New at BOP: Review: Matrix Resurrections Movie Review: Moonfall Movie Reviews: Scream The #1 Movie in America November Forecast The Many Saints of Newark October Forecast New Trivia Question All site updates Share & Save   Tweet Print this column

Indiana Jones

Now bear with me. As much as I grew to strongly dislike last summer's Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, I can't ignore the fact that the Indiana Jones series was classic before that film was released, and is still a classic to this day. We can go over what the fourth film in the series did wrong on another day (and we could start with Indy inside a refrigerator, if you like), but today, we look at the positive. The Indiana Jones series was originally a 1980s trilogy, films about the adventures of a daring archaeologist always looking to get his hands on treasured relics so they could be properly kept in museums as opposed to held by greedy thieves. Played by Harrison Ford (who had a nice string of movies starting with the Star Wars trilogy and this series), Jones is not only a breathtaking adventurer, but a great romantic lead, and witty to boot. Steven Spielberg, who directed the entire series, brought a love for old-style serials to this franchise, imbuing everything with a winking sense of fun. The first film, 1981's Raiders of the Lost Ark, is one of the great films of the past 30 years, filled with memorable action scenes, weaselly villains ("Nazis...I hate those guys"), and great chemistry between Ford and female lead Karen Allen; unfortunately, that chemistry was not revitalized last summer, but that's another story. Despite the many flaws of the fourth film, the Indiana Jones franchise lives on in its original three films, all of which are good or great; admit it, the mine train scene in Temple of Doom rules. Just pretend that Indy never stepped into that refrigerator.

Harry Potter

I'm making a fervent wish here that I'm proven right by this choice. Though the wildly popular Harry Potter franchise hasn't yet finished its run (with the sixth film coming out this July, and two final films to follow in 2010 and 2011), each of the films have a rare and unique quality: they're not only all good films, but they're all better than their predecessors. Though people do give a lot of hate to the series' first director, Chris Columbus, for making the films too faithful and rigid to the source material, his second and final time behind the camera, Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, was a vast improvement in every way from the first film. The major leap into greatness, though, was made by Alfonso Cuaron, who helmed the third film, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban. Though it kept some plotlines out and was shorter than the other films, Prisoner of Azkaban was strongly acted, colorful, and the direction was more fluid and open than anyone could have imagined. The following films improved even further, giving the lead characters a dose of realism that the fantastical story (about a boy wizard, but you knew that, didn't you?) couldn't automatically lend. David Yates, who took the reins for the fifth film and is behind the camera for the remaining installments, made Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix menacing, dark, and creepy while also having enough lightness so as to not damper everyone's mood. He also made the longest book in the Harry Potter series into the shortest, yet freshest film, which is no small feat. As a big fan, I can only hope that Yates and company will make the rest of the films as memorable and awesome as those that followed it. If the trend stays the same, I and the many other Harry Potter fans have nothing to worry about.

Continued:       1       2       3