Theatrical Review of Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull

Let's face it, the movie was really awful. Sure the beginning was up to par for Indiana Jones, but once the bomb went off...well, let just say that was that. Lucas and Spielberg need to learn that CG monkey's are not the answer to a movie's problems..Its a great script and using terrific actors to their full potential. Time to get back back to basics and stop ruining their legacies.

DELETED BECAUSE OF SPOILERS.

---

[Post edited by tylerdurden on May 25, 2008]

yeah this movie sucked! i was gonna buy the blu ray set when they came out but i think ill just keep my dvd set without the 4th film, wow!!!!!!! lucas, spelberg, and harrison ford, never thought that combo would ever make something this bad

tylerdurden,

Does the word "spoilers" mean anything to you, or were you purposely trying to ruin the movie for people who haven't seen it?

John

It was a good movie, not like the original three, but decent enough. I would give it a B-. I wasn't really into the skull story, I have a hard time believing thats the best script they had.

Now, in fairness to the new "Indy," I liked it more than I expected I would and, apparently, a little more than Jason did.

No, it isn't the old "Indy," but who among us is the same person we used to be? The new film does its best to reference not just the older "Indy" films but as many cultural icons of the fifties as possible--thus, the inclusion of flying saucers and aliens, very big deals in the movies and in the general culture of the 1950s.

But, no, the new movie doesn't quite capture the magic of the first movies, despite the actors' best intentions. I blame a script that doesn't establish relationships well enough and goes for too much spectacle and chases, especially at the end. If "Raiders" is a 10/10, "Crusade" is a 9/10, and "Doom" is an 8/10, I'd give "Indy 4" a 7/10. Still, that's pretty close to the 6/10 Jason gave it, so maybe we're not so far apart after all.

John

---

[Post edited by John J. Puccio on May 26, 2008]

If Crusade is a "9/10" then Eddie is going to be named "People's" Sexiest Man next year.

Seriously, it's a really bad movie. It's the Phantom Menace of the franchise.

Temple of Doom gets short shrift though - darn good popcorn flick.

I was planning to see Crystal Skull this week but now I hear it has cute CGI animals in it. WTF?

The fourth installment of the whip-cracking professor's exploits, "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull," grossed an estimated $101 million from Friday to Sunday, plus $25 million from its opening Thursday.

That would put it behind only "Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End," which had a Friday-through-Monday total of $139.8 million, in the pantheon of Memorial Day weekend blockbusters.

"This is the definition of a summer movie from two of the architects of the summer movie season — George Lucas and Steven Spielberg," he said. "These guys have it down to a science and audiences want to go along for that ride."

The first three Indy movies took in $1.2 billion worldwide.

Disney's action sequel, "The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian," slipped to second place with $23 million, for a total of $91.1 million over two weeks. The company expected the movie to continue to play well as school lets out.

Marvel Studios' "Iron Man" clinched another $20.1 million, bringing its domestic total to $252.3 million. A sequel is set for release in 2010.

Fox senior vice president Bert Livingstone said high gas prices were encouraging people to see movies rather than take long trips away from home.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080525/ap_en_mo/box_office_ylt=Ajx.Mfd63bnqB0vfE1_TJYpxFb8C

Deleted since Tyler was nice enough to remove his spoilers.

---

[Post edited by Tim Raynor on May 28, 2008]

Can someone delete Tylerdurdens post? I didn't read all of it but it killed some of the movie for me.

lololol

---

[Post edited by xplaytendo on May 26, 2008]

You know, I realize some people don't mind having the film spoiled for them, but I on the other hand DO! IMO, him and others that post spoilers without warning should be worthy of getting banned from the site! Again, just my opinion.

I would be happy with someone editng the post with something to the effect of...

SPOILERS!!

Quote:
I would be happy with someone editng the post with something to the effect of...

SPOILERS!!

I agree, Falcon. As long as they post a "SPOLIERS" warning, I have no problem with it. It's when they don't it just pisses me off to no end!

---

[Post edited by Tim Raynor on May 28, 2008]

How many members on that list?

this wasn't a stinker, but the primary creative forces were definitely on auto-pilot.

i don't blame the CGI, which simply replaced stuntspeople and matte paintings (which look as fake and terrible as CGI backgrounds).

i blame the script, which was plot- and exposition-heavy without devoting much time to character developments and casual conversations between friends.

the villain was boring--blanchett had no presence and pales in comparison to the bespectacled nazi in "raiders", mola ram in "doom", and dr. elsa schneider in "last crusade".

it took more than 15 years for lucas to come up with this story??? (N)

Quote:
it took more than 15 years for lucas to come up with this story??? (N)

He was busy with the masterpieces which were the SW prequels, Eddie!!!!!

Jason, cynical

Again, as I mentioned on the "I saw KOTC..." thread, the movie was good, except for the first 15 or so minutes, when it's just rough and odd...

But the rest, on par with any of the sequels, even better...good thing I hadn't read this thread, or the spoilers would've done it for me ...

Again, four crystal skulls, out of five...

here's something for you:

Tyler is obviously trying to piss people off and you have now made his day.

Haven't seen it yet, didin't read much of Durden post. Other than saw the word aliens. Geesh. I wasn't a huge Indy fan in the begininng and now just purchased the three previous movies for $24.99 the other day. Now I'm wondering if I should bother. DAMN, Damn, damn... As I fade off into the sunset...

Reaggie, DO BOTHER...all of them are great popcorn movies...

Oh, and chocolate chip cookies are not my favorite...

For any one that saw this, why did it look like what ever was suposed to be the visual focus at any given time was poping out of the screan, or rather it looked like the back ground was overly far back? I don't know why but the movie just looked stange when I saw it

I more or less hated this film...greatest flaw, even disregarding the nearly endless list, was the shift from the more pure energy and fun of the originals, to a new slick, manufactured feel. And as for all the Lucas bashing, this was more of Spielberg's affair, from what I understand, Lucas was pretty displeased with where the film was going from the start, and is now simply trying to make off with what he can.

I knew I would be reading this kind of talk last week. I'll take that cookie!

Note to self-"Preserve fond childhood memories. Learn from the mistake of watching SW prequels. Skip this and wait for the DARK KNIGHT.."

---

[Post edited by bladerunner1 on May 27, 2008]

Quote:
Note to self-"Preserve fond childhood memories. Learn from the mistake of watching SW prequels. Skip this and wait for the DARK KNIGHT.."

LOL. I feel you pain on that one and can relate.

We still have plenty of films left...but don't skip Indy, you'll regret it...oh, just disregard the first 15 minutes of the film...and those meerkats?? What was all that about??

I'll keep it short:

wolfen's opinion/review of the newest Indy installment...

L A M E!

---

[Post edited by wolfen on May 28, 2008]

Quote:
wolfen's opinion/review of the newest Indy installment...

L A M E!

Cool, now I know it's a good movie!

Quote:
Cool, now I know it's a good movie!

Tim, how's this...

Jason's opinion: it's meh. Some good parts, some not too good parts. Nowhere near the other three. Blanchett is wasted, the end over CGI'd and the magic is gone.

Good enough?

Jason, mine is the only opinion which counts (joking)

Jason,

My reaction ^^ was just because Wolfen is my mortal enemy! It's just a fun thing between us, no big deal.

I did read your review, I just don't have a rebuttal at this time because I still yet have to see it. It's certainly getting a mixed bag of comments here, much more negative than RT, but I'll just have to see for myself. My trusted critic, John Puccio, enjoyed it, so I most likely will have the same reaction.

Tim

---

[Post edited by Tim Raynor on May 29, 2008]

I'm only playing with you Tim.

Jason, jokester

i trust this guy:

That looks nasty...

Anyways, again, disregard the first 15 and the rest is as good as Crusade and better than Temple...what magic is gone? The only thing that is missing is the religious stuff, now we have "sci-fi"...have you realize that both Indy 4 and National Treasure 2 mention the City of Gold??

I think part of what killed it for me was how I felt like I was on a set for a good portion of the movie.

If a movie like Jumper can go shoot on location, why can't INDY!?!?!?!

Quote:
If a movie like Jumper can go shoot on location, why can't INDY!?!?!?!

Because shooting in a real jungle costs money you know. Just as the makers of Apocalypse Now!

Spielberg was intentionally going for the artificial set feel, as he has done before in the series.

I was surprised that this wasn't as terrible as I expected. It's a mediocre film, but it's not awful. Certainly better than Last Crusade. Not as good as the first two.

chris,

i usually trust your judgments, and i don't even mind a person rating one "indy" movie above or below the others. however, your insistence that "last crusade" is a bad movie is befuddling. just exactly what is so "bad" about it? aside from the zeppelin green screens and the screaming nazi in the falling tank, the movie has the least artificiality about it. i would think that that alone would rate it highly in your book.

eddie

Quote:
just exactly what is so "bad" about it?

If you have to ask, you won't understand the answer.

How about this to start? Sallah and Brody are turned into pathetic, downright embarrassing caricatures of their "Raiders" incarnations.

And if you pick the Top 10 action scenes in the first trilogy, none would come from "Crusade."

The only saving grace of the film is Connery's performance - he is the one and only thing that keeps it from being an all-time turkey.

sallah was very capable in both "raiders" and "last crusade". we didn't really see much of brody in "raiders", so what was wrong with showing how inept he was in the field in "last crusade"?

the venice boat chase and the tank chase are awesome, and alison doody has much more chemistry with harrison ford than either karen allen or kate capshaw. one of the worst aspects of "crystal skull" was watching how mis-matched ford and karen allen are--again.

"if you are scottish lord, then i am mickey mouse!"

I saw it today and it's certainly not as bad AS OTHERS HERE are making it out to be. My daughter and I enjoyed it the whole way through. I was never expecting or anticipating the film to be greater or better than any of the previous installments -- I expected it to be an Indiana Jones film and that's exactly what I got. For all the griping I've heard over the backdrop nature of the movie, I say to those people, you need to go back and look at the culture of the late 50's and you'll see the film captures that persona perfectly.

There really isn't much to complain about in this obvious popcorn, Saturday matinee movie. If you went in expecting The Godfather . . . well, duh! Of course it's not that nor would even I expect it to be that. It's certaily no master piece, but it's no dud either. It was the usual fun and adventure, full of action, wit and charm we've seen in other Indina Jones films. Aside from the obvious age differences, there really wasn't anything overly original, but as I said, I wasn't expecting anything better. If all Speilburg and Lucas intended to do was give us an entertaining summer blockbuster, then they did their job well. However, if you were expecting them to exceed the excellence of the previous films and expect this new installment to actually shift the axis of the planet, then be prepared for disappointment.

7.5/10

Tim's 7/10 rating for "Crystal Skull" seems about right to me. I'll be reviewing the DVD and BD when they appear, so that's about the score I was thinking of giving it. True, I didn't like it as well as the first three Indy films, but I didn't think it was as awful, either, as the original poster did.

However, it's not that I found Harrison Ford too old. He just seemed tired. And Spielberg and Lucas seemed tired as well. I know they were all trying hard to recapture the old magic by providing exactly what fans wanted to see and not straying from the old formula, but I think they went too far that direction. There was virtually nothing new (except the kid) in "Indy 4," both a blessing and curse. And, really, although the plot was inconsequential, it was pretty convoluted and far out, even for an "Indy" flick. I could never figure why the ending had to be so bizarre and inexplicable. Oh, well, as Tim says, it still gives you a better time at the movies than most adventure films do.

John

Quote:
There was virtually nothing new (except the kid)

Actually John you could argue that the kid wasn't even that new because it was almost a recycling of the dynamic between Indy and his dad from last crusade. Accept now the roles were reversed. However I liked the movie it gave me exactly what I wanted and I wasn't disappointed.

tim,

i was expecting the greatest thing since sliced bread, so yes, i was disappointed.

eddie

Good point, Movelover. Yeah, with Connery refusing to come out of retirement, the filmmakers had to replace him with something, like another father-son relationship. But at least it was a new relationship of sorts, and, who knows, it could lead to further things down the line. If....

John

I've been saying it before, and I will say it again, Shia LeBeouf is GREAT...

Disregard the first 15 minutes of KOTCS, and you'll be in for another Indiana Jones episode in the series...and I agree, the ending IS bizarre...and it's great that you and your family enjoyed KOTCS Tim!

john's favorite was the aborigine who kept swinging around like a banshee and shooting poison darts from a reed pipe.

"john's favorite was the aborigine who kept swinging around like a banshee and shooting poison darts from a reed pipe" --Eddie

Clearly, you never grew up with Commando Cody or even Al "Lash" La Rue. (Now that I think about it, today that name sounds like a porn star. )

John

Quote:
john's favorite was the aborigine who kept swinging around like a banshee and shooting poison darts from a reed pipe.

It's as if Spielberg was responding to the charges of racist depictions in "Temple of Doom" by saying "Hell, I can go way further than that!"

the next thing you know, spike lee is going to say that spielberg shouldn't have been allowed to adopt two black kids.

Was Theo the li'l Spielberg who was considering going to Chapman for film school when the 'Berg visited?

no, that was max from spielberg's first marraige to amy irving.

Personal life

Marriages and children
From 1985 to 1989 Spielberg was married to actress Amy Irving. In their 1989 divorce settlement, she received $100 million from Spielberg after a judge controversially vacated a prenuptial agreement written on a napkin. Their divorce was recorded as the third most costly celebrity divorce in history.[37] Following the divorce, Spielberg and Irving shared custody of their son, Max Samuel.

Spielberg subsequently developed a relationship with actress Kate Capshaw, whom he met when he cast her in Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom. They married on October 12, 1991. Capshaw is a convert to Judaism.[38] They currently move among their four homes in Pacific Palisades, California New York City East Hampton, NY and Naples, Florida.

There are eight children in the Spielberg-Capshaw family:

Jessica Capshaw (1976) — daughter from Capshaw's previous marriage to Robert Capshaw
Max Samuel Spielberg (June 13, 1985) — son from Spielberg's previous marriage to Amy Irving
Theo (1988) — adopted by Capshaw before her marriage to Spielberg adopted by Spielberg
Sasha Rebecca (May 14, 1990 in Los Angeles)[39][40]
Janet Sanders (November 28, 1990) - God-daughter to Spielberg [41]
David Arno (August 12, 1991) - adopted
Sawyer Avery (b. March 10, 1992 in Los Angeles)[42]
Mikaela George (February 28, 1996) — adopted with Capshaw
Destry Allyn (December 1, 1996)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Spielberg

---

[Post edited by posters5 on Jun 9, 2008]

Somehow I wish that Steven Spielberg had hit harder so George Lucas could have understood the message.

"Don't make movies for no reason at all!"

Yeah, and maybe writers should've stopped making sequels to their books... ...I mean, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows? The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian?? The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King???

MONEY MONEY MONEY

Did somebody say MONEY?