Posted this on the main Indy sub as well and figure why not also share it here, it's Indy-related. Your super, ultra unpopular and controversial Indy opinions. Not just controversial but downright blasphemous. Opinions that you think would land you in a similar position as one John Wick in the picture. And I mean unpopular, not ones that are commonly held like "Raiders is the best movie ever," "Last Crusade is the best and better than the rest," "Crystal Skull and Dial Of Destiny suck," "I hate Willie and Short Round," "Temple Of Doom is too dark and violent," "Nazis should always be the villains," etc. I'm talking extremely unpopular and not widely held ones.

I've definitely got my share of scorching hot takes on the series for sure. Get ready, some of these takes burn hotter than the lava under Pankot Palace.

* While I still really like it and think it's a good film and a worthy capper to the original trilogy, Last Crusade is honestly probably my least favorite of all five. It's still a very good movie and I enjoy it a lot, but for some reason just not as much as the rest and it doesn't strike as strong a chord with me. I guess just because it comes off as such a redux of the first film and isn't as intense as the first two? Probably my most unpopular IJ opinion and one I'm not sure how many others here also share it (I'd imagine there's probably others but they likely keep quiet about it). I'd be curious if there's others who share this, it being such an exceptionally unpopular and uncommon opinion.

* Temple Of Doom is the best of the series and the one truest to the classic adventure serials. The installment that best epitomizes Indy and his world. It also feels like the last truly intense Indy film and the last one that wasn't afraid to take chances to do different things with the character and concept.

* Crystal Skull and Dial Of Destiny are both good. Neither is perfect and without flaws, but I felt they were as good as could've been coming so many years after the fact and Harrison being much older. DOD was a satisfying finale.

* Short Round is the best sidekick (not sure if this is unpopular?).

* Willie Scott isn't that bad. Sure she screams a lot but how else is she supposed to react in her situation? She's supposed to represent the audience in her position.

* Likewise, I also don't mind Helena and Teddy in DOD. Helena at first was sufferable but got better by the end.

* Sallah was a good character in Raiders but had no purpose for being in more movies after that. He was reduced to useless (and downright annoying) comic relief in TLC and while his role in DOD was better, he still felt he was there mainly for fan service.

* Nazis as the villains all the time is boring and unneeded. I felt re-using them in both TLC and DOD was a big flaw and it especially feels dull and uninspired in TLC. They worked in Raiders but after that, I would've preferred different and varied enemies per movie.

* I didn't mind the aliens in KOTCS and felt it fit in with the time and zeitgeist in which the movie was set. Truth be told, I think more alien and extraterrestrial-oriented relics would've been cool to have seen throughout the series.

* Likewise, I also don't mind the time travel aspects of DOD. Again, something different outside of the usual Judeo-Christian relics.

Posted this on the main Indy sub and feel it fits here as well being Indy-related and all. I know the general consensus is that Raiders and Last Crusade are the two best of the series. People tend to be very 50/50 on TOD and while both KOTCS and DOD are generally lesser-received both have their share of fans and defenders. I've always been much more partial to both Raiders and TOD. Who else also regards both Raiders and TOD as the best of the series, even if it's not exactly the most popular or commonly held view?

Raiders is the one that started it all and is damn near perfect. Lightning in a bottle and it was such a great homage to the classic adventure serials and pulp comics while at the same time totally being it's own unique beast. Very classy and exceptionally well-crafted. TOD was even more alike the pulp adventure serials with it's tone and distinct visual style, and also went a bit into EC Comics territory with it's darker, more Horror-like tone and mix of Horror and some grossout with bizarre humor. TOD was also the last Indy film that felt "dangerous" for lack of a better word, before how massively toned down TLC was made. Good as TLC is, it wasn't the best move to basically have it be Raiders Part II and increase the slapstick and gags. It also much of the time doesn't even have the "pulpy" feel of the first two and feels more like a spy film. I'm not the biggest fan of it's more family-friendly tone after the more Horror-like and intense TOD, which really ratcheted things up the way any good sequel/prequel should. TLC is still a good film but it just doesn't quite grab me the same way it's predecessors do. I missed the more dangerous feeling the first two had that TLC lacked much of the time, and was definitely something lacking from the latter two as well.

I'm sure others get where I'm coming from. All five films are solid and there isn't one I don't enjoy. But for me when it comes to Indy, I feel the series peaked early with the first two. I always wished the series had kept the much more hard-edged tone and approach of the first two. I always have to wonder if not for TOD's backlash how the remainder of the saga might've been affected. Who else here agrees the first two as the best?

For those who don’t know: Alfred Molina, who played Satipo also played Dr Octavius from Spiderman 2 (2004 movie).

Prepare for the ultimate Alex Arnold Labor Day West Coast Weekend Experience.

Credit to: https://babylonbee.com/news/trump-names-harrison-ford-as-2nd-greatest-president-in-history