They probably used the same process they were planning on using to fit the Ark on the very thin, stream-lined Flying Wing. 
The opening title card after the “Anything Goes” dance number establishes the action as Shanghai in 1935 (a year before Raiders).
And thanks for the comments, everyone. :o
:: chiming in on the ArchiveGuy love :: 
(A question for you, though: I wasn’t aware the title was changed to Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the Lost Ark. IMDB just calls it Raiders of the Lost Ark.)
I now have a question, which may be purely me failing to understand. Bear in mind I haven’t seen the film in a while, but I have, over the years, seen it quite a few times.
The question is – doesn’t at some point the John Rhys-Davies character tell Indy or Marian that the desert is “three days in every direction.” Isn’t this from the Well of the Souls dig location? From the action of the movie, it seems like the dig is just outside the city walls. Yet, after the big bloody flying wing plane scene, there’s the long Mercedes truck chases, and the vast desert, where the tank drops off into a giant canyon.
How did they get out there? Did the action just skip to this point way out in the desert? If so, why didn’t they just leave the way they came.
Or do I have it all confused?
Tank? In Raiders?
Well, I’ll be go to hell. I never twigged to the significance of the date. Oh well, you learn something new everyday. Thanks.
On the newer video and DVD releases, it’s labeled Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the Lost Ark (the actual title card in the film has been unaltered). This is because Paramount wanted all 3 films to be next to each other in video stores and retailers, which tend to organize their films alphabetically.
It’s Belloq who gives Marion the “3 days” line when she’s thinking of escaping (before they get drunk together). And it’s a car that goes off a cliff in Raiders, not a tank (that happens in Crusade).
Well, Sallah obviously came out with a workcrew, so Indy invariably tagged along on their work team. Accessing the site wouldn’t be too hard since Sallah had been hired by the Germans to participate in the dig.
That’s from Last Crusade after Donovan has their car blown up. He then tells the Nazi general it’s three days of desert in every direction and Indy is as good as dead.
That’s when Indy steals the horses (and tells Sallah “No camels.”)
Oh, and Raiders was never renamed, but all of the VHS and DVD packaging since 1999 has listed the title as “Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the Lost Ark” so stores can stock the whole series together. The title in the movie still says “Raiders of the Lost Ark.”
Who?
The title card in Temple of Doom says that it is 1935. However, in Raiders of the Lost Ark, the film begins in “Peru, 1936”.
As far as plot, logic, and continuity holes, Raiders of the Lost Ark has more of them than any three random books of the Old Testament. Even the minor details, like the San Francisco bridge being fully constructed, is wrong. If you actually sit down and think about the movie, not only does it not really make much sense, the hero is actually totally unnecessary. Had he stayed home grading term papers and reading a H. Rider Haggard novel, the result would have essentially been the same; either the Nazis (who followed Jones to Marion Ravenwood) would have never found the Ark at all, or they would have dug it up and been destroyed when they impenitently opened the Ark. And despite Brody’s final protest that the Ark has to be studied, storing it in any anonymous crate in an enormous warehouse where it will no doubt be forgotten is probably the next best thing to burying it back in the sands of Egypt. (The Bond film, Goldfinger, has similar problems.)
Some or much of this is, if not consciously intentional, at least in keeping with the blasé attitude of adventure serials toward factuality and realism. That the film works despite enormous leaps of logic, deus ex machinas, and other absurdities is part of its charm, and is entirely due to the unrelenting (but not overamped) pace of the story and the quality of characterization brought to the roles by the actors. Indiana Jones is clearly indestructible, and yet, you never get the impression in Raiders that he is without fear, even when he is doing things that are beyond foolhardy. Much of the humor comes from his overconfidence leading him into a situation where he suddenly finds himself in unanticipated peril. And the fact that his plans work, if but barely (“I’m making this up as I go along,”) is really his only edge against his opponents.
A preponderance of plot holes and unlikely coincidences doesn’t keep many people from raving about Casablanca being one of the greatest films ever made; again, the quick measured pace, snappy dialogue, involving characters, and a memorable score all make it a crowd pleaser despite its significant story problems.
As far as spotting plot holes, permit me to add a few more. [ul][li]How is it that Jones is traveling to the Peruvian temple with porters and mules though Hovitos territory, but his escape plane is a short run away from the temple?[]Why doesn’t he just climb down from the opening up top (which we can see when he swings across the pit) rather than deal with spiders, spring traps, and a rolling boulder?[]Why did the temple builders make all of these traps (out of bamboo technology, no less) which would have made it risky even for them to enter the temple? []Why and how is there a big statue in the Well of Souls that is just conveniently placed to fall through the wall, even though practically nobody is allowed in there?[]Notice that the Well of Souls is vacuum sealed when the open it up, and yet the snakes are still alive?[/ul][/li]
Stranger
Top men.
::meaningful gaze::
I think that’s what makes the movie nearly unique in cinema: the government gets its hands on a mysterious, incredibly powerful, incredibly dangerous artifact, and instead of thinking, “How can we use this as a weapon?” they wisely box it up and put it somewhere where no one can ever get their hands on it. 99% of all other movies based on this idea, the Ark would have been found in the opening scene, and the rest of the movie would be the hero trying to clean up the government’s mess, ending with him giving a heartfelt speech about not meddling in God’s domain.
I was always grumpy that Indy never answered the question, "And what did you find?’ at the end of Last Crusade. It was the perfect opportunity to sum up his experiences in the film years 1936-38 and what he came to learn/believe. Instead, we get the lame ‘He named himself after the dog.’ business.
If I EVER win the right to change one thing in any movie, ever, I will make Indy answer that particuliar question. Because, like Archive Guy , I believe that Indy had become a man of faith. But, in my mind, it was when he took the step from the Lion’s Head. But looking back, I might be convinced Indy’s ‘conversion’ (for lack of a better term - I don’t want to aver he was converted in a classical Christian sense of the word) started with Belloq and the Nazis snuffing it and was completed in the Temple of the Grail.
dang it, missed the Edit window.
The reason I believe the Moment of Truth was at the Lion’s Head was that he finally faced a challenge that he could NOT think his way through or use his physical skill/abilities to defeat, he HAD to rely on something he had no control over.
I didn’t like that Lion’s Head scene that much. The ledge would have been there had the intruder been faithfull or not.
What if the infidel intruder come blundering out at night, or just plain without paying too much attention?
The intruder would have stepped out, and realised [channeling Neo]“whoa”[/Neo], “I’m on a narrow bridge. Gotta remember to watch my step.” and proceded on. Nothing more mystical required than dumb luck.
:: Camera pulls back to reveal the question being deposited atop thousands of others in a dusty inbox, on an endless rows of cluttered desktops belonging to the Straight Dope Science Advisory Board. ::
Thanks for straightening me out on the tank/car/canyon scene, everyone. :o
Or they could just do what Indy did after he crossed the bridge. Throw a handful of sand out there and see if it falls. Not to mention the illusion was pretty ridiculous. For it to work your eyes would have to be in the perfect position and it would only work on someone with no depth perception.
Nah, it’s easier than that. In Raiders, he assumes the stories about the Ark are just myths because he already has first-hand evidence that the Hindus were right all along.
In Raiders, there is a line delivered by Belloq to Marion before they start drinking. He tells her there is no hope of escape on foot, as the desert is three weeks in every direction.
What about the glowy magic potatoes? And at some point I need to ask if ol’ Mola Ram had betrayed Shiva, and if so was Indy right? Or was it mind games?
On how Indy knew to close his eyes: In the original screenplay, when they read the back of the amulet, there’s also a warning about not looking. This got cut somewhere along the editing process.
My son had a RAIDERS picture book, that still had that warning given to Indy as a pre-shadowing. He was always bothered that the book and movie were different, and we found out why way back then.
You know, I think I had the same book. It also depicted the original, pre-dysentary, whip v. swordfight scene in the marketplace. Although, I think mine was a coloring book, not just a picture book.