiders of the Lost Ark, although that's a really tough debate that I keep going back and forth on.

This one's got everything.  Horses, tanks, daddy issues (James Bond as Indy's Dad?  I love Sean Connery), origin story, knights, museums, a hot blonde, blimps, boats, motorcycles, evil Nazis (as if there's any other kind), plus the hilariously inept Marcus Brody. 

One of the things I love about Indiana Jones is that he has to rely as much upon his brain as he does on his fists, gun, or whip.  The entire climactic scenes in the cave when Indy must pass the trials and choose the correct Grail rely on his knowledge and reasoning skills.  And it's still riveting to watch, despite the complete lack of explosions and fighting.  Take a lesson Michael Bay.

It is interesting watching this film in the post-Dan Brown / Da Vinci Code era.  That book and a ton of A&E / TLC / History Channel shows have been pushing the idea of the "Holy Grail" as actually being a continuation of Jesus' bloodline.  So it kinda feels refreshing to go back to when the Grail was just a cup.  A magic cup, but still a cup.

Jaws :: Dir. Steven Spielberg :: Temple of Doom

More Spielberg. More Indy.  Some people love Temple of Doom.  It's their favorite of the Indiana Jones movies.

I am not one of those people.

Don't get me wrong, I like Temple of Doom.  I just don't like it nearly as much as Raiders or Last Crusade.

Re-watching Temple of Doom reminded me of many of the things that are wrong with "Crystal Skull,"  which I won't get into again here.  Instead, a bunch of other reasons Temple of Doom annoys me:

• Short Round.  I know, I know.  Lots of people love the little Asian kid who helps out Indy at every turn and says stuff like, "No time for love, Dr. Jones!"  I kind of like that stuff too, but also find it to be gimmicky comic relief.  I'm torn between enjoying the character and hating the whole, "let's add a kid in this one to appeal to families" thing.
• "Fortune and Glory."  Really?  Indy is pilfering huge diamonds and archeological artifacts for "fortune and glory?"  How selfish!  I much prefer the "This belongs in a museum!" Indiana Jones that we see in Raiders and Last Crusade.  Now, Temple of Doom is a prequel to the other Indiana Jones movies, so it's possible that sometime between when this movie takes place and when Indy is fighting Nazis for the Ark of the Covenant he completely changes his attitude about archaeology, but I still don't like the greedy Jones here.
• The mythology.  I just don't get it all.  Sure, there are magic stones and a creepy evil cult.  But why are the stones so important, what's the cult trying to do, and what does it have to do with being able to pull the still-beating heart out of someone's chest... and they're still conscious... and the heart bursts into flames when the person is dropped into a lava pit?  Huh?
• Kate Capshaw.  I hate her.  Just hate her.  Is this really how women should be portrayed?  Whining, bitchy, spoiled, fickle, weak, greedy, ignorant, and so wrapped up in herself that she's oblivious to most of what's going on in the movie.  This is like plucking a character from Sex and the City and dropping her into Predator.  Except she doesn't die.  And the screaming.  The constant shrill screaming.  I beg every time I re-watch this movie that somehow Indy will actually let the evil guy pull the still-beating heart from her chest if only to stop the screaming and whining.  I know that Spielberg married Capshaw, but based on this performance I can't for the life of me figure out why.

But somehow despite all these things I still find the movie entertaining.  And it always makes me hungry for chilled monkey brains..  Mmmmm... chilled monkey brains.

Return of the Jedi :: Harrison Ford :: Raiders of the Lost Ark

Remember when Harrison Ford was the coolest guy in the world? American Graffiti, Star Wars, Apocalypse Now, The Empire Strikes Back, Raiders of the Lost Ark, Blade Runner, Return of the Jedi, Temple of Doom, Witness, Frantic, Last Crusade, Presumed Innocent, Regarding Henry, Patriot Games, The Fugitive, and Clear and Present Danger. That's a hell of a resume from 1973-1994.

Harrison also gets me connected from Return of the Jedi to Raiders of the Lost Ark.

Damn, this is a great movie. Action, humor, romance, melting Nazis... what more could you want? Plus, it's at the height of careers for Ford, producer George Lucas, and director Steven Spielberg.

Re-watching this film is like going back to an old friend and a lesson in great movie making. A lesson that Ford, Lucas, and Spielberg should have gone back to learn before making their recent 4th entry in the Indiana Jones catalog, "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull."

First: the title. It's just "Raiders of the Lost Ark." No "Indiana Jones" in the title at all. Admittedly, Raiders wasn't planned to be a franchise, so there was no need for some name that would grant continuity through the series. But at the time, Lucas was also working through the Star Wars franchise - which, at least at the time, also didn't have "STAR WARS" and silly episode numbers in front if each title. All that came later, along with the ridiculously long Indy 4 title.

Second: the action. Raiders works so well because it's ultimately so believable. When Indy leaps over a pit using his whip, you feel the tension because it's reasonable to see that he would actually be in danger of falling... and also that he could actually make it across the pit with a little skill and luck. Indy can actually outrun the giant boulder. Indy can actually fight the giant bald Nazi guy. Indy is in danger from the actual snakes that surround him and act the way that snakes really act. Sure, we're suspending disbelief that Indy could really be that tough and survive that many incidents. But that's a fairly easy leap of faith to make when watching a movie.

In the Crystal Skull debacle the action just becomes ridiculous. Indy would not survive a nuclear blast - even inside a lead-lined refrigerator. Especially if that refrigerator got blasted across the desert with him in it (can you say Broken Spine?. The leaps and falls in the big warehouse chase scene are too big, too violent to walk away from (and look too computer-generated). And speaking of computer-generated, what the hell were those bugs? Giant fire ants? Do those even exist in real life? Even if they do exist, there's no way they would behave like that - devouring entire human beings in seconds. I definitely would have seen that shit on Discovery Channel by now if it could be true. And don't even get me started on the aliens.

Third: the mythology. Raiders (plus, Temple of Doom and Last Crusade) all rely on accepted mythology based on archaeological fact. The Ark of the Covenant actually existed and was the box that the ancient Jews used to carry around the broken pieces of the original Ten Commandments. Beyond that, the film uses the other myths that surround the Ark about its supernatural powers and use to make any army that carries it unstoppable. These are actual myths taken from real ancient texts.

The "real" Crystal Skulls? A hoax. Proven to be a hoax. Just some crap that guys claimed to have found in South America in the mid 1800s. They've been scientifically tested and proven to have been manufactured around the time they were "discovered." There is no record of ANY legend or mythology about Crystal Skulls in ANY Mesoamerican or other Native American culture. Period. So the movie is all based on hoaxes and sci-fi fanboy crap.

And Indy doesn't even try to quote ancient myths when he's getting the crew from place to place. At least in the original three movies, the screenplay gets through different tasks, challenges, and discoveries by being able to quote some (usually fictional) piece of folklore or highly researched legend. In Crystal Skull, he just makes shit up and it ends up being right. No legends. No myths. No research. Just crap.

OK, I'm spending too much time bitching about Crystal Skull. Just go watch Raiders. It's still awesome.

Star Wars :: Alec Guinness :: Bridge on the River Kwai

Sir Alec Guinness gets to be the connection here from Obi-Wan "Ben" Kenobi in Star Wars to Colonel Nicholson in The Bridge on the River Kwai. This might have creeped into my top ten all-time movies... keeps getting better every time I see it. Here are three reasons it's so damn good...
It's an epic that doesn't feel long.
Clocking in at 161 minutes, this isn't a short film by any means. But the film is really structured into three characters' stories, each compelling, that intertwine and come together explosively at the end of the film. The first is that of Alec Guinness as Colonel Nicholson and his refusal to break and allow Japanese Colonel Saito (Sessue Hayakawa) to force the captured British officers and sick or wounded soldiers to work on the Kwai Bridge in violation of the Geneva Convention.
The second story is the breaking of Colonel Saito. He is forced to acquiesce to Nicholson's stubbornness in order to complete construction on his bridge project and avoid his own disgrace and forced suicide. Of course this leads to a shift of power from Saito to Nicholson. Eventually Nicholson has his own officers and sick soldiers working on the bridge by his own orders. It is a victory of sorts for Saito, but an empty one in that he needed to rely on the British officer in order to succeed.
The third story is of US Navy Commander Shears (William Holden). His escape and rescue from the labor camp play out in the background of the first half of the film, but then his new mission to return to the jungle and destroy the bridge comes into play. We see in his story not only the opposing force of the construction vs. the destruction of the bridge, but also the opposing ideals of Shears (searching for pleasure and freedom in society) vs. Nicholson (adhering strictly to the rules of a civilized world).
It uses moral ambiguity and the shift of audience loyalty.
I love the moral questions in Kwai. Should Nicholson give in to Saito's demands if it means saving the lives of his soldiers? Is it nobler to attempt escape or follow the rules as prisoners? At what point does benefiting yourself cross the line into benefiting your enemies?
The film also shifts your loyalties throughout. Initially you despise Saito and want Nicholson to win their battle of wills. Later you fear how far over the line Nicholson will go for his ideals, and pity Saito in his shame. You want to see Nicholson complete the bridge. Then you desperately want Shears to destroy it. It's brilliant in getting the audience to root for both teams at various points throughout the game.
They actually built the bridge, and they actually blew it up.
No miniatures. No CGI. It's an actual bridge over an actual river with an actual train going across it as they actually blow the whole thing up and the bridge and train actually crash together into the actual river. It's not only an amazing feat that they pulled it off, but it's amazing because movie studios will never do that stuff anymore. Instead they build a couple of sets and use some green screens and fancy camera work to make it look "real." Instead it looks like CGI effects with no real tension or real danger involved. And unfortunately as a result, too many of today's film goers would watch an amazing sequence like the detonation of the Bridge on the River Kwai and simply assume that it was only a model.

That's it for now. Great movie - and if you can get the 2-DVD set, definitely check out the extra features and documentary on disc 2!

Blade Runner :: Harrison Ford :: Star Wars

From one sci-fi classic to another, by way of Harrison Ford. I go from watching Blade Runner to watching Star Wars.

That's STAR WARS. Not "Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope". Not the re-issue with Jabba the Hutt walking around and Greedo shooting first. It's Star Wars. Period. Fuck George Lucas, his crappy prequels, and his incessant need to "fix" things he did before.

Lucas created an amazing vision with Star Wars. People loved it. I loved it. I understand the desire to make the prequels. They weren't very good. I've mostly gotten over that.

But it's the re-issues I have the most problems with when it comes to the Star Wars franchise. It was (and still is) a beloved product. I never once heard a fan complain about the number of people, buildings, and creatures roaming around the Mos Eisley space port. But Lucas had always felt it should be busier, so he added more computer generated crap 20 years later.

I never heard anyone complain about the fact that Han Solo shot Greedo. Han was a scoundrel, a space pirate. The notion that he was a bad mofo, willing to shoot and even kill to get out of a tight situation is fine. In fact, it makes his eventual decision to join the Rebel Alliance and become a decent human being that much more significant. But no, Lucas felt that a "good guy" shouldn't fire without being fired upon, so he CGI'ed an extra laser blast.

I never heard anyone complain about Jabba the Hutt not being in the first movie. But of course Lucas had some cutting-room footage of a scene between Han Solo and a Jabba that he just had to use. So we suddenly get a Jabba that's too small, too agile, too computer-generated, and too pointless.

With the original releases, we didn't see Jabba until the third movie, by which point he's become this mythic, shadowy, gangster that we can only imagine... and when we finally do meet him, he's the complete embodiment of greed, sloth, lust, and gluttony. He doesn't move. He doesn't need to. He's like Paulie in Goodfellas: "Paulie may have moved slow, but it was only because Paulie didn't have to move for anybody."

But if you watch the re-issues, now you've already seen Jabba, and he suddenly looks, acts, and moves differently - because now he's a huge puppet instead of a bunch of pixels. And now I'm disappointed.

I'm wandering way too far into the Dork Forest. So I'll just leave with this... Watch the original 1977 version of Star Wars. It was the Citizen Kane of sci-fi for 20 years, and that's good enough for me.

Unless you want to add some CGI sleds to Orson Welles' classic.