I Rather Enjoy True Lies, Actually

Both of these stills have a lot to say, obviously. Otherwise, I suppose, they wouldn't be the stills we were given. I'm going to try to take the stills out of the context of the movies from which they are derived, because there are some points that are made debatable when you consider the original context. As an example, looked at in context, I wouldn't find these two pictures to be fair examples of progression in representation of Arabs, since one is a picture of affluent royalty, and the other is street peasants. So, then, context be damned.
In the still from Lawrence of Arabia, we see Peter O'Toole, a European, standing in the midst of the wealthiest the Arab world has to offer. He is portrayed in white, with a relatively simple outfit. The design is very clean, the colors simple, the flow is all well done. He even has a halo on his head. He is clean, poised, civilized. In comparison, his Arabian hosts have darker outfits, with more complicated designs and colors. While they don't necessarily look dirty, many of them have beards or mustaches, or have their outfits slightly off-kilter. They have headdresses that are more complicated, and so look less graceful. The frame around O'Toole's face is completely symmetrical. Their headdresses, on the other hand, have slight variations here and there. Small, yes, but important. It gives the impression that, while O'Toole is in the midst of the most cultured people Arabia has to offer, they are still not as cultured and dignified as he.
The still from Raiders of the Lost Ark shows Indiana Jones facing off with a villain, dressed in very plain black, surrounded by white-adorned peasants. The villain, as all villains do, looks like he is enjoying the prospect of a fight. The crowd is there for the spectacle, to watch the fight about to unfold. They are, it could be suggested, so uncultured that a fight is the most entertaining thing they will find all day. The prospect of the bloodbath is very enticing to them. Indiana looks reluctant, and tired, like it's been a struggle. Our sympathies naturally go to him, by nature both of his pose and his being the main character. Again, though, put into context, this movie was a pastiche of serial films from the 1940s and 50s, so its representation of Arabs doesn't reflect the then-modern sensibility, but the sensibilities of a culture thirty-odd years prior.
In current times, men and women from the Middle East are typically the villain. This is a product of both recent events and the fact that anybody with an exotic accent automatically makes a better villain than someone from the same country as the primary audience. This has been the case since the earliest movies. The villain has always come from somewhere else. I know, not ALWAYS, but close enough. Even novels have used mysterious foreigners as villains. They're mysterious and, well, foreign. You are more inclined to believe them capable of whatever heinous, unspeakable atrocities they commit than you are of someone who looks a lot like your neighbour. Of course, this supposes that your neighbours aren't of Middle-Eastern descent, and that's something that's changing rapidly, so never mind that
Portraying colonized peoples in the lights in which they so often were, and are, portrayed is a simple way of making the subjects of the nation, we'll go with England for sake of argument, feel better about what they're doing. It's a result of the culture because the culture is what makes it okay for a group to always be portrayed in the same way, and it justifies the culture by making the people who create the culture feel better about the culture in which they reside. Very confusing, but it's been working for centuries.