"Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the Lost Ark" Movie Review Essay & Film Analysis

This picture of Steven Spielberg's classic adventure spirit came out in 1981 after a series of well-known works such as 'Jaws', 'Close Encounters of the Third Kind', and less well-known - "The Sugarland Express" and the television movie 'Duel'. And was not an example of them unsuccessful. Not in terms of success in the audience or fees (budget was surpassed in the world more than 20 times), and on the nature of the plot, which started all the other films of the same genre. Of course, for the cinema, he is ideal, for the sake of such a sight, and go to the movies. And Spielberg, at the beginning of his career, the director catches the desired manner of filming this movie, turned in the end on the path of pure spectacle, keeping, however, in some studies the elements of good fiction (I have seen, not all of his movies and I can not judge about the big picture) . A first example - 'Raiders of the Lost Ark' and we all know 'Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the Lost Ark'
before us a film to dump full of all sorts of clichés, which in future will use all and sundry, to be exact. those who simply had nothing else to say in his films. Benefit more in this film, they were probably the place seemed fresh and interesting. Especially after the strangely fascinating story of contact with extraterrestrials in the previous major Spielberg film people just rested soul, watching Harrison Ford mutuzit fists Arabs and the Nazis. Let us more detail on the expensive clichés heart. The main hero, Indiana Jones - in the everyday life of an intelligent teacher with glasses that at call of duty turns into a specialist in archaeological findings and in general the whole 'mysterious'; he wears his trademark hat, a belt clings to the indispensable companion, known as a whip, and goes in search of nothing less than the Ark of the precepts of Moses. No one can find these three millennia, and suddenly Hitler, obsessed with the occult (which, in principle, true) begins new digs. And the noble defender of archaeological antiquities taken ahead of the leader of Nazi Germany. Handsome adventurer with burning eyes, unshaven, but with the ever-beaming smile all shoulder: it do not take no ingenious traps in the tombs, nor spear nor arrow, nor gunfire - from all dangers by upbeat music triumphant hero, under which at the time ride in the cavalry charge, it comes out the winner. The entire movie - except that trifling wound in the shoulder and a couple dozen hated to death of snakes, frayed nerves. And as a reward due Beauty-companion, which Jones had once broken heart, but now is back to regain it. However, beauty is not easy, with the character and can-drink any man; her, over a couple of times kidnapped for decency, and then pulled by an all in the same shirt, in which it was in the abduction. Provided as a rival archaeologist - too handsome, in a white suit, which is like a 'dark' side of Jones. Well, where do without German soldiers who brave archaeologist knocks packs, except for one big man, so to speak 'boss' (they will then be an indispensable part of the adventure of Dr. Jones), who had a good stuffing Jones's face, and then still is neutralized how someday bloodthirsty way. Let's not forget about the already mentioned the tomb with traps (this is just a classic), of which Indy will always find a way to get at the last minute. Oh yeah - the ending, where the Nazis struck wrath of God, simply a masterpiece, but it must be seen. Maybe I missed that, but I think quite enough.
share my sarcasm against this film is intended only to draw attention to its obvious shortcomings, not to ridicule and curse subjective. Perhaps, it is called 'Raiders of the Lost Ark' cult film, although it does not compare with the magnitude of a little previously removed 'Star Wars'. And then on the face of a certain general naivety in shooting two pictures with the intention to bring to view the most simple and enticing way - to show full-bodied, but not compelling adventure story. It is no accident that the film Spielberg and Lucas had a hand, it is really felt. And Harrison Ford, the actor, of course, a very good and charming, doubly attracted attention in the role of Indiana Jones for his role as Han Solo. But it's not even in the running mate Chewbacca. A lone hero, for whom even a few dozen opponents - a piece of cake, no problem, have always been and remain popular. And I must say, the first film about John McClane was better, though, and breathed the same air saturated stamps.
I repeat, I am not a film about the iconic archaeologist with bias and deliberate contempt. I remember, as a teenager he I even liked the plot seemed incredibly exciting, and weaving it such 'tough artifact', as the Ark, only strengthened the impression. So, in my opinion, this kind of movie and fit the audience of adolescent and grown up people to use the Ark or the Holy Grail as a mystical notes of the story must seem childish games severe mother. The result is that the 'Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the Lost Ark' and all its sequels (alas, each time repeating itself, and to the fourth part - all turned into some kind of insanity) - typical of a spectacular movie, no better than the others and does not worse still many. And you can see it sometimes on TV for entertainment or educational purposes once, paying tribute to the cult. But what is important - the cult, most popular and significant impact on the future of work in the film is in no way affect the quality of a particular movie, do not do it in some particularly good effect as an exception. This movie does not age with time, and there is not the style or power equipment and special effects; there is a special spirit in him nested views and put questions are always relevant. This movie is not this too much, more than just a good, but also to this category, I can not classify films about Indiana Jones. That is my opinion on this matter. And I would be glad to listen to objections, and not just a lot of dumb 'No' in my review. Thank you for your attention.
6 of 10

How to cite this essay: