TheRaider.net
 

Go Back   The Raven > The Films > Indiana Jones Trilogy
User Name
Password

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 02-07-2014, 09:56 AM   #1
Phlip
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: England
Posts: 62
Raiders the least humorous?

All the films after Raiders do have a noticeable amount of cartoony, campy humour, which I love. Is it just me whose noticed Raiders is the least funny? It has a couple of moments, but not in the same campy style.
Phlip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2014, 10:21 AM   #2
Goodeknight
IndyFan
 
Goodeknight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Chesapeake, VA
Posts: 1,007
I don't think anyone will disagree with you.

Raiders set the tone for adventure. As the first film, I think if it would have included even half of the humorous elements of either TOD or LC, then it would have seemed way too campy. Had to set the tone first and get to know the character as gritty and tough. Then lighten it up later in the series.
Goodeknight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2014, 12:37 PM   #3
Indy's brother
IndyFan
 
Indy's brother's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: In the Map Room playing with a laser pointer
Posts: 3,029
I agree with Goodeknight about nobody disagreeing with you. Which is to say i agree with you as well. Right. Moving on. I'm pretty confident in saying that the goofy comedy element was introduced in TOD to offset the much darker and violent material. Once that goofball style was released into the film franchise, then they were unable to stop themselves from going further down that road, even though it wasn't necessary to balance out the action. Not that it's inherently bad for a film like LC, it was done well enough, and worked with the language of the film. But, well, let's just say that not all three films past ROTLA had valid reasons for the more cornball slant on Indy's adventures.
Indy's brother is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2014, 01:21 PM   #4
Montana Smith
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 10,617
Raiders may just have had the some of best humour in the series...





Montana Smith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2014, 05:33 PM   #5
Stoo
IndyFan
 
Stoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Neuchâtel, Switzerland (Canadian from Montreal)
Posts: 7,942
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phlip
All the films after Raiders do have a noticeable amount of cartoony, campy humour, which I love. Is it just me whose noticed Raiders is the least funny? It has a couple of moments, but not in the same campy style.
That's why "Raiders" is the best of all 4. The movie doesn't have a hammer landing on a bad guy's head (in "Temple of Doom"/Warner Brothers cartoon fashion) but that's a good thing! I remember that you consider it to be slow and your least favourite Indy film but do you also think "Raiders" is inferior because it's not as funny as the others?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Indy's brother
I agree with Goodeknight about nobody disagreeing with you.
I don't disagree with this agreement.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodeknight
Then lighten it up later in the series.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Montana Smith
Raiders may just have had the some of best humour in the series...
Right, the SERIES (not that other word). Hats off.

"Raiders" has a modicum of funny moments and it's just enough. "Crusade" has too many, in my opinion. Its humour is well executed but the overall buffoonery is a vast difference from the original movie.

The TV show had humour, too, but always done subtly & tastefully. Apart from 2 outright comedic episodes, the laughs were sparse and at the right moments. Much more in line with the tone set in "Raiders". A couple of episodes had little or no comedy at all.

If it was up to Spielberg, "Raiders" probably would've had LOADS of jokes in it! Steven was the one who wanted Indy whipping a guy's belt and having his pants fall down, Sallah spilling soup on the soldiers, the monkey punching a cat, a wacky camel chase and other such silly shenanigans.

Perhaps people like Phlip might like the film more if it had a kooky scene with a bad guy's pants falling down?
Stoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2014, 06:50 PM   #6
kongisking
IndyFan
 
kongisking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Skull Island
Posts: 3,022
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoo

"Raiders" has a modicum of funny moments and it's just enough. "Crusade" has too many, in my opinion. Its humour is well executed but the overall buffoonery is a vast difference from the original movie.

There's a decent argument to be made that in some ways, Raiders feels like it belongs to a totally different universe than the sequels and prequel. The lack of overtly silly humor and increasingly-over-the-top plot points and action scenes, makes Raiders seem remarkably gritty in comparison. That's why when I finally saw Raiders for the first time as a kid, after having already seen TOD and LC, I was very underwhelmed by how, um, not-as-fun it was.

Quite ironic, as now I have a preference for more dark, gritty storytelling in my modern movies, but yeah...
kongisking is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2014, 11:49 PM   #7
Stoo
IndyFan
 
Stoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Neuchâtel, Switzerland (Canadian from Montreal)
Posts: 7,942
Quote:
Originally Posted by kongisking
There's a decent argument to be made that in some ways, Raiders feels like it belongs to a totally different universe than the sequels and prequel. The lack of overtly silly humor and increasingly-over-the-top plot points and action scenes, makes Raiders seem remarkably gritty in comparison. That's why when I finally saw Raiders for the first time as a kid, after having already seen TOD and LC, I was very underwhelmed by how, um, not-as-fun it was.
Dear me, that is such a backwards way of thinking.

As I've said many times before (even with Phlip), the preferences probably boil down to:

- what year you first saw the movies
- what age you were at the time
- MOST ESPECIALLY, what order you saw them in.

Newcomers in the 1990s (& beyond) who saw "Crusade" as their first film were introduced to Indiana Jones in entirely different way -- at his goofiest. Their introduction to the character was totally different from the audiences of 1981.
Stoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2014, 12:52 AM   #8
Montana Smith
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 10,617
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoo
"Raiders" has a modicum of funny moments and it's just enough. "Crusade" has too many, in my opinion. Its humour is well executed but the overall buffoonery is a vast difference from the original movie.

Raiders had a wry humour befitting the character as created at that time.

As you know, my first introduction to Indy was through the novelization. In those first few pages I thought of him in the same terms as The Man With No Name. In fact the writing was similar to Frank Chandler's A Fistful of Dollars, in the manner in which Indy overcomes Barranca with his almost superhuman speed and skill with the bullwhip.

He's immediately a dangerous character, not to be messed with lightly.

Therefore, when it comes to the film the wry humour becomes apparent. Thankfully he's not always superhuman. The look he gives after Marion surprises him with a punch on the jaw; the easy, matter of fact, and decidedly un-heroic manner he chooses to despatch the Cairo swordsman; outmatched by the German Mechanic he falls on his ass and resorts to biting the guy's arm. And of course, we see the other side of him in the classroom.

It's naturalistic humour, in-keeping with the character who, unlike Bond, doesn't always do everything to perfection.
Montana Smith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2014, 09:26 AM   #9
InVader
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 78
Subtle Humor

I think that Raider's humor was just a bit more subtle. Not paying attention and ya miss it. Still quite a bit of it in there though, like Indiana Jones passing right between the baddies exactly when they're discussing some small element eluding them, or the brief shish kabob scene with the stabbed swordsman and the apples in the market place.
InVader is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2014, 06:14 PM   #10
kongisking
IndyFan
 
kongisking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Skull Island
Posts: 3,022
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoo
Dear me, that is such a backwards way of thinking.

As I've said many times before (even with Phlip), the preferences probably boil down to:

- what year you first saw the movies
- what age you were at the time
- MOST ESPECIALLY, what order you saw them in.

Newcomers in the 1990s (& beyond) who saw "Crusade" as their first film were introduced to Indiana Jones in entirely different way -- at his goofiest. Their introduction to the character was totally different from the audiences of 1981.

That was what I meant. I unfortunately didn't get to see the films in the proper order, and so had an unrealistically campy idea of Indiana Jones before I finally got to Raiders. By saying Raiders felt like it belongs to a different, more serious and less jokey universe, I was relaying how from my perspective, it remains an oddly 'seperated' movie from the others in tone. And even if you did see them in proper order, you'd likely be off-put by how the sequels kept dipping into more and more cheese as they went.

Maybe that's why KOTCS doesn't bother me. I grew up with Indiana Jones being a more outrageous, over-the-top series in my mind, with Raiders seeming anomalous, and so when KOTCS came along, I just went along with the goofiness since I'd become accustomed to it in Indy.

If Raiders had been my introduction. I'd probably join Smiffy in calling it a degenerate piece of cartoony trash that disgraces its ancestors...
kongisking is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2014, 07:33 PM   #11
Stoo
IndyFan
 
Stoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Neuchâtel, Switzerland (Canadian from Montreal)
Posts: 7,942
Quote:
Originally Posted by Montana Smith
As you know, my first introduction to Indy was through the novelization. In those first few pages I thought of him in the same terms as The Man With No Name. In fact the writing was similar to Frank Chandler's A Fistful of Dollars, in the manner in which Indy overcomes Barranca with his almost superhuman speed and skill with the bullwhip.

He's immediately a dangerous character, not to be messed with lightly.
Right. During the brainstorming sessions for "Raiders", when Spielberg suggested that Indy should wrap the whip around a girl's waist to spin her back into his arms (& a guy's pants falling down), Lucas interjected by saying, "it's important that it be a dangerous weapon" and "any time it strikes it's a real threat". Not a device for tom-foolery like Spielberg envisioned.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodeknight
Had to set the tone first and get to know the character as gritty and tough. Then lighten it up later in the series.
As much as people like to malign Lucas, there's a lot to show that Spielberg is responsible for the series' eventual goofiness.
Quote:
Originally Posted by InVader
I think that Raider's humor was just a bit more subtle. Not paying attention and ya miss it. Still quite a bit of it in there though,
Hey, InVader. Good to see you again. Indeed, the humour in "Raiders" is much more subtle but also more clever. It'd been interesting to see a joke-per-minute graph of all 4 films and see how they compare.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kongisking
If Raiders had been my introduction. I'd probably join Smiffy in calling it a degenerate piece of cartoony trash that disgraces its ancestors...
No, it probably wouldn't have. Lots of people (including myself) saw "Raiders" first and don't think that the 4th movie "disgraced" the earlier ones.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kongisking
And even if you did see them in proper order, you'd likely be off-put by how the sequels kept dipping into more and more cheese as they went.

Maybe that's why KOTCS doesn't bother me.
Well, that's someone like me. However, in my opinion, "Skull" had less humour than "Crusade". Sure, there were some ridiculously silly moments but the overall, intended jokes were cut back. It wasn't an overt comedy like Indy 3 was!

---
Personal anecdote which puts a dent in my demographics theory about age/year/viewing order:
My brother is 2 years older and loves comedies. He saw all of the Indy movies in order but is not an Indy fan. His favourite is "Crusade". When asked why the favourite, his answer was:

"Because it's the funniest."
Stoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2015, 07:26 PM   #12
Duaner
IndyFan
 
Duaner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Somewhere Out There
Posts: 214
Raiders probably does have the least humor overall, but the scene where Marion whacks Indy in the chin with the mirror still makes me bust out laughing every time!
Duaner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2015, 07:12 AM   #13
AndyLGR
IndyFan
 
AndyLGR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 826
Raiders is all the better for not having the campy humour that in the main falls flat in the other 3 films. They pulled it off in Raiders and probably thought they now have to add more humour in the following movies. Look at the comedy moments in Raiders (off the top of my head and I've probably missed some).......

The I Love You eyes
The Cairo swordsman
The monkey heil Hitler
The coat hanger
The mirror
The uniform change in the dock

I don't think those scenes were too contrived or too forced or telegraphed to the viewer like they are in later films. Thats the reason why they fall flat for me in the other 3, the majority just aren't funny. But later (TLC and KOTCS in particular) its not just a slapstick scene, its slapstick dialogue thats added as well and it just doesn't come off.

Lucas even carried the poor humour and campness over to some of the prequel trilogy. Its like taking an early Connery movie and ramping up the humour with Moore.
AndyLGR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2015, 03:20 AM   #14
Mickiana
IndyFan
 
Mickiana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,184
Yes to AndyLGR.

Satipo: "If you insist, Señor."

Indy: "Neolithic..i.t.h.i.."

Jock deciding to finally throw the fishing line into the river and start the plane.

Jock: "Grow a little backbone will ya?!"

just to add a few more to the list.
Mickiana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2015, 05:28 AM   #15
indytim
IndyFan
 
indytim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: England (you can get all kinds of transport there ... boat, plane, anything)
Posts: 428
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phlip
All the films after Raiders do have a noticeable amount of cartoony, campy humour, which I love. Is it just me whose noticed Raiders is the least funny? It has a couple of moments, but not in the same campy style.

Which is why (in my humble opinion) Raiders is by far the best and only true Indy film. The following three movies gradually diluted the gritty, violent storytelling with ever-increasing 'family friendly' buffonery. Unfortunately, now the franchise is in the hands of Disney I doubt we'll ever see future films return to Indy's darker origins.

Last edited by indytim : 05-26-2015 at 05:41 AM.
indytim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2015, 10:32 PM   #16
Duaner
IndyFan
 
Duaner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Somewhere Out There
Posts: 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by indytim
Which is why (in my humble opinion) Raiders is by far the best and only true Indy film. The following three movies gradually diluted the gritty, violent storytelling with ever-increasing 'family friendly' buffonery. Unfortunately, now the franchise is in the hands of Disney I doubt we'll ever see future films return to Indy's darker origins.

I don't think anyone would really consider Temple of Doom to be "family friendly", but yes it does have more silly moments in it (the jungle scenes for example).
Duaner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2015, 05:44 AM   #17
indytim
IndyFan
 
indytim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: England (you can get all kinds of transport there ... boat, plane, anything)
Posts: 428
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duaner
I don't think anyone would really consider Temple of Doom to be "family friendly", but yes it does have more silly moments in it (the jungle scenes for example).

True. I find it strange how all the Indy films are now seen as 'family friendly' blockbusters considering the amount of violence and goriness they contain, particularly Raiders and Temple of Doom. When Raiders was first released in the UK it was given a certificate 15 meaning no-one under that age could see it even if accompanied by an adult.

As for Temple of Doom's silly moments, like the jungle scenes, I think that's purely down to Spielberg. He seems to like that goofy humour based on what I've read.
indytim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2015, 08:59 AM   #18
AndyLGR
IndyFan
 
AndyLGR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 826
Quote:
Originally Posted by indytim
Which is why (in my humble opinion) Raiders is by far the best and only true Indy film. The following three movies gradually diluted the gritty, violent storytelling with ever-increasing 'family friendly' buffonery. Unfortunately, now the franchise is in the hands of Disney I doubt we'll ever see future films return to Indy's darker origins.
When I first saw Raiders on video back in 84 I was only 10 and I thought Raiders was an adult film, with some subtle humour that hit the mark, so I agree that back that it is a more gritty, darker film.
AndyLGR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2015, 01:14 PM   #19
mrman7
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 32
I think it's funnier

"Trust me." *SLAP*

"Bad dates."

*Monkey Saluting Hitler*

"It's not the years, it's the mileage."

"He's got your looks." "Yeah and YOUR brains."

"Wait here." "If you insist Senor."

This movie is pretty darn funny. Does it have as many "jokes" as the others? No. Do they land better than those in the other films? Absolutely. So in that sense, it's FAR funnier. Remember, NUMBER of jokes a funny film does not make. It's if they are actually funny. Raiders has a more subdued adult sense of humor rather and I like it better.
mrman7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2015, 04:15 AM   #20
Mickiana
IndyFan
 
Mickiana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,184
Raiders the most appropriately humorous.
Mickiana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-24-2016, 05:42 AM   #21
Indy86
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 78
To me it's Temple of Doom. I think all movies has their humorous moments, but in Raiders and Temple it was a little more subtle and that's what I like about them. Indy doing a spelling check and stumbles over his words over the girls eyes in Raiders or hitting down the girl in the club in Temple. Subtle yet spontaneous. Crusade has more humor but it wasn't exaggerated as KOTCS. It was just perfect actually after Temple. I think it helped the movie while in KOTCS it seemed more forced and unnecessary. 'Hold the rope'?

Now I think I always saw Crusade first and several times before I was allowed to see Temple. Raiders just came some time later. So I saw them backwards. But it took a lot of time before fully understanding to meaning of the movies but I think that's what you get when starting at a young age. I don't think I would let my kids (if I ever have some) watch Temple before they're like 11-12 years old. While I was I think only 8 or 9.
Indy86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2017, 06:03 PM   #22
Kai Hagen
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 120
The humour in the first three movies (especially the first one) didn't interrupt the action scenes. It did in The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull and it really wasn't funny.
Kai Hagen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2017, 07:56 AM   #23
Goodsport
IndyFan
 
Goodsport's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: California
Posts: 645
Goodsport is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2017, 02:00 PM   #24
Glenville86
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Reston, VA
Posts: 200
I liked Raiders and Last Crusade. Less humor and better plot.

Temple of Doom seemed more of a movie directed towards younger kids. I did not like it very much. Kingdom had way too much computer generated stuff that was crappy. Concept was good but the script was horrible for me.
Glenville86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2017, 02:31 PM   #25
IndyBuff
IndyFan
 
IndyBuff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Missouri
Posts: 1,273
The humor in Raiders was a bit more subtle. I didn't mind the comedy in the later films but there were a few slapstick moments that didn't quite connect. Indy is best when the humor is more sarcastic and grounded.
IndyBuff is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:26 PM.