So I just finished watching Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, which is awesome in its own respect, and I hopped onto my PS3 and started playing Uncharted 2 when I got a sudden thought: "Why am I watching a movie and playing a game alone on a Saturday night?" Then I had a second thought: "Who is better between these two?" Then I had a third thought: "Where did my pants go?"
After locating my pants, I continued to wonder about who the better adventurer would be. They're both great characters, but to put it simply, one has to be better than the other... Or else why bother writing an article critiquing them?
Story:
Since each of the games/movies have individual stories, it's hard to simply say that one piece of media has a better plot than the other. mostly because they theoretically get better the longer the series proceeds, with the fourth Indy movie being the exception to the rule. As a result I'll pick one game and one movie to analyze. Picking one through three, I choose to go with the first game: Uncharted: Drake's Fortune and Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the Lost Ark.
Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the Lost Ark kicked off the Indy series really well. You have a globetrotting archeologist with a grizzled face and a kick ass whip. He gets commissioned to find the Ark of the Covenant and keep it away from the Nazis. Of course the guy who commissioned him is himself working with the Nazis, but is that going to stop Indy? Hell no! In the end Indy get's the girl, lets the Nazi's melt, and allows his discovery to be locked away so the Government can keep it in storage.
Uncharted: Drakes Fortune follows the wacky misadventures of Nathan Drake as he tries to uncover the secret of his ancestor, Francis Drake's, quest to find the lost city of EL Dorado. Along the way he must fight mercenaries, get revenge for his "murdered" friend, and keep his spunky female sidekick alive. In the end he finds his ancestor's remains, finds his friend alive, and has to fight crazed mutant Spainards for some reason. While this was awesome, the ending was lackluster, however. Having to kill someone that you have no investment in killing didn't make a lot of sense.
As a result, a point goes to Indy for making those dastardly Nazi's melt.
Main Character:
Indiana Jones was a rough guy who everyone immediately liked, mostly because he exemplified all the bad-assery that heroes need to have. Likewise, Nathan Drake is also a badass who isn't afraid to get his hands dirty. Where they differ is that Indiana Jones is like the paragon of goodness. To speak in terms of Dungeons and Dragons, he is Lawful Good. As seen in all his movies (most notably in The Temple of Doom), everything belongs in a museum to this guy and he won't allow anyone to steal it or cause harm to others. Nathan Drake would be Unlawful Good; as his long term investment is in fact the money, fame and fortune. He's a treasure hunter in the same regards as Lara Croft. However Lara Croft can use daddy's money to pay her way out of any situation, where Drake has to resort to whatever he can afford. He's willing to go the distance to get what he wants by any means nessecary. I'd give the point to Drake except for one thing: Indiana Jones is played by FUCKING HAN SOLO.
Point: Han Solo.
Supporting Characters:
Okay, there has really only been two characters that have proven their worth to Indiana Jones: Marcus Brody and Sallah. Every other character that Indy has run into was nothing but a foil or a dredge. Ignoring that horrible Shaia Lebouff character, you have Marin (Raiders of the Lost Ark), who could out drink a Tibetian Homeless guy but got captured by an effeminate professor/NAZI, Willy (Temple of Doom), who's best line was "AAAAAAAAAAAH" over and over and FUCKING OVER AGAIN, Shortround, who was an insanely racist take on a Chinese person, that one Nazi lady who fell down a hole, and James Bo- I mean Sean Connery, who should have won worst father of the year.
Now look at Nathan Drake. He's got Sullivan, who's a mentor/partner that helps out and hooks him up with useful info, Chloe who is simply banging, and finally Elena who would be equal to Willy yet is stronger and independent and won't scream unless she is falling off the side a cliff.
Nathan Drake scores a point.
Replay/Rewatchability:
This isn't even a competition. While I love playing the Uncharted games, once I beat them, they sit on the shelf. Sure there is multiplayer but it's not enough to keep me as occupied as other games have.
However, I can watch the Indiana Jones movies over and over again. There's a unique charm to them that makes them fun to watch. Maybe it's because Nazis get killed, or maybe it's just because every boy in the nineties watched the Indy flicks religiously. Every weekend, they would have the Indiana Jones movies on USA or TNT and we could recite the lines from heart.
Point: Indy.
Overall, it's safe to say that Indiana Jones is the better Adventure series. At least it was. Looking at it, I tend to avoid speaking about the latest movie. Why? It's simply horrible and makes Indiana Jones look cartoony. Which I would find acceptable if the series was cartoony at it's roots. While you could argue that they are, I'd find the series to be more mystical and paranormal. In The Last Crusade, the elderly knight thinks Indy is a fellow knight and I'd like to agree. He is a knight of the 1920's and 1930's. That doesn't mean he should fucking fight aliens or anything.
Fuck it, I'm just going to watch Dune instead.
Totally not gay
