Self-important, over-dramatic, uninspired.

Sadly Over-hyped

It's funny watching the elements come together in this complicated scam. On one hand, the set-up isn't quite as complex as it seems, but there's an easy sense of fun in every exchange.

While it is a pity that the story wasn't told with more visual finesse, this is trivial compared to our real-world problems. It takes a good movie to put that into perspective.

Adventure action at its best, fascinating Chemistry between Harrison Ford and Sean Connery, and of course John Williams with his enthralling magnificent Music. One of my Favorite movies.

The Last Crusade is as fine as a finale as you'll ever have. The inclusion of Sean Connery as Indy's stern father makes the chemistry and quips perfect, with another Nazi bound adventure, this time for the Holy Grail. Yes, it may seem like a re-tread or re-hash of the first movie, but its keep the entertainment factor to the maximum, and the film's real star is the relationship between father and son. Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade is easily one of the best films of all time.

I still don't understand why this movie became the fans favorite of the franchise and it was even critically re-praised, when the vastly superior "Doom" is, constantly, bashed. I was lucky enough to watch the original three in the cinema and ironically, i've watched them by the correct chronological order, my first was "Doom", then a re-run of "Raiders" and 5 years later, now as a teen, i attended, enthusiastically, the premiere of "Crusade", but it ended with me left the movie theater in a total state of disappointment. Where do i start ? Firstly, it lacks the excitement and thrills of the previous two installments, when we think about the most memorable scenes of the franchise, "Raiders" have the most iconic and unforgettable opening like if a comic book came alive; the sequence in Nepal when Indy and Marion reunite; the swordsman in Cairo; the Well of Souls; the truck chase and so on. "Doom" have a 'glamour-ish' opening which reminds the classic musicals of the golden age, mixed with the exotic war dramas from the 30's & 40's and a bit of Bond thrown into it, plus the escape from the plane; the spike chamber; the black sleep of Kali Ma; Mola Ram (which was one of the best villains ever put on film); the mine chase and the rope bridge. "Crusade" have a lacklustre opening sequence where Indy, at the young age of 13, in a total of 10 minutes screen time acquires all his future trademarks: "It belongs to a Museum"; the ophidiophobia; the chin scar; the mastering of the whip and even his Fedora hat given away by a man who was supposed to be Abner Ravenwood, the future Indy's mentor, but he was ended up credited in the cast list as "Fedora Guy", because Lucas at the last moment, opted to exclude the Abner connection. One of his first dumb moves. For the rest, they gave us a tepid boat chase; the rescue on the Castle Brunwald; the zeppelin; the tank chase in the desert which was an unimaginative re-hash of "Raiders" and the anti-climatic 'grand finale'. Secondly, the McGuffin in this one isn't as exciting as the Ark of the Covenant or the Sankara Stones, and once again it's a Jewish / Catholic artifact that resembles too much of the Ark and even have the Nazis as, once again, the evil nemesis spreading their greediness towards the power of the Grail. Thirdly, the characters, Ford has been saying that this was his favorite Indy, but what he said doesn't mean that it rings true, because he looks bored / uninterested for almost the entire movie and his acting looks and sounds more Ford playing himself than Ford playing Indy. The lack of conviction is apparent here, he grew tired of the character after the difficult shot of "Doom" and, at this time, he was establishing himself on a more demanded roles in drama films. Connery was cast, not because that the best actor to play Indy's dad was the former James Bond, but because Sean was fresh from his Oscar winning role in the B.O. Hit, "The Untouchables" and his name had became trendy again after almost a decade into oblivion. Connery's roles in the acclaimed, "The Name of the Rose" and the sleeper hit, "Highlander" which he played the witty old mentor to younger folks, convinced Spielberg & Lucas that he could do the same for Ford and 'cash in' on Connery's crescent popularity of his middle-age comeback & Oscar winning. Connery gave an inspired performance with lots of heart and integrity, which earned him the SAG and BAFTA nominations, no question about that, but he wasn't the best pick to play Henry Jones, Sr. Charlton Heston should have been the perfect choice. Not only he resembles much more Ford in the looks, acting style & 'screen persona', but also Heston's jungle adventure movies from the 50's, such as "The Naked Jungle" or "Secret of the Incas" were major inspirations in the conception of the Indiana Jones' character and his perilous adventures around the world. The late great Denholm Elliott returns as Marcus Brody, this time with more than a glorified cameo, he's also on the track of the Grail, except that in "Raiders", Spielberg & Lucas established the character as an adventurer / archaeologist like Indy in his younger days, but here he serves the purpose of the buffoon / comic relief, a distracted erudit that "gets lost in his own Museum". John Rhys-Davies also returns in this installment, but his character Sallah have as much importance to the plot as his brother-in-law's camels. A total waste of two great actors !! Julian Glover and Alison Doody are too weak villains, they look like Disney Channel next to Arnold Toht or Mola Ram. Doody is, certainly, the nicest Indy Girl to look at, but the worst in the acting department (yes, Kate Capshaw was way better !!). Michael Byrne as Colonel Ernst Vogel is the only menacing of the bad guys, but he can't save the whole. Last, but not the least, River Phoenix sporting a late 80's haircut style, played Indy at age 13 in 1912, a bit 'off', but we accept it as Indy is well-known for being a misfit. The late actor gave an acceptable performance as young Indy, after he played the son of Ford in the underrated, "The Mosquito Coast" and studied his mannerisms and dialogue delivery. In short, "Crusade" still delivers, it have nice production values; not-so-exotic, but still okay locations; great cinematography by Dougie Slocombe; the master score from John Williams (even if it was the weakest of the original trilogy); stunning art & costume design and some impressive stuntwork like the previous two movies, but lacks in the thrilling department and the magic started here to disappear, maybe making this the last one (before the "Crystal Skull" crap resurrected the franchise some 19 years later...) was a good decision by the main trio.

I love this movie! Personally it's my favorite out of the first 3. It definitely is not the best but I love the treasure that Indiana is searching for and the story is just written so well. Sean Connery really is so good as Indiana's father that you can actually see him being his father in real life. Just like the first 2 films in the franchise it has everything you have come to expect from an Indiana film. I also love that we get to see a small taste of our hero's childhood. It follows the exact same formula as the first 2 but that's what makes a successful franchise. Some of the old favorite characters return and join in on the adventure which was a refreshing change. With this film Spielberg and Lucas insured that they created a truly successful trilogy of films that could even rival Star Wars. I would go so far as to say that in some ways Indiana Jones is a stronger trilogy than the first Star Wars trilogy simply because with this film Indiana really does end on a strong note.