Udvarnoky said:
It's not the very existence of Harold Oxley that irritates me, but the fact that he was a fellow student of Abner Ravenwood who had enough of a sense of responsibility with regard to Marion that he would happen to be Mutt's foster father while also being the world's pre-eminent crystal skull expert. Oh and just for an added eyeroll they make it so that Mutt knows his mom's name as "Mary" rather than "Marion," all to protect a forthcoming surprise that the movie's poster and opening credits give away. It's just lazy and too many contrivances stacked atop each other for me, especially since it didn't add up to much.
I agree that Last Crusade is guilty of a similar antic when it suddenly drops Indy's dad into the saga and consequently turns Brody into comic relief. I
I've got my own issues with Last Crusade, but I think the difference comes down to the fact that it's just a more focused movie. The dynamic between Indy and his dad works so well that you overlook whatever ropey maneuvers were required to get them to share the screen.
In contrast, there's zero pathos between Indy and the various sidekicks - all of them figures from his past - he's assigned in Crystal Skull, and so the retconning doesn't feel nearly as justified despite being even more aggressively employed. Crystal Skull just doesn't have that emotional center Last Crusade does. Temple of Doom didn't either, but then that movie was all muscle and momentum in a way I don't think even Crystal Skull's fans would say is true of that movie.
The thing with that for me is, you argue there's no pathos between Indy and his various sidekicks. I would tend to agree, yes. But really you have that same problem with Last Crusade. Sallah and Marcus have their characters almost totally rewritten, and like in KOTCS, they're just stuck in the film. I tend to grade Last Crusade equally. For myself, the only times Last Crusade shines are when Sean Connery is on screen or during the River Phoenix segment. There's a very "by the numbers" feel to Last Crusade; I wrote as far back as 2007 how the action scenes felt very lazy in Last Crusade, and the scenes which proceed Connery's appearance drag and lack the taut feel of the first two films. And unlike in KOTCS, Harrison doesn't pull the weaker moments of Last Crusade together. Go back and rewatch Last Crusade; Harrison, to me, feels a lot different than he did n Raiders and Temple. He doesn't seem as into the part as he was in the first two. And honestly, that stupid necktie makes every error of KOTCS bearable.
The novelty of seeing Indiana Jones' father and and the novelty his dad being Sean Connery (which, let's be honest, is a giant gimmicky thing), for me, is equal to the novelty of seeing Indiana Jones as an older man, in a different decade, with aliens. I've never found the Holy Grail all of that interesting as a "MacGuffin" - I find the Skull/Alien mythology a lot more interesting and realistic as a threat.
Every issue that was found in KOTCS, can, in my opinion be found in Last Crusade. Both films try to hit all the beats of Raiders of the Lost Ark, and each with declining returns. Both of the films, for the sake of comedy, to an extent rewrite Indy's friends; both see Indy really completing someone else's quest - In Raiders, Indy is acting as a government agent; In TOD, he willingly goes to Pankot, motived by fortune and glory, whereas Last Crusade and KOTCS are rescue missions Indy would rather not be on ("You've got the wrong Jones, Mr. Donovan - why don't you try my father?"), as such, he's a more passive figure in both. Last Crusade, overall, has even less of a sense of dread or a threat than Kingdom. At least in Kingdom, the power of the skulls is (in theory) a threat to mankind - Spalko's intended use of them is powerful. The Holy Grail isn't going to change the outcome of World War II. While the Holy Grail is more powerful as a symbolic treasure, that's not what Indiana Jones films were originally about. It was about Indy saving the world in pulpy adventures. Both expand while also deflating the size of Indy's universe. Both have stupid gag moments which are thrown on for yucks (Mutt's hits to the crotch vs. the idiot pilot who doesn't realize he's on fire in Last Crusade). Both film feature Indy in a more well-behaved fashion than he'd usually be due to the circumstance: In Last Crusade, he can't go all out because he's restrained by his father's presence; In KOTCS, he doesn't want to look like a total grave robber in front of this kid (his reputation, being, as it is, in the basement at the moment).
Last Crusade in a sense rebooted the character of Indiana Jones. The dark, edgy, mysterious, devil-may-care guy who took an almost sociopathic glee in disposing the bad guys was gone as soon as Indy uttered "it belongs in a museum!". No longer was Indy this n'er-do-well who worked for gangsters; No, now he was a holy warrior with God on his side, a neo-Knight, who if we're to believe Last Crusade's implications was chosen by God the same way the Knight in the Temple was; He's a guy who is always on the right side, and who'll stop the bad guys from taking over the world not because he's being paid or because they're in his way, but because it's the right thing to do. With Last Crusade and beyond, Indy is now a superhero. A borderline Boy Scout. Indiana Jones including and post Last Crusade is a different character from the mysterious and dangerous guy of the first two films, who exists in a smaller and much more comedic universe.
KOTCS and Last Crusade are cinematic siblings who share a lot more "DNA" if you will than Last Crusade shares with the two original films. If you want to watch Indiana Jones be a mercenary, kick ass and take names, watch Raiders or Temple. If you want to see good guy Indy have every mystery revealed, and be cowed down by his father, or his son, go watch Last Crusade or KOTCS. The pulpy anti-hero that Lucas, Spielberg and Kasdan dreamed up in 1978 died in May 1989. The guy who replaced him wearing a hat and fedora in two movies afterward is just as enjoyable, but nowhere near as interesting.