I have always viewed the last Indiana Jones film, the Last Crusade, as the perfect summer film. It was well made, had engaging characters, and was fun. Nobody goes to a summer film to see The Passion of Joan of Arc , but the movie also made one think . . . even if only briefly.
The first film, Raiders, convinced Christians to go to PG films without hesitation (killing the G rating), created a genre, and is the best B-film ever made.
The second Jones’ film was much weaker. Our DVD copy of Temple of Doom only came out of storage (the ripped copy has never been played) when we wanted to see all three films. There is no reason to watch it as a “stand alone.” It is either part of the trilogy, where it has some merit, or it is not watched. Like the Senator Clinton campaign, its chief claim to fame comes from associates and its problems from the thing itself.
The fourth Indy film looked to be a disaster, but was not. It is flawed, but better than the second film (or at least as good). While not as good as the two best movies, it is a good postlude to the trilogy.
Why?
SPOILER AHEAD:
The film ties up the one flaw in Jones’ development: his relationship with Marion. The disappearance of Marion in the third film is its great flaw. . . and Jones’ trivial relationships with other women his greatest character weakness. It is hard to like a man who cannot see that Marion is his equal and that he needs her. In fact, the other films miss Marion. . . she is the missing character in the other two. The female lead in the second film is dreadful and useless while the female lead in the third is evil.
This prologue shows that Jones is slow to learn, but does learn in the end.
The film delightfully matches an aging Jones with an aging Marion. . . and both are interesting to watch. They are themselves, but wiser.
This is a popcorn film, nothing wrong with that, but seeing “our” characters come to romantic peace is worth the price of the ticket. It is a happy ending at last. . . with Jones not just “riding into the sunset” (as he does in the third film), but becoming a father, a husband, and a complete man. In that sense, this film has some of the strength of Star Trek VI which gave finality to those characters and their struggles as well.
Like Star Trek VI, this film is burdened with a strained plot with a “prize” much less interesting than the Ark or the Grail (a problem of the second film), but with a surprise ending that worked well with the fifties theme of the film.
If the goal was to make the best fifties science fiction film ever, then the filmmakers were very successful!
The real point of the movie is Jones and Marion . . . the special effects are just an excuse. Those of us who take our fictional characters seriously were glad to see some issues in Dr. Jones resolved. My greatest complaint was introducing Marion so late in the film. . . though that too can be justified by the structure of the story. . . with Jones like Odysseus (this film is structured a great deal like the Odyssey) finding his son before his wife.
Here is hoping that unlike the Kirk character, who is needlessly misused in a further reprise and killed, that Jones is allowed to remain as we leave him in this movie. Rewatch value (outside of a Jones marathon) will be small. . . but if only for the last five minutes of this fun bit of fluff necessary for fans.