Sorry for the infrequent updates around here lately. I haven’t really got a good excuse for it, other than the usual “life (or perhaps, the lack of it) got in the way”. Things should normalize soon enough, though. They can’t take all my free time away from me forever! But until that time arrives, I’m going to write up some reviews of the three first Indiana Jones movies. The plan is to post them all before the world première on Thursday (at least that’s when it premières where I live), starting with this one right here, You’ve all watched it, you all love it it to some degree or form.
I’m here to remind you why that is.

Let me refresh your memories in the unlikely case that you’ve forgotten the story behind this classic cinematic character: Indiana Jones (Harrison Ford) is an archaeologist, but not of the boring, toothbrush-combing variety. No sirree, this guy is all about the adventure and the quest for discovering forgotten relics and artefacts, and he’s no stranger to risking his life to get his hands on them. In “Raiders of the Lost Ark”, Indiana Jones is contacted by the US government to help them figure out some vital information about - yes, you guessed it - the lost Ark of Covenants. You know, the one that they used to throw all the broken rubble of the original ten commandments into. Remember now? Good, because this particular holy relic vanished some 3000 years ago, and it isn’t until now, the year 1936, that someone’s pieced together the clues to its current whereabouts. Who might that be, you ask, lips all a-trembling. Well, his friends called him Adolf, but we all refer lovingly to him as der Fürher.
There are some big spoilers in this review, so if you haven’t watched this movie yet (the shame, the SHAME!), and plan to do so, then I recommend you just check out the last paragraph and leave it with that.
Re-watching “Indiana Jones” is highly enjoyable, even though it’s been nearly thirty years since “Raiders” was first released. I’ve splurged out for new set of DVD’s, and I’ve got to say that I don’t think these movies have lost a single hair of charm (much unlike Harrison Ford, whose gotten considerably more granddaddy-y since his heydays). The action is still just as thrilling and it’s so tight that there nearly isn’t a single dull moment during this hundred and ten minutes long ride. One of the most important reasons it hasn’t lost its appeal is the fact that nearly all the sets and stunts are actually real, which is something of a rarity these days. There are only two sequences that features some kind of CGI, and those are thankfully not too bad (in a kind of, “Aww, look at the crappy ’scary ghosts’ - aren’t they adorable?”, way).
Harrison Ford as Indiana Jones gives me goosebumps every time I see him, simply because of the sheer legend that follows him. As a role and character, it isn’t the greatest in terms of depth and all that jazz, but who the fuck gives a damn about those things when you’re watching an “Indiana Jones” flick? This movie delivers everything it promises with its opening chapter; witty banter, exciting adventure, bitter rivalry and tons and tons of action. Complaining about “lack of depth or character development” in this film is comparable to noising outrage at the lack of atheistic arguments in the Bible. It simply has no home there.
Now, this isn’t to say that this film is flawless or should that it should be regarded as such because it does what’s it’s supposed to do. Far from it, my friends - I can certainly find things to complain about. The first and foremost thing would obviously have to be the ending, which is not so much “deus ex machina” as it’s “deus ex box”. Some of the events are quite ludicrous, too. Like the scene where Indy hi-jacks a truck filled with Germans, and they decide to climb around the outside of the truck instead of shooting him through the flimsy wall…
If I you try to interpret some kind of deeper meaning in this rather shallow action flick, then you end up wading through pro-Americanisms so thick that you’ll have to take a second glance around yourself just to check that you haven’t landed in the deep-frier at McDonalds. Thank you George Lucas - we got the message, all right? You don’t have to (BIG SPOILER COMING UP) make it as if God ACTUALLY loves America more than the French and the Germans. I’m also still every bit as disappointed that Indy’s love interest, who starts up as a strong and independent character, has to play the damsel in the distress no less than three times during the movie.
That’s about all then nits and tidbits I’ll pick from this film, ’cause I actually can’t bring myself to be very critical of it. It’s just too much fun - and it’s meant like that, too - to bother with minor problems in an otherwise classic movie that will be essential for any movie lover for as long as I live.
8.0 /10
Expect the next review tomorrow evening…

Posts
“Again we see that there is nothing you can possess that I cannot take away.”
I’d give it a strong 8,5, I think. Belloq makes this movie for me, and it’s additionally got Sallah, and he’s always fun. I don’t really agree on your God hates French and Germans-thing - they make it look like He hates Nazis and their accomplices, which is hardly the same as loving Americans. (And Jones is half-British, too, you know…)
My main issue with it is just the lack of treasure-hunt involved - the actual “find the hidden treasure”-bit is rather quickly over and done with, which is odd considering that’s probably the bit that the movie-franchise is most well-known for. The main focus is the obstacles in the way of getting their hands on the Ark, not on finding it. (Oddly enough almost the opposite of the “Holy Grail”-movie where the hunt for the treasure is well done, but the actual traps in its way are mostly pretty unimpressive…)
I’m looking very much forward to seeing what you think of the other two. In my opinion, Temple of Doom is far inferior to the other two, while Holy Grail and The Lost Ark are rather close in most ways. I find Grail to be some notches better on most accounts, with the one exception of Belloq - I really miss that guy. The main reason I’ve never gotten around to watch through the Young Indiana Jones-chronicles is because I read that they never got to the point where he’d meet Belloq before the series got cancelled. Sigh.
18. May 2008 @ 13:37 ( Permalink )
Oh, and not to forget, this movie has what’s probably the best movie-main-theme ever.
18. May 2008 @ 13:38 ( Permalink )
It all seemed a bit random to me. Why did “closing your eyes” help any when the wrath of God was unleashed upon them? Indiana was just as much responsible for taking it away from where God intended it to be. Besides, the movie was riddled with these little nudges about America. Indy himself being the prototype who does all the hard work and fights on the right side of things, whereas the French lie and cheat and germans are just plain bad.
Sallah was a mixed bag for me. Sure, he was funny and well played, but I kept re-imagining him as Gimli whenever I saw him. That, of course, added to the hilarity, but not in the way it was supposed to, methinks. Not that it’s any fault of the film itself… Belloq and that little black-caped nazi guy are thoroughly enjoyable throughout the entire movie, though. That has to be mentioned.
Da-dada-daaaaa, da-daa-daaa, da-dada-dAAAA, da-dadaa-da-dA
18. May 2008 @ 13:50 ( Permalink )
I guess you’re not supposed to behold God (or his acting power, i.e. the Holy Spirit, i.e. part of the trinity, i.e. God) directly? I don’t recall where, but the idea that you need to avert your eyes or die at the sight of God immesurable glory seems familiar to me, I think that it’s mentioned in the Old Testament somewhere.
God “intended” it to be? It was stolen from the Jews by a Pharaoh (historical fact, actually - the Egyptian invasion, that is, not that he stole the Ark), and that’s only God’s will if you go the deterministic route, in which case everything is God’s will and he wouldn’t be annoyed at the Nazis for stealing it in turn. He was just disinclined to them using it as a weapon (as he was with the Pharaoh, which is probably why they hid it and didn’t conquer the world with, something the Nazis should have thought through).
Right, I get that the Americans, the French and the Germans are stereotyped in that regard, I just didn’t agree that the scene where God gets involved has any bearing on if the message is there one way or the other.
I’ve never had any issues with feeling he was Gimli, nor with feeling Gimli was Sallah (which, let’s face it, would’ve been the natural way for the association to go)
18. May 2008 @ 13:57 ( Permalink )
I do sometimes have issues with feeling Treebeard sounds too much like Gimli, though, but that’s neither here nor there. (Though I must admit, only on later rewatches, never did when I saw them in theatres)
18. May 2008 @ 13:59 ( Permalink )
Seems a bit lame if you ask me. The picture in Indy’s book at the beginning shows the Ark being used as a weapon. If “averting your eyes” rendered its “invincible powers” useless, then I’ll lay down five of your preferred currency right here and now and say that that’s the kind of memo they’d figure out fast. Would’ve made for some fun battle scenes, though
You’re misremembering the movie here, Loki. The Egyptians didn’t hide the Ark - it was buried by “a year-long sandstorm” that kept the city of Tanis from being found until just before the film took place. Aside from that though, I’ll concede that you’re probably right about the why of God’s actions. If he didn’t have any problems with the Ark when it was used correctly in Jerusalem.
18. May 2008 @ 14:11 ( Permalink )
“then I’ll lay down five of your preferred currency right here and now ”
Cattle, if you please, like in ancient times.
And you’re misinterpreting me. I am NOT saying that averting your eyes makes you immune to whatever the Ark does. I’m just saying that LOOKING at the Ark DOING its thing, whatever it is, will kill you, as that is witnessing God at work, which no mortal can survive. The Ark will kill those that God deems worthy of death, but those that watches Him kill will perish for having witnessed the Allmighty directly. See? I’m not saying this is what’s intended to be going on in the movie, but this is how it very intuitively makes immediate sense to me, and how I’ve always interpreted it. Without consciously giving it thought until I put it down in this comment.
Ah, right, hiddend in a year-long-sandstorm. Sounds like the work of God to me. And in that case, very pro-American indeed. The Jews were fit to have it, the Egyptians and the Nazis were not, but lo and behold, the US government is to be trusted with it….
18. May 2008 @ 14:21 ( Permalink )
RotLA is probably my favorite adventure movie. “Snakes… Why’d it have to be snakes?” That scene gave me nightmares for months when I was little.
Loki:
“I guess you’re not supposed to behold God (or his acting power, i.e. the Holy Spirit, i.e. part of the trinity, i.e. God) directly? I don’t recall where, but the idea that you need to avert your eyes or die at the sight of God immesurable glory seems familiar to me, I think that it’s mentioned in the Old Testament somewhere.”
I think this was an allusion to the razing of Sodom and Gamora. When Lot’s family is leaving, but his wife looks back and sees the work of god (or angels, I’m not sure it’s been a long time since I read any of the bible, being atheist now), and then she is turned into a pillar of salt. The rest of the family is just as close to god’s work being done, but they did not look back at it.
18. May 2008 @ 14:43 ( Permalink )
Right, that’s probably the one, I knew I had it from somewhere. Thanks!
18. May 2008 @ 16:03 ( Permalink )
@Loki: Yeah, that makes sense. Sorry for being so slow (with a lot of things. Gonna write that review now…)
Nice to see you around, RedEyedGhost. I didn’t know you read my blog
21. May 2008 @ 06:11 ( Permalink )
Yeah, I’m even one of your RSS subscribers. You do good work here - even if I think you’re a little harsh on some of your ratings
I enjoy your movie/tv reviews as well… too many of the blogs I follow just review books.
Keep up the good work!
21. May 2008 @ 18:38 ( Permalink )
Oh, I will. Hopefully
Things will probably become even better in the future though, when I actually have time to do some real reviews.
22. May 2008 @ 01:10 ( Permalink )