The inception of theIndiana Jonesfranchise actually began with the desire to make a film in another, already established film series.Steven SpielbergandGeorge Lucaswere on vacation together in 1977 during the opening weekend ofStar Warswhen Lucas asked Spielberg — who was in post-production onClose Encounters of the Third Kindat the time — what kind of film he wanted to make next. Spielberg said he’d always wanted to direct a James Bond film, to which Lucas replied, “Well, I’ve got that beat.” TheStar Warsfilmmaker proceeded to pitch an adventure film in the vein of the 1930s and 40s serials starring a heroic archeologist named Indiana Smith. Spielberg loved everything but the name, and suggested Jones as the new surname, and thus one of the most enduring film franchises in history was born.
TheIndiana Jonesfranchise is also noteworthy in that no two films are too similar. Spielberg and Lucas were careful not to retread the formula of past movies, and this resulted in a fresh story and structure each time out.Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny, directed byJames Mangold(and the first installment not directed by Spielberg) continues that tradition. For over forty years, Indiana Jones has fought Nazis, found some of the world’s greatest treasures, and been extremely cool doing it, thanks to the lead performance byHarrison Ford. The Indiana Jones franchise might have its hiccups, but its impact on action films can’t be understated. Below, we’ve visited all five IndianaJones films, digging into the merits and shortcomings of each entry in this beloved, long-lasting, and ongoing franchise.
5’Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull’ (2008)
Directed by Steven Spielberg
We begin with what is glaringly the worst of the bunch. One of the biggest problems withIndiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skullis apparent from the opening frame, in which a distractingly-obviously-CG-created groundhog pops his head out of a mound.Indiana Joneshas always been about grand adventure, using the best effects possible to put our hero in the greatest amount of danger, but a 21st-century Indiana Jones movie already begins to feel false once incongruous CG effects begin to creep in. This permeates throughout the entire film, fromShia LaBeoufswingin’ on vines with animated monkeys, to a swarm of weightless computer-generated ants carrying communist soldiers to their death. As fake as some of the bugs inTemple of Doommay have looked, they still felt tangible in relation to the actors, and tangibility goes a long way towards sweeping the audience up in the adventures of Indiana Jones. Unfortunately, an overreliance on CG is only one ofmany issues plaguing the fourthIndiana Jonesfilm. EvenCate Blanchettcan’t make paranormal-obsessed villain Irina Spalko interesting,John Hurtis completely wasted as a walking, talking clue-pointer, the loyalty ofRay Winstone’s sidekick Mac doesn’t matter one bit because the character barely exists as-is, and LaBeouf performs with such emotional intensity that it feels like he’s in an entirely different film. Pretty much theonly character dynamic worth anything inCrystal Skullis the one between Indy and Marion. Harrison Ford andKaren Alleneasily slip back into their old rapport, giving the film a much-needed boost when it begins to get bogged down by its own convoluted plot involving saucer men from Mars.
Some took issue with the fact that Indiana Jones would be dealing with aliens in the fourth Indy film, and while another religion-focused MacGuffin may have been more suitable, it makes sense for Lucas and Spielberg to want to tackle this particular kind of story when moving the series into the 1950s. The problem isn’t aliens; it’s the specific story they choose to tell. There’s no weight to the hunt for Crystal Skulls, and as Indiana Jones starts to rattle off various off-screen adventures he’s had since we last left him, we begin longing to see those stories instead.“Uninteresting” is the operative word ofCrystal Skull, from the story to the characters to even the set pieces. The truck sequence in the jungle is the least dull of the bunch, but even then, it’s hard to care about what’s happening when we don’t really care about the characters themselves. This is a shame, because Indiana Jones is undoubtedly one of the most interesting heroes to grace the silver screen. It took years for Spielberg, Lucas, and Ford to agree on a take for the fourthIndiana Jonesfilm, but maybe they should’ve realized the difficulty in coming up with another satisfying film meant they probably should have left well enough alone.
Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull
4’Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom' (1984)
Spielberg and Lucas began developingTemple of Doompretty quickly after the success ofRaiders of the Lost Ark, but from the onset, they were intent on making a film that would be darker and very different from the first adventure. Lucas rooted this idea in how he approachedEmpire Strikes Backas the darkest entry in theStar Warstrilogy, but whereas that film simply went to some emotionally difficult places,Templeessentially becomes a horror film in its somewhat disturbing, pitch-black third act. Things begin promisingly enough inTemple of Doomas Spielberg opens the movie with aBusby Berkeley-esque musical number followed immediately by a thrilling showdown and shootout between Indy and Lao Che (Roy Chiao). But the first hints that we may be in for a bumpy ride arrive withKate Capshaw’s nightclub singer Willie Scott. In keeping with Spielberg and Lucas’ desire not to repeat themselves, it makes sense that they’d want to craft a wholly different female companion for Indy in the follow-up, butmakingWillie Scott the opposite of Marion Ravenwoodmeans Indy shares the screen with a grating, dim, and infuriatingly self-obsessed stereotype. Again, the intention behind Willie Scott was fine, but the execution is pitched way too severely toward the damsel in distress as Willie screams and stomps like an angry toddler throughout most of the film’s runtime. While her romantic interactions with Indy are meant to evoke the tone of classic screwball comedies, more often than not they fall flat. IfRaidersreflects the best of the James Bond influence,Templeembraces some of that franchise’s worst tendencies when it comes to the hero/love interest dynamic.
Indy’s other companion, Short Round, is at least endearing enough to tolerate onscreen, and thechemistry between Ford and Ke Huy Quan results in the film’s most effective comedic moments— which are absolutely vital to keeping the darkness of the movie’s second half from engulfing the movie whole. Indeed, Spielberg embraces certain aspects of the horror genre and B-movie cinema with the film’s violent finale, which certainly caught some audiences off guard. WhileRaidersended in a similarly graphic fashion, it’s about balance —TempleI of Doomlitters the shock value throughout the entire third act, whereasRaiderssaves the gore for the money shot at the very end.Temple of Doomisn’t a bad movie — the booby-trap sequence on the way to the temple is one of Spielberg’s most effective set pieces ever, and the mine car chase in the finale is thrilling. But the lack of a strong companion, overreliance on the wrong kind of dark tone, and lessened focus on Indiana Jones as an intellectual make it a somewhat less fulfilling entry in the franchise.
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom
3’Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny' (2023)
Directed by James Mangold
It may seem like heresy to sayDial of Destinyis better than any of the first three Indiana Jones, but thesatisfying conclusion to Indy’s story, despite a blandness to the rest of the film, outweighs the shrill, irritating, and extremely questionable aspects ofTemple of Doom.Dial of Destinyhas some decent setpieces, like the opening flashback to a younger Ford (with some odd de-aging), and a chase through Tangier with Indy’s goddaughter Helena (Phoebe Waller-Bridge) and her sidekick Teddy (Ethann Isidore), but this might be the first Indy film where it’s the smaller moments that are better than the action scenes.Dial of Destinytreats Indy like a real person and not a cipher for whatever adventure scenario that he’s thrown into this time around. He’s a character looking at his past, discussing his previous adventures, and reckoning with the choices he’s made. As a goodbye to this iconic character, Ford is doing some great work, and it’s interesting to see Jones as a living, breathing character and not a serial star for once. It’s hard to believe, but some of the best moments ofDial of Destinytake the weaknesses ofKingdom of the Crystal Skulland make them strengths, as Ford gives a moving explanation as to why Mutt isn’t in this film, and thefilm’s final moments with Indy are extremely lovely and surprisingly moving in a way this series rarely is.
While Disney has insisted that this is the last adventure for ‘ol Indy, Waller-Bridge makes a decent case for how this world could continue without Ford, thanks to her character Helena. She brings an energy unlike Indy’s, and she’s a delightful addition to this world unlike we’ve seen before. Indy’s sidekicks have always been a mixed bag, but Helena matches Indy beat-for-beat, and while it would be absolutely fine if this series ends withDial of Destiny(it probably should have ended before this, to be honest), it wouldn’t be terrible to keep following the adventures of Helena.And kudos to James Mangold, who had the unenviable task of following in Spielberg’s footsteps with this grand finale.The aforementioned train opening is a tense delight, CGI notwithstanding, and Mangold keeps the stakes always escalating for this quest. But the real bonkers swing comes in the film’s finale, which finds Indianatime traveling. It’s such a wild choice, you can’t help but admire the choice to go all-in like that. Mangold films this bonkers conclusion in a way that truly makes us think Indy mightactuallybe ready to disrupt the space-time continuum to find someplace he belongs. But after crystal skulls, melting faces, and monkey brain meals, Mangold knows he can play a bit fast and loose with what people will believe in this universe. To be completely honest, we probably didn’t need any Indiana Jones movies afterThe Last Crusade, butDial of Destinycertainly works as a better conclusion to this series thanCrystal Skull, which seems to be the primary reason why this film exists in the first place. Waller-Bridge is a charming addition to this franchise, andMads Mikkelsenis a great villainas always — even if we’ve seen characters like him before in this universe — and they do make this feel more essential than it probably is. However,Dial of Destinydoes a fairly decent job of giving Ford a goodbye to one of his most famous characters, wrapping up this series with a nostalgic, charming bow.
Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny
2’Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade’ (1989)
The brilliance ofIndiana Jones and the Last Crusadeis that it’s almost a stealth origin story. You think you’re just watching the next adventure of Indiana Jones, but in fact, the entire film is telling the audience where Indy came from and why he is the way he is. The movie literally begins with Young Indy, as Spielberg channels his love of Westerns with athrilling sequence that runs through the foundation of some of Indy’s hallmark traits, all in the midst of an elaborate and supremely entertaining chase sequence.River Phoenixis pitch-perfect casting as the young Indiana Jones, composerJohn Williamsgets playful with some of the best work of his career, and it all culminates with the introduction of Indy’s father, followed by an inspired cut to an adult Indy hunting the same MacGuffin decades later. And that’s just the first 15 minutes.
Last Crusadeis the most ambitious film of the franchise, as Spielberg and Lucas send their hero on a globe-trotting adventure to recover yet another all-important religious artifact. But the “adventure” is, for all intents and purposes, a facade. The crux of the story lies in Indy rekindling and accepting his relationship with his father, who, in another case of spot-on casting, is played by James Bond himself,Sean Connery. Thedynamic between Ford and Conneryis wonderfully executed. It’s combative but never mean-spirited, and despite their estrangement, they assume dominant and submissive roles in the most subtle of ways, many times evoking the entire relationship with a simple glance. The film also acts as Spielberg and Lucas’ rebuke toTemple of Doom. Itrelishes the talk-y intellectual moments ofRaidersand eschews the more grotesque aspects ofTemple of Doomin favor of comedy and snappy dialogue. Indeed, at times this tonal course correction goes a little overboard, losing a bit of the drama along the way (Hitler signing Indy’s Grail Diary is just silly), but overall it finds a nice balance and culminates in a wonderfully affecting finale with the highest emotional stakes of the series.
Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade
1’Raiders of the Lost Ark' (1981)
Honestly,The Last Crusademakes a strong case for the best of theIndiana Jonesbunch, but ultimately, the consistent sharpness and God-tier-level filmmaking ofRaiders of the Lost Arknudges it just ahead to the top spot. There’s not a false note to be found in Spielberg’s buoyant, adventurous thrill ride. Karen Allen’s Marion Ravenwood is just as compelling as Indy himself, but she isn’t an attempt to create a female copy of the eponymous hero. The chemistry between the two drives the film, as doesFord’s mix of moxie, smarts, and luck that brings Indiana Jones to vivid life. What makes Jones a unique action hero is that he’s always a little bit in over his head. He doesn’t have every beat worked out 30 steps in advance — there’s an on-the-fly quality to his attitude that makes the ride that much more enjoyable because, as an audience member, you don’t necessarily feel like Indiana Jones can survive anything. He does, mind you, but it’s always a close call. The iconic image of Indy always reaching at the last moment to grab his hat is not only clever, but it’s also indicative of Indiana Jones as a whole. He makes it out in one piece, but often by the skin of his teeth.Spielberg brilliantly sets up the worldand the hero in the film’s prologue, which takes a cue from Bond by beginning the film with a set piece that’s only tangentially related to the rest of the plot. But we learn almost all we need to know about Indy in that first sequence, and then the character is even further fleshed out in the next sequence, in whichthis dashing hero is revealed to be a highly intelligent professor at Marshall College. What sets this apart from a “secret identity” dynamic as seen in superhero stories is that Jones’ day job and adventures are one and the same — he relishes knowledge and action, and doesn’t even necessarily need to hide one facet of his being from the other.
But in hindsight,Raiders of the Lost Arkis a perfect storm of three of the most iconic and important names in film history at the top of their game. George Lucas' concept is a brilliant expansion on the serial films, and showcases his ability to create legendary adventure heroes in a world we want to explore long after the movie is over. Spielberg was coming out of the 1970s, where he almost had a major hand in creating the blockbusters as we know them, with films likeJawsandClose Encounters of the Third Kind. And, of course, Ford was already the definition of cool afterStar Wars,The Empire Strikes BackandAmerican Graffiti, but even Indiana managed to seem even cooler than Han Solo. Either in a classroom or running away from a giant boulder, Ford’s Indiana Jonescould get it. Looking back onRaiders of the Lost Arknow, it’srefreshing to see just how dialogue and character-driven the film is as a “blockbuster” movie. It’s an action-adventure movie, sure, but the bulk of the runtime is made up of interactions between human beings, not explosions and set pieces. And the set pieces that Spielberg does present are all the better for it, because the audience isn’t being inundated with adrenaline shot after adrenaline shot. They come at opportune moments, they’re impeccably crafted, and they’re wholly character-driven. Combine that balance with some of the most compelling characters put on screen, throw in a hefty dose of Harrison Ford’s charm and vulnerability, and you’ve got a recipe for an enduring masterpiece.
