Perfect ending as father and son obtain eternal life from the Cup and ride off into the sunset. Instead they continued on Crystal Skull and the upcoming 2023 movie with him aging hard in his Indy look. It would make sense if it was 500-700 years into the future or something to look that old since that Knight living in the Grail location was around that age look.
shareBut they didn't get eternal life. They left the cave. They only would have had eternal life if they stayed there.
I agree that it should have ended then though.
Yes, correct. The grail could not 'pass the seal'.
shareI thought it was only the grail that couldn't leave the cave, not their lifespan which they drank from the grail cup.
Indy: I've heard this one as well. Two of these brothers walked out of the desert one hundred and fifty years after having found the Grail and began the long journey back to france. But only one of them made it. And before dying of extreme old age, he supposedly imparted his tale to a-to a franciscan friar, I think.
Donovan: Not "Supposedly," Doctor Jones.
Knight: You have chosen wisely. But the Grail cannot pass beyond the great seal. That is the boundary and the price of immortality.
Drinking from the grail doesn't impart immortality per se (especially once one has left the confines of the cave) and given the infirmity of the eldest brother who can't even swing his sword, it seems pretty clear that the grail doesn't even impart youth and/or vitality beyond a certain point.
The grail only rejuvenates you, in order to have eternal life you have to keep drinking from it, since the grail can’t pass the seal or some shit you’d have to stay in the temple or keep coming back to it. I know it’s really really stupid but those are the rules.
shareHow is it any dumber than the supernatural stuff in the other movies?
shareBecause it’s obvious that the rules were invented to suit the plot, not by what made sense.
shareIsn't that the case in every movie?
shareNo, the rules should make sense and shouldn’t be modeled around what will make the plot move forward. That would be like in Temple if it turned out if the stones left the Temple then the Temple blows up, that doesn’t make any sense at all but it would be a convenient way for Indy to defeat the Thuggees.
shareIn Temple the stone starts burning Mola Ram's hand when Indy invokes Shiva - in spite of the fact that Raiders established the God of Abraham to be real. So that was pretty convenient. How did Indy know how to "turn on" the stone, anyway? Temple also features a sacrifice victim who is able to live without a heart, for no other reason than it would be more gruesome if the victim would have his heart ripped out and be burned alive.
shareRaiders never established that Shiva doesn’t exist. This in the fantasy universe, you need to let it go.
Indy was an expert on Archaeology and knew a lot about the stones, so I’ll let it slide, kind of like how he knew to close his eyes when the ark was opened.
As for the sacrifice victim it was clearly black magic that was keeping him alive.
Raiders never established that Shiva doesn’t exist. This in the fantasy universe, you need to let it go.
Indy was an expert on Archaeology and knew a lot about the stones, so I’ll let it slide, kind of like how he knew to close his eyes when the ark was opened.
As for the sacrifice victim it was clearly black magic that was keeping him alive.
I don’t criticize Crusade for it’s fantasy elements, I criticize it for being a bad movie
Ummm why can’t they both be true, especially considering we are in a fantasy universe? Hell how are either of them true? Also Crusade establishes that Christianity is true so therefore Crusade has the same problem you claim Temple has. In fact Temple takes place before Raiders so if anything Raiders has the problem.
The grail is far dumber, a cup of water that rejuvenates you is the stupidest thing I have ever heard of. Having a heart ripped out is awesome.
The grail is far dumber, a cup of water that rejuvenates you is the stupidest thing I have ever heard of. Having a heart ripped out is awesome.
I don’t expect realism, I expect the movie to be somewhat logical and tell a coherent narrative, Crusade does not but the first two did. The problems of Last Crusade were non existent in the first two
shareNo it should have ended after Temple.
shareThen we would of never got the 2nd best indy film which is crusade
shareYou're wrong, we would have only gotten the 2 best Indiana Jones films (Raiders and Temples) and we would not have gotten two godawful pieces of shit (Last Crusade and Crystal Skulls)
shareNope, it crusade thats the 2nd best, to settle this argument we will take critics and audience scores .......and the winner is crusade in 2nd , you lose.
shareSo your objective data is the subjective opinion of someone else???
shareRather thst than your shitty opinion
shareStill subjective and declaring my opinion as “shitty” is also subjective. You’re 0-3 dingleberry
shareOf course it's subjective. Just like your opinion is 100% subjective. However, as vast majority of people agree that your opinion is indeed shitty, there must be something to it.
shareAppealing to popularity is a logical fallacy, there was a time where everyone believe the world was flat but that didn’t make it true.
shareAppealing to popularity is a logical fallacy, there was a time where everyone believe the world was flat but that didn’t make it true.
Oh it’s objectively ridiculous? Perhaps you’d care to show me the objective , quantifiable and imperial study that proves I am objectively ridiculous. Or you could admit that you’re lying and all you’re basing your premise on is your own fallacious, subjective opinion
shareI think at least one followup movie or dare I say a sequel trilogy set during WW2 could had been cool. I wish we got that instead of The Terminal.
shareTotally agree, KOTCS is absolute garbage and might aswell not even exist.
In fact, as far as I’m concerned it’s a trilogy.
Should've ended as one film.
shareI’ll still count the prequel Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom because it’s at least hella entertaining but yeah Raiders is the only one that is truly a masterpiece.
shareI disagree. Frankly I don't like Temple of Doom and prefer both Raiders and Last Crusade.
shareI completely disagree with you. Raiders is one of the greatest films ever made, Temple isn't nearly as good but still watchable, good movie to watch as you're going to sleep. Crusade is Batman and Robin level of bad.
shareI completely disagree with you. Raiders is one of the greatest films ever made,
Temple isn't nearly as good but still watchable,
Crusade is Batman and Robin level of bad.
Never said it wasn’t.
share"Raiders is one of the greatest films ever made" is a fact statement. And I know you, you treat your opinions as uncontroverted facts. Your compulsive hatred of Crusade is proof of this: you just can't accept that people love Crusade, and it angers you that Crusade has nearly the same rating on IMDb as Raiders. You won't be happy until you've made everybody hate the same things you hate.
shareAnother strawman, I never said my opinion was an “uncontroverted fact”.
I can like or dislike any movie I want, I don’t need your approval. You are an overly emotional man baby who refuses to see the flaws in this trash movie. I bet you would never apply that logic to any movie that you happen to hate.
Another strawman, I never said my opinion was an “uncontroverted fact”.
I can like or dislike any movie I want, I don’t need your approval.
You are an overly emotional man baby who refuses to see the flaws in this trash movie.
I bet you would never apply that logic to any movie that you happen to hate.
Call it what you will but I never even implied that my opinion was an “uncontroverted fact”, you came up with that on your won.
You have the right to not like what you want and I have the right to disagree with you, see how this works, numb nuts?
False equivalence, the flaws in Crusade don’t even come close to the flaws in Raiders and Temple
I can accept flaws in Raiders, for example why the Nazis would have discovered the secret entrance to the Well of Souls and then just give up on it, all they had to do was break down a wall and they had the ark. The flaws in Last Crusade are exponentially higher.
Call it what you will but I never even implied that my opinion was an “uncontroverted fact”, you came up with that on your won.
You have the right to not like what you want and I have the right to disagree with you, see how this works, numb nuts?
False equivalence, the flaws in Crusade don’t even come close to the flaws in Raiders and Temple
I can accept flaws in Raiders, for example why the Nazis would have discovered the secret entrance to the Well of Souls and then just give up on it, all they had to do was break down a wall and they had the ark. The flaws in Last Crusade are exponentially higher.
No, it's nothing more than your own subjective opinion.
My behavior is not obsessive compulsive, you're just having a fit because not everyone thinks the way you do and because of your narcissistic personality anyone who doesn't think like you must have obsessive compulsive disorder.
Uhhhh yeah the flaws in Last Crusade are exponentially higher, therefore not on the same level.
As for the U-Boat we don't know how far it dove down so therefore we aren't in any position to say he definitely would have drowned. If it hadn't been for Indy then the Nazis never would have found the medallion,they never would have taken the arc to the Island and they wouldn't have died so your premise is debunked. The only reason the Nazis even knew where the medallion was was because they followed him.
The whole thing with the grail and the seal was so damn stupid so if that's your defense of this trash movie then you've already lost. You are desperately clinging to a life raft so you don't drown.
No, it's nothing more than your own subjective opinion.
My behavior is not obsessive compulsive, you're just having a fit because not everyone thinks the way you do and because of your narcissistic personality anyone who doesn't think like you must have obsessive compulsive disorder.
Uhhhh yeah the flaws in Last Crusade are exponentially higher, therefore not on the same level.
As for the U-Boat we don't know how far it dove down so therefore we aren't in any position to say he definitely would have drowned.
If it hadn't been for Indy then the Nazis never would have found the medallion
they never would have taken the arc to the Island and they wouldn't have died
The whole thing with the grail and the seal was so damn stupid so if that's your defense
It's your subjective opinion and nothing more that I have acted with "irrational rage", I have provided constructive criticism and you are just pitching a fit because you disagree. Pathetic.
Actually no, it's obvious to anyone who has eyes how flawed Last Crusade is.
You don't know if they submerged all the way, the truth is if they did submerge then they would use more fuel and there may not have been a reason to submerge. I'm not saying this happened, I'm saying you aren't justified in saying it did considering we never see it submerge. Try to keep up, kid.
They did need the medallion, without the medallion they never would have found the Well of Souls, they were digging pretty far away from it. Without the medallion the Nazis just keep looking forever and the ending never happens. Indy even said "well they aren't going to find it without this (the medallion)"
Indy had nothing to do with taking the arc to the island, that was all at Belloq's insistence, Belloq was working with the Nazis with or without Indy so therefore Indy had nothing to do with the ark being taken to the island.
I am not blinded with hatred at all, I am being honest and objective.
It's your subjective opinion and nothing more that I have acted with "irrational rage", I have provided constructive criticism and you are just pitching a fit because you disagree. Pathetic.
You don't know if they submerged all the way, the truth is if they did submerge then they would use more fuel and there may not have been a reason to submerge.
They did need the medallion, without the medallion they never would have found the Well of Souls
Indy had nothing to do with taking the arc to the island, that was all at Belloq's insistence,
I am not blinded with hatred at all, I am being honest and objective.
The Mickey Mouse joke is a HUGE problem, it was childish, immature not to mention not funny. It set the stage for the kind of kiddie nonsense for the 4 year olds that Spielberg was pandering to.
Maybe they decided not to submerge later because it would have used too much fuel? I’m not saying they didn’t but I am saying you aren’t justified in saying they did.
Ummmmm the medallion literally did reveal where the Well of Souls was, were you paying attention? That was literally the purpose. Uhhhh once they found the Well of Souls they didn’t need the medallion anymore. That’s why it pretty much disappeared from the movie after the map room scene. Damn you’re dumb.
I am sure I misspelled it, but I don’t care and I will not correct my spelling of the work “arc”. “ And they very easily could have flown the ARC to the island to test it or they could have flown it somewhere else and tested it. But none of this matters because it was Belloq’s idea to take it to the island, not Indy’s. You are not justified in your premise.
I am the most objective and unbiased person you’ve ever come across. First of all I never said that Raiders didn’t have flaws, it does, but Last Crusade’s far outnumbers Raiders and to put them on the same level is a logical absurdity not to mention false equivalence. Also I am willing to overlook many of the flaws of Raiders because you know, IT’S ACTUALLY GOOD!
The Mickey Mouse joke is a HUGE problem,
it was childish, immature not to mention not funny.
Ummmmm the medallion literally did reveal where the Well of Souls was, were you paying attention? That was literally the purpose. Uhhhh once they found the Well of Souls they didn’t need the medallion anymore. That’s why it pretty much disappeared from the movie after the map room scene.
I am sure I misspelled it, but I don’t care and I will not correct my spelling of the work “arc”.
And they very easily could have flown the ARC to the island to test it or they could have flown it somewhere else and tested it.
I am the most objective and unbiased person you’ve ever come across.
First of all I never said that Raiders didn’t have flaws, it does,
but Last Crusade’s far outnumbers Raiders
and to put them on the same level is a logical absurdity not to mention false equivalence.
Also I am willing to overlook many of the flaws of Raiders because you know, IT’S ACTUALLY GOOD!
They shouldn’t have had a joke at all although Jesse Owens would have been less bad, but Spielberg changed it to Mickey Mouse because the toddler’s this movie was meant for wouldn’t know who that was, it proves that Spielberg made the movie for kids which is a sharp departure from the first two.
Not an opinion at all, Mickey Mouse is intended for children, also whether or not Spectre had a similar joke is irrelevant to this discussion.
Had they not followed Indy then by the laws of probability they would still be digging in the wrong place, the only way to dig in the right place would be to have the medallion.
Oh for crying out loud I’m typing from my phone, of course autocorrect is going to get me you nincompoop.
For all we know Belloq would have made the suggestion to go to the Island at some point had it been loaded on the plane, the point is you are speculating and contemplating alternate realities which don’t exist. Therefore you are pissing in the wind and not contributing to a logical flow of this discussion.
I am objective and unbiased, I’m sorry I don’t agree with you but that’s your own damn fault.
I already told you a flaw in Raiders, the Nazis not searching the secret passage to the well of souls that Indy and Marion escaped from.
Now, the flaws of Last Crusade far outnumber Raiders and I have made multiple posts providing this.
LOL Last Crusade isn’t even in the same ballpark as Raiders, Raiders is one of the greatest films ever made, Last Crusade belongs in the IMDB Bottom 100 and should have swept the Razzies that year.
They shouldn’t have had a joke at all
although Jesse Owens would have been less bad
but Spielberg changed it to Mickey Mouse because the toddler’s this movie was meant for wouldn’t know who that was,
it proves that Spielberg made the movie for kids which is a sharp departure from the first two.
Not an opinion at all, Mickey Mouse is intended for children,
also whether or not Spectre had a similar joke is irrelevant to this discussion.
Had they not followed Indy then by the laws of probability they would still be digging in the wrong place, the only way to dig in the right place would be to have the medallion.
Oh for crying out loud I’m typing from my phone, of course autocorrect is going to get me you nincompoop.
For all we know Belloq would have made the suggestion to go to the Island at some point had it been loaded on the plane,
I am objective and unbiased, I’m sorry I don’t agree with you but that’s your own damn fault.
I already told you a flaw in Raiders, the Nazis not searching the secret passage to the well of souls that Indy and Marion escaped from.
Now, the flaws of Last Crusade far outnumber Raiders and I have made multiple posts providing this.
LOL Last Crusade isn’t even in the same ballpark as Raiders, Raiders is one of the greatest films ever made, Last Crusade belongs in the IMDB Bottom 100 and should have swept the Razzies that year.
Except the jokes in the first two movies were dark and mature and were typically about someone receiving an incredibly brutal death. The "jokes" in Last Crusade were kiddie jokes and were obviously a pathetic attempt by Spielberg to dumb his movie down for toddlers.
Because Jesse Owens would have at least required the viewer to know a little thing about history, but of course there never should have been a joke in the first place so this talking point is meaningless.
I knew who Jesse Owens was back in 3rd grade. The audience should be expected to know who he was, and Blazing Saddles proves this. Spielberg changed it because toddlers would respond better to Mickey Mouse.
Temple does not pander to children, Temple dealt with very mature themes such as black magic, child slavery, etc., it was very much not a kiddie movie, Last Crusade was.
The Mickey Mouse joke was specifically put in there to appeal to children, that proves my premise and debunks yours. Spielberg felt the backlash from parents because Temple was too dark and violent so he pussed out and made a kiddie movie the third time around.
Quit bringing up Spectre, it has literally nothing to do with this discussion, can it with your non sequiturs.
So then they were digging in the right place before Indy found the medallion? Please show me where you got this from? They still would have dug in the wrong place had Indy not found the Medallion and the Ark would have remained undisturbed.
How do you know he didn't suggest that? Yes you have to prove a negative because you asserted a negative, I didn't.
So not going through the trouble of copying and pasting a long and incoherent rant makes me certifiable? Where the fuck are you coming up with this logic?
The point still stands, I did point out flaws in Raiders and you said I didn't.
I have provided multiple posts including long lists of objective flaws in Last Crusade, that proves that Last Crusade is a trash movie.
You seriously need to chill out, you are overly emotional and you are having a panic attack, not everyone cums in their pants over Last Crusade like you do and it's OK. I happen to hate it as I'm sure you hate other movies.
Except the jokes in the first two movies were dark and mature
were typically about someone receiving an incredibly brutal death.
I knew who Jesse Owens was back in 3rd grade.
The audience should be expected to know who he was, and Blazing Saddles proves this.
Spielberg changed it because toddlers would respond better to Mickey Mouse.
Temple does not pander to children, Temple dealt with very mature themes such as black magic, child slavery, etc., it was very much not a kiddie movie, Last Crusade was.
The Mickey Mouse joke was specifically put in there to appeal to children, that proves my premise and debunks yours.
Spielberg felt the backlash from parents because Temple was too dark and violent so he pussed out and made a kiddie movie the third time around.
Quit bringing up Spectre, it has literally nothing to do with this discussion, can it with your non sequiturs.
So then they were digging in the right place before Indy found the medallion? Please show me where you got this from?
They still would have dug in the wrong place had Indy not found the Medallion
and the Ark would have remained undisturbed.
How do you know he didn't suggest that? Yes you have to prove a negative because you asserted a negative, I didn't.
So not going through the trouble of copying and pasting a long and incoherent rant makes me certifiable? Where the fuck are you coming up with this logic?
The point still stands, I did point out flaws in Raiders and you said I didn't.
I have provided multiple posts including long lists of objective flaws in Last Crusade, that proves that Last Crusade is a trash movie.
You seriously need to chill out, you are overly emotional and you are having a panic attack, not everyone cums in their pants over Last Crusade like you do and it's OK. I happen to hate it as I'm sure you hate other movies.
Then you're now arguing a moot point because I have acknowledged flaws in Raiders despite the fact that the flaws in Temple and to a greater extent Crusade vastly outnumber them.
The Mickey Mouse joke is a huge deal, it symbolizes the childish nature of the movie, it reinforces that Spielberg was making a movie for Toddlers. The first two movies don't have nearly the level of flaws that Crusade has and I have proven this multiple times.
So expressing my opinion constitutes "loitering in their forums?" I'd love for you to stand by your principles and say the same thing to the Dark Knight Rises haters who think that Bruce quit because of Rachel. But you won't because you have no integrity, you are nothing more than an overly emotional manbaby.
OMFG, are you still hung up over a silly little line in Crusade?
And no, not "everyone" knew about Jesse Owens, I'm from the UK, saw this movie in 1989 and I certainly never knew about him then.
Then that means you're stupid and you are proving my point. Spielberg dumbed the movie down for children and people like you, he didn't respect the audience's intelligence.
Also why did a Jesse Owens joke work in Blazing Saddles? That came out before Last Crapade and therefore by your logic less people should have known who Jesse Owens was.
Oh? I'm "stupid" for NOT KNOWING SOMETHING? How fucking dare you, you hypocrite!?
I never saw Blazing Saddles back then, neither, I'm not into Westerns nor most Mel Brooks movies.
In fact, all you've done here is show your absolute arrogance, ridiculing people who've not seen the same movies you've had and liked them just as much. It's like you want them to be just like you, but guess what, everyone's different.
Jesse Owens existence is common knowledge, I knew who that was back in 3rd grade, Spielberg changed the line because he thought his audience was stupid (although considering you don’t know who he was Spielberg may have had a point). Having said that the joke wouldn’t have made much sense whether it was Jesse Owens or Mickey Mouse. The joke made perfect sense in Blazing Saddles because Bart was surrounded by racists who wanted to kill him because of his skin color so therefore making a reference to a very fast person who was black made sense.
I am not being arrogant and if you feel I am “ridiculing” you then well you deserved to be “ridiculed”.
"Jesse Owens existence is common knowledge"
Maybe in the USA, but I come from the UK.
He’s a historical figure, you should know who he is.
shareWhy should I care? We were never taught about him in school, and I don't much care for athletes, or even most sports.
It doesn't matter if you are into sports or not, his existence is common knowledge. I don't give a good fuck about Basketball yet I know who Michael Jordan is.
shareThat's because Michael Jordan has gotten a lot of publicity, in our own time. How many basketball players from the '30s can you name? Jesse Owens, unlike Michael Jordan, hasn't gotten any publicity since before he died.
Can you tell me, without googling, who Henry Rinnan was? He was an historical person, after all, and according to your logic, being an historical person constitutes "common knowledge" for some reason.
False equivalence by your part, Jesse Owens is common knowledge and people should have known who he was, again the joke worked (a lot better by the way) in Blazing Saddles and no one complained they didn’t know who he was. You have admitted that Spielberg dumbed the movie down which was my point from the beginning.
shareFalse equivalence? Comparing someone who was famous in the '30s to someone who was famous in the '40s? Holy Projection, Batman! You wanted to compare someone famous in the '30s to someone famous today, for crying out loud.
As for Blazing Saddles, that's a movie from 1974. Crusade came out in 1989, 15 years later. Jesse Owens isn't common knowledge just because you happen to know who he is.
No , people in 1989 should have known who he was, people in 2022 should have known who he was. Blazing Saddles was made 36 years after 1938, Last Crapade was made 51 years after 1938, a large number of people are not just going to magically forget who a very famous track star was in that span of time considering both were considerably far after 1938. Nice try kid but the fact still remains that Spielberg put Mickey Mouse jokes in the movie to appeal to toddlers and preschoolers
shareRegardless my point stands, Spielberg changed the line to something that would appeal to Toddlers.
shareYou think Mickey Mouse only appeals to toddlers? I'm sure MM has many adult fans, or fans who grew up with him.
Toddlers? Mickey Mouse is massive business for adults, apparently:
https://www.fastcompany.com/90324660/how-disney-grew-its-3-billion-mickey-mouse-business-by-selling-to-adults
I can only guess you despise the rodent, to be so hung up on this Crusade scene.
Yes adults know who he is, adults also know who Barney the Purple Dinosaur is, that doesn’t mean that Mickey Mouse jokes are for adults, they are strictly for children and the franchise was never strictly for children until Last Crapade.
shareWait, you think that just because a character like Mickey Mouse is mentioned just once in Indiana Jones, means that the movies are now for children?
Also, you failed to read in that article that those children who grew up with MM are now adults (especially those who grew up during WW2 and are now old) and don't you think they'd be offended by what you say here?
Just what the hell is wrong with you??
Doesn’t matter at all, those adults would have grown out of Mickey Mouse by that point just like how I grew out of Sesame Street.
I’ll now ask: What the hell is wrong with you?
Nothing's wrong with me, I certainly don't spend hours and hours going back and forth with someone who has far too much time on his hands, arguing with others over a movie based on children's action serials of the 1950s. I have better things to do with my time. This conversation is terminated.
LOL you are literally the one who resurrected this thread, I forgot about it a long time ago until you responded, so if you want to blame someone for “wasting your time” or whatever then blame yourself.
shareThe Mickey Mouse joke is a huge deal, it symbolizes the childish nature of the movie, it reinforces that Spielberg was making a movie for Toddlers.
So expressing my opinion constitutes "loitering in their forums?"
You haven’t refuted anything, junior aside from your own intelligence and ability to put forth a rational thought.
Ummm as far as loitering I literally forgot all about this thread until you decided to resurrect it, you are literally guilty of what you accused me of, maybe you should focus on curing your own obsessions and forget about what I do, just food for thought.
The thread is still active, I didn't "resurrect" it. The reason it went three months before I replied to you is because I can only stomach so much of your idiocy before I need a break. But it's not like you've stayed away from these forums in the meantime, is it?
shareI literally have not posted on this thread for a long time, I was never going to post on it again until you hunted me down to repeat the same, debunked, fallacious talking points. Yes you do have an unnatural obsession with this trash movie
shareI agree. Indiana Jones Trilogy. Done and dusted.
shareShould have ended with Raiders of the Lost Ark being a one-and-done afaic. Last Crusade was tons better than Temple of Doom, but that's not saying much.
share