Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade: Unholy Edition
- Thread starter Sakis
- Start date
I'd only just heard of it upon seeing this thread.
http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/to...d-the-Last-Crusade-Unholy-Edition/topic/9628/
Here's a very thorough breakdown of everything that has been done to it. From what I can tell, they've taken most of the charm out of the film, but I guess that's the intent.
Oh, and here's the link to the Temple of Doom one.
http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/to...Temple-of-Doom-The-InfoDroid-Edit/topic/9418/
http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/to...d-the-Last-Crusade-Unholy-Edition/topic/9628/
Here's a very thorough breakdown of everything that has been done to it. From what I can tell, they've taken most of the charm out of the film, but I guess that's the intent.
Oh, and here's the link to the Temple of Doom one.
http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/to...Temple-of-Doom-The-InfoDroid-Edit/topic/9418/
Last edited:
ResidentAlien
Guest
Ugh-- revisionist fanboyism.
I don't think I'd be so opposed to the idea of re-edits were it not for the fact that they keep talking on those forums about how things need to match KOCKS more.
Sounds exactly like Lucas' revisionist mentality toward Star Wars. The new **** should fit with the old, not vice versa.
I'll pass.
I don't think I'd be so opposed to the idea of re-edits were it not for the fact that they keep talking on those forums about how things need to match KOCKS more.
Sounds exactly like Lucas' revisionist mentality toward Star Wars. The new **** should fit with the old, not vice versa.
I'll pass.
Forbidden Eye
Well-known member
ResidentAlien said:
You know you don't look at all smarter and more creative when you do that right?
And did you even read the site? It doesn't even mention KOTCS(the correct lettering). He simply states he reediting because he noticed the film had problems he wanted to fix it(didn't you agree with those problems in the past?).
While the idea of seeing a River Phoenix-less Last Crusade intrigues me, frankly my opinion is the same as an Indy 4 edit, it's not worth going through all the trouble, especially when it isn't my film to begin with.
ResidentAlien
Guest
Forbidden Eye said:
And did you read the site? Hmm?
It repeatedly mentions he fixed the titles to match KOCKS.
WillKill4Food
New member
If you read, he moved the Club Obi Wan scene to be a flashback.James said:
Personally, I agreed with some of the criticism of the superfluous schtick in the Last Crusade, but, as Attila noted, such extensive editing did seem to remove much of the film's charm, and if similar editing were applied to KotCS, only about half of the film would survive, if that much.
WillKill4Food said:
Oh, I had just glanced at his opening shots for TOD.
It's interesting that he chose to open with Pankot solely because of the tone it evoked. After all, the entire point of the dance number is to set the tone for the upcoming adventure: "Anything Goes".
In addition to removing much of the charm, these edits essentially gut the entire spirit.
ResidentAlien
Guest
Gear said:
ZOMG!! How can I be so stupid! I neeeeever realized that KOCKS is not the acronym!
Pretty dense, guys. Nothing to do with smarts-- everything to do with disdain and apathy.
KOCKS.
Jonesy9906753
Well-known member
ResidentAlien said:
give the sheep hell Resident
Forbidden Eye
Well-known member
ResidentAlien said:
All I see is that he added a Lucasfilm logo and he said he changed the credits(I don't even see mentioning Kingdom on there).
The credits on Kingdom are actually closer to Raiders than any of the sequels. So in a way, he was actually trying to resemble Raiders.
As far as the Lucasfilm logo, yeah, he probably is, but when growing up, I always have wondered why none of the original three Indys had the Lucasfilm logo on it, as all the Star Wars films and American Graffiti had it. Obviously because its a tradition in the Indiana Jones movies for the Paramount logo to blend into a mountain. Still, I liked seeing the Lucasfilm logo on the fourth installment, as it made the Indiana Jones films feel more like Lucas films(which they are much more of than Spielberg films as I see it). So it was a nice touch.
I notice Raiders doesn't have a fan-edit. I think as everyone knows though, Raiders is the only Indiana Jones movie that is considered perfect, or at least extremely close to, whereas the others aren't.
Last edited:
Forbidden Eye
Well-known member
ResidentAlien said:ZOMG!! How can I be so stupid! I neeeeever realized that KOCKS is not the acronym!
Pretty dense, guys. Nothing to do with smarts-- everything to do with disdain and apathy.
KOCKS.
I'll admit, it was kinda funny when you first used it. Now, we get it, you hate Indy 4. What are you trying to prove?
Last edited:
ResidentAlien
Guest
Forbidden Eye said:
Nothing. Nothing at all.
Violet
Moderator Emeritus
I can understand a fan edit of KOTCS but a fan edit(s) of LC and ToD. Burn him at the stake!! *Picks up pitchfork and a torch*
Alright... seriously. I love those films the way they are. I think they're great as is. It's KOTCS that I have a problem with.
And I agree with Resident Alien, the new should be made to match with the old, not vice versa (I hate revisionist attitudes towards films, it's fine to restore but anything else just ain't right).
Alright... seriously. I love those films the way they are. I think they're great as is. It's KOTCS that I have a problem with.
And I agree with Resident Alien, the new should be made to match with the old, not vice versa (I hate revisionist attitudes towards films, it's fine to restore but anything else just ain't right).
Darth Vile
New member
Violet Indy said:
The only revisionism I see around here is from those who state that there was a general consensus, when TOD and TLC were first released, that they were considered great movies (which they were not). They then use this revisionist view as a stick to beat KOTCS with i.e. "it's not like the original three".
I'm not a fan of "fan edits"... it's a little like giving a chimpanzee a paint brush... but the truth is, if you think it's fine for KOTCS to get a fan edit, then there is certainly some mileage in doing the same for TOD and TLC.
IAdventurer01
Well-known member
As mentioned before, I'm not sure if this can even be considered a "fan" edit. I mean, I'm a fan, and he cut out some of the best parts from these movies, in particular Last Crusade which has always been my favorite. The cuts are so extensive, I really do wonder why this fellow liked them in the first place.
Note: If the changes had been less bold, I would give more credit. A tweak here or there is a lot different that the hacksaw approach detailed in the change log.
Note: If the changes had been less bold, I would give more credit. A tweak here or there is a lot different that the hacksaw approach detailed in the change log.
kongisking
Active member
Violet Indy said:
If you use that logic then, they never should have bothered to make the Blade Runner Director's Cut, the Superman 2 Director's Cut, the Alien 3 Director's Cut, the Lord of the Rings and King Kong Extended Editions, etc.
Wanna rethink that statement?
Forbidden Eye said:
Which is infuriatingly, heartbreakingly, and monumentally unfair. Sure, let's all heap love on Raiders while we dump on the sequels until they drown in our hate-filled crap! Ugh!!!!!
Last edited by a moderator:
Violet
Moderator Emeritus
kongisking said:If you use that logic then, they never should have bothered to make the Blade Runner Director's Cut, the Superman 2 Director's Cut, the Alien 3 Director's Cut, the Lord of the Rings and King Kong Extended Editions, etc.
Wanna rethink that statement?
Nope!
I don't like any of those films even originally or revisionist wise and even looking at them as a filmmaker, I still feel LOTR and King Kong are way too long. To me, if the original is a turkey, then it's always going to gooble like one. Had an experience with a short film like that. No matter how many times we tried fixing it with a revisionist approach, it still was crap and sometimes you've just got to step away and move on and just learn your lesson and try not to let it happen the same way again.
If a filmmaker wants to bother to go the revisionist route, fine, that's their personal decision as an artist. I just think it makes too much of a mess of things.
I will however withdraw my statement about KOTCS needing a different edit. It really wouldn't change what it really is deep down anyway. I am dissatisfied with KOTCS but I fear a revisionist solution could in fact, make it worse. We can't like everything that's thrown at us with a particular brand name, it's called having taste.
Remakes are fine so long as there's some kind of artistic difference.