So, which of the original Indiana Jones Trilogy do you like best?

[Danger Mouse]

Not including the new movie, cause I haven't seen it yet. Anyway, they all have their relative merits.
I think that overall, the best one is Raiders of the Lost Ark.
What do you think?

[Chovexani]

1. Last Crusade, no contest.

Ford and Connery had amazing chemistry. Made the whole damn movie.

[Danger Mouse]

3. I agree that it's incredible...but something about Raiders...

it just slightly out-cools Last Crusade.
Granted, it's like the choice between rocket ship dino jet plane and rocket ship dino jet plane with ninja dragon.

[Chovexani]

5. Raiders is a classic.

I still haven't seen the new one. I'm terrified I will hate it.

[Danger Mouse]

6. I'm sure it's at least as good as Temple of Doom...and thus, at least decent.

Temple of Doom would've been awesome if Kate Capshaw weren't so fucking annoying. :banghead:

[Mojambo]

11. It's not as good as Temple of Doom. IMHO. n/t

[Danger Mouse]

12. Uh oh.

:scared:

[Mojambo]

16. The story is worse, the action scenes are merely decent

And they totally wrecked the character of Marian, making her almost as whiney as Capshaw.

Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is a theme park ride, not a movie.

[Danger Mouse]

18. well, i'd rather see it and judge for myself.

[Mojambo]

20. Oh, please do.

It was not my intent to try and dissuade you.

I've said from the start (and still believe) that any Indy is better than no Indy.

[LeftyMom]

22. It's nowhere near as as good at TOD.

I can not begin to describe how bad it is. The plot is so thin you could read through it in a dark room. The action sequences are totally unbelievable, like they're operating in a world governed by cartoon physics. Shia TheBeef is more annoying than Kate Capshaw and Short Round put together. And I'm still not sure where the hell the ants and monkeys tied into the plot.

[Redneck Socialist]

15. It's pretty bad.

Maybe worth a rental, but still, pretty bad.

[jobycom]

27. It was much better than 2 or 3. Shun the non-believers. Shun. Shu-unnn.

[Danger Mouse]

30. Charlie the Unicorn!

[yellowdogintexas]

37. new one is fun. I have seen it two times actually

enjoyed it more the second actually because I noticed some stuff in a couple of the really huge action scenes I totally missed first time out.

My husband and I went last night because he is going back out into the boondocks to work and this is his last chance to see it on the big screen.

It has all the requirements:

Great vehicle chases with crazy stunts
Interesting traps and effects in the ancient sites
some fun dialogue
snake reference
great whip tricks
mud
spiderwebs
bugs
etc.

[Celeborn Skywalker]

13. Yep.

Raiders was damn good, but Last Crusade was in a class of its own.

[Robeson]

2. I favor one of those responses, without the "hate you" part....

...:-)

[Danger Mouse]

4. *gasp* HERETIC!

[CaliforniaPeggy]

7. My dear Elrond Hubbard!

I had to go with the original "Raiders"...

It had a freshness, an originality, a spirit, that the others just didn't have as much...

I am looking forward to the new one...

:hi:

[Danger Mouse]

9. I agree! And come on! Face melting! Nothing could top that.

:P

[Mojambo]

8. Raiders. Definitely.

Crusade may have more/better action and a better story, but nothing matches Raiders of the Lost Ark for sheer movie-going pleasure.

[Danger Mouse]

10. Yeah, it has it all, really.

[Breeze54]

14. The first of anything is always the best....

isn't it? I mean how do you know when you first see it?

To me Raiders of the Lost Ark was the best...

after that it becomes predictable....

But still exciting but predictable.

[Danger Mouse]

19. Well, I think for example that Empire Strikes back is far superior to Star Wars...

in just about every way possible.
But that's probably the exception to the rule.

[pokerfan]

28. Star Trek II: TWoK >>>>>> ST:TMP

[Danger Mouse]

31. ....

[InkAddict]

17. "Bring it on" sweet fantasy!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNqMWsGYsE0&feature=related

[jobycom]

21. 2 was lifeless, 3 was formulaic to the point of silliness. The original was the best. nt

[Orrex]

24. Whoa! That was going to be my post!

Get out of my brain!

[jobycom]

26. Next I will win the lottery with YOUR NUMBERS!!

Seems like this has happened before...

[MrSlayer]

23. Raiders, by a lot.

The second one was corny as hell and the third one was "ok", but only because Sean Connery was in it.

[Orrex]

25. Raiders was perfect

The other two were films whose main character was based on Indiana Jones, rather than being about Indy himself.


And there was no fourth film.

[TZ]

29. pfft!

Most predictable response on this thread. I'll repeat what I've said. elsewhere..I liked Last Crusade the best because of the chemistry between Sean Connery and Harrison Ford.
I also think that the much maligned fourth movie is about on par with number 2...fun but not to be taken seriously...
But what the heck, must be that FluMist vaccine going to my head, right?:crazy:

[Danger Mouse]

32. Pfft....Raiders was fantastic, but 3 can't be completely discounted.

[Orrex]

35. If only it could be!

What was good about that film could be compressed into the teaser-opener for a real Indy film.

Don't make me come over there.

[TZ]

36. You are wrong.

Just that. NA NA NA BOO BOO. LA LA LA LA--I can't hear you!!! I am rubber and you are glue..oh wait...I thought I was in the Health scare forum for a minute.....
:P
Even better..if you think number 3 was better than VOILA it will be better than 1!!!:hide:

[Lyric]

33. Last Crusade, hands down.

Raiders is okay, but the story isn't nearly as good (to me) as Last Crusade.

[DarkTirade]

34. The two good ones are the two involving nazis.

And out of the Indy books and games I've encountered, that also seems to be the case. The more the nazis are involved, the better the movie/book/game.

You need the right villains to make Indy work properly.

[Xipe Totec]

38. There ya go!

:thumbsup: