Is TLC Anyone Else's Least Favorite?

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I'm surprised to see so many people offended that Marcus Brody was played for comic relief in TLC. TLC has its lion's share (no pun intended) of problems but I've never seen Marcus as being one of them. He was a bit character in Raiders with a small handful of minutes on screen and didn't appear in TOD at all. Hardly a sacred icon of cinema.
 
I'm surprised to see so many people offended that Marcus Brody was played for comic relief in TLC. TLC has its lion's share (no pun intended) of problems but I've never seen Marcus as being one of them. He was a bit character in Raiders with a small handful of minutes on screen and didn't appear in TOD at all. Hardly a sacred icon of cinema.

Raiders painted Brody as more or less an "M" (007) character. Imagine if M had ended up a bumbling stooge in a Bond film.
 
Raiders painted Brody as more or less an "M" (007) character. Imagine if M had ended up a bumbling stooge in a Bond film.

Hear Hear. They completely changed his character. His "small handful of minutes" in Raiders painted him as an intelligent, experienced former-archeologist. He maintains that character in the first half of LC. Next thing you know, he got "lost in his own museum" and bumbles his way out of a train station. He doesn't have to be a sacred icon to be a beloved character that went from "cool to fool" because some comedy relief was required.
 
Agreed that they ruined Marcus in LC... Despite being a minor part in Raiders, he had a very smooth, intelligent calm about him. They way he casually handles Indy getting all ramped up about going back after the idol when they talk in his classroom.. He kind of exuded this steadiness that balanced Indy's eagerness... So yeah.. when he turned into a clown in LC I was also disappointed... Agreed on the comparison to 007's M too... Same vein in that he was the steady rock that kept things on track..
 
Exactly and TLC ruined Sallah, too. He was a good character in ROTLA and he also became clownish in TLC. Needless to say, he wasn't missed in KOTCS.
 
I just remember when i saw it back in 89, the three trials was about to start, so i thought this is pretty sweet. But then it happened and it felt really rushed. Like they were trying to time the movie to finish abit sooner.
Connery is really funny imo, but the effects are terrible.
 
As good as Connery was in the film it annoys me a bit that Indy gets overshadowed in his own movie at times. His name is in the title and he's the character I expect to be the main one, not one of his family members. KOTCS suffered from the same problem, Indy feeling more like he was along for the ride with his family rather than the other way around as it was with the supporting characters in the first two. I far prefer the more rogue, mysterious Indy of the first two. He has people along helping him in his quest but is still leading the way.
 
Hear Hear. They completely changed his character. His "small handful of minutes" in Raiders painted him as an intelligent, experienced former-archeologist. He maintains that character in the first half of LC. Next thing you know, he got "lost in his own museum" and bumbles his way out of a train station. He doesn't have to be a sacred icon to be a beloved character that went from "cool to fool" because some comedy relief was required.

I've got to wonder if there was a re-write somewhere mid-shoot. As a character goes, Marcus does shift considerably from the first act to his re-appearance in the second.
 
I don't dislike TLC but you hit the nail on the head with it's many problems. That's another thing I forgot to mention, how shoddy and cheap some of the effects look, especially the blue/green screen. Hard not to be distracted sometimes when I watch the film.

It's not just the effects that look cheap. A lot of the production value seems cheapened somehow, far less extravagent than what we saw previously in Temple of Doom and Raiders. Castle Brunwald in particular; It's supposed to be an actual historical castle and instead looks like the pre-fab film set that Neville Sinclair's "The Laughing Bandit" was being shot on in Disney's The Rocketeer.
 
I notice that too, it looks like it's somewhat lower-budgeted and at times sort of looks a bit made for TV-like, whereas Raiders and TOD and even KOTCS feel far grander-scale and bigger than life. You don't really get that feeling from TLC despite it harkening back to the globe-trotting formula of Raiders.

Another thing is the setpieces aren't nearly as interesting barring the catacombs and the caverns near the end. One of the things about the temple in TOD is it felt "alive" somehow and had so much detail. TLC doesn't really have that "alive" feeling, if that makes any sense.
 
I notice that too, it looks like it's somewhat lower-budgeted and at times sort of looks a bit made for TV-like, whereas Raiders and TOD and even KOTCS feel far grander-scale and bigger than life. You don't really get that feeling from TLC despite it harkening back to the globe-trotting formula of Raiders.

Another thing is the setpieces aren't nearly as interesting barring the catacombs and the caverns near the end. One of the things about the temple in TOD is it felt "alive" somehow and had so much detail. TLC doesn't really have that "alive" feeling, if that makes any sense.

Exactly. The production of the first two films is far more lavish and interesting. Just compare the Thugee's sacrificial "altar", the towering, gruesomely ornate sigil of Kali, the mine tunnels, Pankot Palace in TOD or the Tannis map room, the Ark of the Covenant's crypt, or the flying wing in Raiders to the by comparison bland set pieces in TLC.
 
I still find it strange that people are up in arms about Marcus specifically when the entire film is an *action comedy.* Indiana Jones himself is a bumbling cringe-worthy doofus for good portions of the film but Marcus' portrayal is drawing all of this fan ire?

TLC has a completely different tone than Raiders from beginning to end so of course this translates to the characters themselves. Don't get me wrong, I agree that TLC was a huge step down on all levels but zeroing in on Marcus in light of the entirety of the film's much bigger issues still seems a bit silly.

The Marcus Brody from Raiders would have felt even more out of place in TLC than the one we got. I guess the reason that I can't join with those who are up in arms about his portrayal is that as comedy relief Marcus actually works. I remember many of his moments getting some of the biggest laughs in the theater and I saw it multiple times on the big screen in 1989. He's only "off" if you directly compare him to his scenes in Raiders. But by that logic every single moment in TLC is off so who cares at that point.
 
Last edited:
I didn't like how Indy himself was played for laughs in TLC, either. For all the complaining many fans have about the fridge in KOTCS and whatnot, I find the "Scottish lord" scene a worse offender. Indy isn't a character I like to see played for laughs and made silly like that. Which for me is a major problem of the film, it's so comedic and cartoony which undermines the tension and the movie is deliberately humorous, whereas in the others the humor comes naturally and not to the detriment of everything else.
 
That’s a good point. It’s as if Spielberg, Lucas and company were thinking, “Right, after going so dark with TOD, we need to get back to the “fun” of Raiders! Everyone always says how “fun” Raiders is, right? Let’s make the next one fun again!”

But they missed the point of what made Raiders “fun”. It was the thrills and dangers, and the clever ways Indy got out of trouble. It wasn’t “fun” because it was lighthearted and funny. It was fun because it was a thrilling edge of your seat adventure with real danger that the characters just barely escape. The small bits of humor work in the previous movies because they’re there to balance off the real perils and close calls. They’re a great release after an intense scene that winds up the audience.

Of course, I actually wouldn’t mind a “funny” Indy movie if it was actually, you know, funny. Take Star Trek 4 for example. That was a real tonal shift from the previous movies, and pretty risky to take a beloved franchise and make a comedy. But it worked because the characters were true to themselves and the humor arose from the situations they were in. And the Marvel movies are pretty funny too (although their quality is highly debatable around here!). So it’s possible to make a good comedy action movie. But it’s damn hard and you better be sure you get it right.

Getting back to the shoddy effects in TLC, I do have to point out that TOD also has a couple of bad scenes. The group riding the raft down the mountain with the rear projection looks incredibly cheap. And wide shot of the group on the side of the cliff with the water bursting out also looks pretty bad, and did back then too.
 
Indeed. TLC confuses fun with funny, which wasn't a wise move. The humor in the first two was used to great effect to ease the tension and throw you off-guard for when the danger hit again and it hit ever so hard, especially with TOD. There's so many close calls in the first two movies and you feel like Indy could die at any time, but in TLC you never really get that feeling at all.

Yeah, there are a few not so good effects shots in TOD, some are dated-looking. It happens with so many older films, after a while certain effects can be noticable, especially in this day and age of HD and Blu-ray. I love the mine cart chase to death but it's very easy to spot the dolls they used in the miniatures. Which I find more amusing than anything.
 
Indeed. TLC confuses fun with funny, which wasn't a wise move. The humor in the first two was used to great effect to ease the tension and throw you off-guard for when the danger hit again and it hit ever so hard, especially with TOD. There's so many close calls in the first two movies and you feel like Indy could die at any time, but in TLC you never really get that feeling at all.

Yeah, there are a few not so good effects shots in TOD, some are dated-looking. It happens with so many older films, after a while certain effects can be noticable, especially in this day and age of HD and Blu-ray. I love the mine cart chase to death but it's very easy to spot the dolls they used in the miniatures. Which I find more amusing than anything.

Much better put than me! :)
 
I didn't like how Indy himself was played for laughs in TLC, either. For all the complaining many fans have about the fridge in KOTCS and whatnot, I find the "Scottish lord" scene a worse offender. Indy isn't a character I like to see played for laughs and made silly like that. Which for me is a major problem of the film, it's so comedic and cartoony which undermines the tension and the movie is deliberately humorous, whereas in the others the humor comes naturally and not to the detriment of everything else.

Yeah and I didn't like how emasculated and pathetic he was made to be with regard to his advances toward Elsa. A far cry from the aloof badass who went out of his way to put his hat over his face to show his indifference towards Willie Scott who herself was portrayed as being something of a mini-celebrity.
 
I didn't care for that, either. The movie tried to make Indy something of a kinder, gentler character when I liked him just fine as the tougher than nails adventurer he was in the first two who still had a heart as evidenced by him going out of his way to free the slave children in TOD.

Another thing I always disliked is the revelation he stole his fedora and jacket look from the guy at the beginning. To me that just cheapened him, to think his signature look wasn't even originally his own and he stole it from someone else. It made him feel inauthentic, for lack of a better term.
 
That’s a good point. It’s as if Spielberg, Lucas and company were thinking, “Right, after going so dark with TOD, we need to get back to the “fun” of Raiders! Everyone always says how “fun” Raiders is, right? Let’s make the next one fun again!”

But they missed the point of what made Raiders “fun”. It was the thrills and dangers, and the clever ways Indy got out of trouble. It wasn’t “fun” because it was lighthearted and funny. It was fun because it was a thrilling edge of your seat adventure with real danger that the characters just barely escape. The small bits of humor work in the previous movies because they’re there to balance off the real perils and close calls. They’re a great release after an intense scene that winds up the audience.

Of course, I actually wouldn’t mind a “funny” Indy movie if it was actually, you know, funny. Take Star Trek 4 for example. That was a real tonal shift from the previous movies, and pretty risky to take a beloved franchise and make a comedy. But it worked because the characters were true to themselves and the humor arose from the situations they were in. And the Marvel movies are pretty funny too (although their quality is highly debatable around here!). So it’s possible to make a good comedy action movie. But it’s damn hard and you better be sure you get it right.

Getting back to the shoddy effects in TLC, I do have to point out that TOD also has a couple of bad scenes. The group riding the raft down the mountain with the rear projection looks incredibly cheap. And wide shot of the group on the side of the cliff with the water bursting out also looks pretty bad, and did back then too.

I don't think "fun" is the word you're looking for. Rather, it's "safe".
 
Back
Top