2519 replies to this topic

[Tarl_Cabot]

[quote name='Judo chop' post='868651' date='8 May 2008 - 14:38'][quote name='Tarl_Cabot' post='868649' date='8 May 2008 - 14:23']I'll see it and hopefully I'll be pleasantly suprised but what if it's a dud than Lucas' failure is complete.[/quote]
Lucas is well beyond completing his failure. He

[Harmsway]

Another review. This one is more positive, but still disappointed:

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/36677

I read ShogunMaster’s uniformly negative review because I saw the film myself two days ago, and I wanted to see if his reaction was the same as mine. It wasn’t, but I’m not surprised by what he wrote. The entire audience at the screening was holding its collective breath, waiting for the breakthrough moment that would signal Indy’s triumphant return to the top of the Geek Heap, and that moment never really comes.

But that’s not to say it’s a bad movie. It’s just an unnecessary one.

Ironically, the problem is that Lucas, Spielberg, and Ford are trying far too hard to give everyone what they think that they want. Look! It’s the Ark! Look! It’s Marion! Look! It’s not the mileage, it’s the years! Everyone’s just treading water in this thing. The result is a movie that could – and should – conceivably have been made about a year or two after the Last Crusade, and would probably have been pretty well received. But after twenty years, everyone expects something that this movie can never be, and the harder the film tries to cram in as much nostalgia and clever references to what’s gone before, the more achingly clear it is that this movie is an empty exercise. It’s all about trying to recapture lightning in a bottle. Nothing about this film stands on its own – it’s constantly leaning on the past, hoping we don’t notice that it doesn’t bring anything new to the franchise.

This is the “Free as a Bird” of Indiana Jones movies.

Ironically, the movie I kept thinking about as I watched it was “Rocky Balboa,” which I consider the best of the recent returns to the long-abandoned franchise wells. Stallone used nostalgia to further a new story – Rocky’s obsession with the past allowed the audience to relive some of their favorite moments, but it also showed us who Rocky is now – lonely, lost, a little pathetic. It used old story elements to tell something new. It showed us how an ancient, weary Rocky adapts to a new world, and in the process, it deepened our appreciation for the character and capped the franchise perfectly.

“Crystal Skull” goes in exactly the opposite direction. Ford is given plenty of asides and one-liners that acknowledge his age, but they’re just obligatory and have no bearing on the story. Indeed, Indy delights in showing up his Wrath of Khan-style Instant Son every chance he gets. And he absorbs more punishment in this thing than in all three of the previous movies combined, which just gets silly after awhile. He’s like Roger Moore at his View-to-a-Kill pruniest – no man of any age could withstand the crap they throw at him, and it’s even goofier to assume a geezer like this could.

And where Rocky Balboa succeeded by stripping the thing down to its essence, Crystal Skull bloats everything far beyond what this plot or these characters can sustain. Set pieces just sort of appear out of the ether, and each is bigger and more bombastic than the last, and none of them matter, because you don’t really give a rip what happens to anybody. Which is really sad, when you consider what an iconic character they’re throwing away.

What’s especially strange about this movie is how heavily it relies on the MacGuffin, and just how talky it is. I, for one, don’t want to know anymore about the crystalline structure of an alien skeleton or their lost city and how they enhance the psionic abilities of psychic Russians than I absolutely have to, but apparently Lucas thinks I need a PhD on the subject. Had this been a story really been about an aging Indy, it might have been interesting. As it stands, even with all the hokey in-joke references to the first three flicks, the characters don’t matter at all. Instead of Indiana Jones, you could call this Horace the Monkey Boy and replace Harrison Ford with Richard Chamberlain or Harvey Keitel or Booger from Revenge of the Nerds and not much about this movie would change.

That’s not to say it sucks. The actors acquit themselves well, especially Karen Allen, although it would have been nice to see her with more screen time. Ford is just fine; he just doesn’t give us anything we haven’t seen before. And for all the Shia hate, LeBoeuf is a long way from embarrassing himself. I couldn’t decide if Cate Blanchett was awful or not, because she’s certainly strange. She’s the most bizarre of the Indy villains but also the least interesting because she’s the least human. She’s all dominatrix weirdness, but you can tell Blanchett is having fun, so eventually you do, too. Ray Winstone is wasted, which is too bad, as his character actually shows signs of being something interesting but never really gets to go there. He’s sort of an amoral Sallah, which might have been fun if it hadn’t been part and parcel with the stupid Skull narrative that crowded out everything else.

It sounds like I hated it. I really didn’t. But I have to admit it made me sad. It felt like going to a family reunion where everyone was forced to watch a slideshow or old home movies instead of getting a chance to catch up with each other. Spielberg boasts that this movie looks and feels exactly like the first three, and he’s exactly right. Had he truly made a fourth Indiana Jones movie rather than just a weak retread, I’d have been a whole lot happier.

Call me Languatron’s Bane.

[Tarl_Cabot]

That review is more rational but still negative. I'll make my own mind on May 22.

[Judo chop]

This guy writes the most honest sounding review I've read yet. I'm afraid it's as I feared.

[The Dove]

I'm paying no attention whatsoever to these reviews.. I know I'm gonna enjoy Kingdom of The Crystal Skull a lot!! After I see it, I'll be able to judge how it stands up to the other Indy films.. I'm just glad we do get a new Indy film...period!!

[Loomis]

[quote name='Harmsway' post='868671' date='8 May 2008 - 21:34']Another review. This one is more positive, but still disappointed:

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/36677
[box]I read ShogunMaster

[Harmsway]

Well, we have one more review, and it's by far the most positive yet:

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/36678

So you've probably received quite a few of these by now, so let's just cut to the chase shall we?

Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. Did I see it?

Yes!

How?

Same as SOME of these other folks.

Is it any good?

Yes!! /Depends...

Explain.

Well, I should admit that Raiders, for me, has remained movie magic despite my involvments in the industry. In other words, despite how jaded I am becoming about movies and entertainment, this one and a few select others just remain untouchable classics. Now, I do love Temple of Doom and Last Crusade despite their respective flaws, but Raiders is a perfect movie for me. There's not a wasted second of screen time there. It still captures that wonder that older movies tend to have and newer movies have forgotten.

So....?

So, I'd put KOTCS in line more with the two sequels - which is by far not a bad thing. I am not surprised that I had this reaction, nor could I think of any way KOTCS could be improved to EVER stand along side Raiders. So there ya go.

What's good?

Oh, so much. The river chase is among the best chase scenes in the whole series. The ant sequence give the suitable chills. Doomtown is a haunting and fascinating sequence with an interesting ending. The one major death (nope not telling) is handled very well. The shots are impressive and familiar to the series. The acting is good across the board. Ford's Indy this time out is a bit different a bit beat down (a ton more so AFTER the events here for sure), but still witty and clumsy. The rest (especially Winstone) are a perfect fit. Shia? I had my doubts but he was just fine. Most of all it feels like Indy so rest assured, in case you are wondering/worrying...this is an Indiana Jones movie! A book should be written on the numerous ways and reasons this series just blows every other attempt at adventure films out of the croc (also a nice addition) infested water. It will bring broad goofy smiles to your faces.

What's not?

Well, the snake scene was a bit too illogical even for an Indy movie. While Spalko is well acted, the psychic thing is a bit hard to take ( as it was in the Fate of Atlantis PC game). Also, the end...well, since I'd heard some awful rumors of a cameo overload, I was worried, but while those were thankfully way off, the ending that is here ...well let's just say I'd personally prefer this to be the last adventure we had with Indy. They got this one right - let us not risk it again. Not sure some of us could take the wait. Also, regarding the ending, it's a bit more in line with TOD than the others, but you'll have to see it to understand.

So rank em?

Easy. Raiders first (see above) Temple of Doom second (close race with LC for me, but the set pieces and serial feel overcome) Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (weird to see another title amongst these others,but it belongs here I am so glad to say) Last Crusade (fun, but uneven).

So seriously...after 19 years...it's actually good?

It's actually very good. Now, people will be mixed on this, though I have a hard time seeing how anyone could say it's actually a BAD film. Some may not like it for whatever personal reason, but that Spielberg magic is still there. It feels like the Spielberg we know and love (well, except for Lost World - bleh).

There you go. Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is officially Pretty. Damn. Good. And I can not wait to see it with some real folks now!

So if you do decide to run this early (spoiler free, poorly written, rushed) look at Indy 4 call me Officially Relieved.

[JimmyBond]

Every Indy sequel has mixed reviews, that's nothing new.

[Harmsway]

Every Indy sequel has mixed reviews, that's nothing new.

Too true. TEMPLE met with some pretty harsh criticism, and LAST CRUSADE, while generally receiving a positive bent, wasn't met with universal acclaim, either. It's only natural that KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL will follow suit.

[dodge]

That review is more rational but still negative. I'll make my own mind on May 22.

Now, why would you want to do that when so many here can decide for you?

I'll wait for 05/22...AND 11/07.

[Harmsway]

Now, why would you want to do that when so many here can decide for you?

I don't think anybody here has really made any decisions regarding INDY IV. We're all waiting for May 22, bracing for the worst, and hoping for the best.

[stamper]

I think those aicn talkbackers really just expected this to be another RAIDERS shockwave, but how could it be ? I prefer Doom myself but I understand were these guys are coming from. The real question should not be if Skulls is a new milestone in action movies filmmaking (the Indy series have already been there) but if it's worth the 8 $ ticket. I'm sure the romp will be worth 80 $ just like CR was.

[Tarl_Cabot]

[quote name='Loomis' post='868682' date='8 May 2008 - 16:31'][quote name='Harmsway' post='868671' date='8 May 2008 - 21:34']Another review. This one is more positive, but still disappointed:

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/36677
[box]I read ShogunMaster

[sharpshooter]

Now, why would you want to do that when so many here can decide for you?

I don't think anybody here has really made any decisions regarding INDY IV. We're all waiting for May 22, bracing for the worst, and hoping for the best.

That's it. There is always a risk when you make another film in a successful series. However, I think Indy will whip all the naysayers. Even if they aren't satisfied, I'm sure I'll enjoy it.

[Professor Dent]

Out of all the movies I go to see that I basically roll the dice on as far as potential enjoyment quality, this one is a sure bet to me. I'll spend my $10 for my movie ticket & won't think twice. Silly movie reviewers.

[Judo chop]

I agree with this reviewer that ROCKY BALBOA is the best of the recent franchise resurrections

I know I

[Tarl_Cabot]

Rambo was great. If you loved Rocky balboa as much as you say you will kick yourself for not seeing Rambo on the big screen.

[Judo chop]

Rambo was great. If you loved Rocky balboa as much as you say you will kick yourself for not seeing Rambo on the big screen.

I suppose I will. But I couldn

[Loomis]

Judo chop, old man, you are so, so right.

RAMBO was quite possibly the greatest cinemagoing experience of my entire life. There have been many wonderful ones - for instance, YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE at the National Film Theatre, the premiere of CASINO ROYALE, and the first time I saw PULP FICTION - but RAMBO may well have been the ultimate. Of course, I say that as a Rambo fan, and so I must in good conscience try to be a little bit objective and point out that if you're not already among the Rambo faithful then RAMBO may be a slightly trying experience for you.

Not that I want to put you off it. Far from it. But it's not quite ROCKY BALBOA. Still, Stallone's double whammy is indeed an awesome and probably unique accomplishment.

[Tarl_Cabot]

[quote name='Judo chop' post='868890' date='9 May 2008 - 13:28'][quote name='Tarl_Cabot' post='868888' date='9 May 2008 - 13:23']Rambo was great. If you loved Rocky balboa as much as you say you will kick yourself for not seeing Rambo on the big screen.[/quote]
I suppose I will. But I couldn

[Tarl_Cabot]

Judo chop, old man, you are so, so right.

RAMBO was quite possibly the greatest cinemagoing experience of my entire life. There have been many wonderful ones - for instance, YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE at the National Film Theatre, the premiere of CASINO ROYALE, and the first time I saw PULP FICTION - but RAMBO may well have been the ultimate. Of course, I say that as a Rambo fan, and so I must in good conscience try to be a little bit objective and point out that if you're not already among the Rambo faithful then RAMBO may be a slightly trying experience for you.

Not that I want to put you off it. Far from it. But it's not quite ROCKY BALBOA. Still, Stallone's double whammy is indeed an awesome and probably unique accomplishment.

In five years when we see every old horse finish his final lap(Conan the King, Mad Max 4?) we'll really know exactly how impressive it is.Sly should get some kind of award like perhaps a second star on the walk of fame.

[Judo chop]

Not that I want to put you off it. Far from it. But it's not quite ROCKY BALBOA. Still, Stallone's double whammy is indeed an awesome and probably unique accomplishment.

Oh no. I won

[JimmyBond]

Hey all, there's a third trailer out. You can find it on the official site and I heard it's playing in front of Speed Racer.

[Double-Oh-Zero]

Damn, beat me to it, Jimmy.

There's also a rather pointless new on-location video at the main site. View 'em both here.

[Doctor No]

I'm actually, finally getting excited for this movie. Plus, who cares about the reviews, Temple of Doom is my fav Indy movie and I have always heard it get knocked.

[DamnCoffee]

Dont you think they're leaving these trailer releases a little late? It's released in 12 days and we've only just had the third teaser. There is still a theatrical to come.

[sharpshooter]

You mean this one?

http://www.comingsoo...ws.php?id=44866

[marktmurphy]

Surely there must be other clips they can put in trailers? I think there's only maybe about two shots in that one we haven't seen before.

[DamnCoffee]

Agreed. Not at all memorable, just a rehash of the second teaser tbh.

[Harmsway]

Surely there must be other clips they can put in trailers? I think there's only maybe about two shots in that one we haven't seen before.

Spielberg's being stingy with the footage. He's said as much in interviews. He still wants as little of this film to be seen beforehand as possible.

Anyway another new review from AICN. This one's the most positive so far.

Only Mild Spoilers

First off, Indiana Jones isn't my cinematic nirvana. It's not a seminal movie going experience for me like most people.

Ultimately, what I've enjoyed most about the films is revisiting them with groups of friends over the years. Watching "Indy" is a truly fun thing to share.

I enjoyed "Raiders of the Lost Ark." After all, who doesn't? Yet, it didn't engage my emotions in the same way the first two "Superman" movies did or even the original "Star Trek" film series. ROTLA is a thrill ride that's built for speed. Its classic status is underscored by how well it holds up decades and imitators later.

Aside from the frenetic opening, I found "Indiana Jones & the Temple of Doom" a bore. Kate Capshaw's performance sunk every scene and Harrison Ford's line reading of "We… are… going… to die!" still makes me cringe. Nevertheless, I find the film fascinating in retrospect, hearing George Lucas' proclamation that the dark tone was the result of his wrenching divorce. That explains all the hearts being ripped out.

What I liked most about "Indiana Jones & The Last Crusade" was the father & son relationship between Ford and Sean Connery. I respected the desire to add dimension to the main character and also the resolution, wherein Indy used his wits to save his old man. (Although, I agree with those who say Connery should have taken the knight's place and stayed behind.)

I never thought I'd see another Indiana Jones film, but after the return of Rocky, Rambo, and McClane… it became inevitable. (Catherine Trammel's return doesn't count. Sorry, this is a gentlemen's club.)
George Lucas should be commended for truth in advertising. He predicted that, after so much anticipation, no movie could ever meet the expectation of a rapid fan whose spent the last two decades imagining the ultimate Indiana Jones adventure in his mind.

Given the iconic place these films hold, Steven Spielberg also didn't set out to reinvent the wheel and fix what ostensibly isn't broken. Sorry, a PG-13 "Die Hard" where helicopters explode and occupants pirouette out and land safely isn't "Die Hard." It's "Die Soft."

During his Comic Con presentation, Spielberg said he was making this film for the fans. He certainly didn't have to, as he can get any studio in town to greenlight a can of baked beans as a new movie.
So, Mr. Spielberg… thank you. Thank you for making an Indiana Jones film for all those around the world who wanted another one.

Thank you for making a film that fits comfortably within the canon you helped invent.

Thank you for recapturing the spirit of your previous direction of the series, while also adding some subtle meditations that your later "serious" pictures have employed.

Also, thank you for reminding us that Harrison Ford is indeed a major movie star who can hold the screen at any age, just like all the other greats… Marvin, Holden, McQueen and Wayne.

"Indiana Jones & The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" blends many of the divergent elements of the first three. The jeopardy and stakes of the first. The darkness and rituals of the second. The generational differences, relationships and humor of the third.

Oddly enough, the mix reminded me of a non-Indy movie, "Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan," wherein an aging, melancholy hero is galvanized back into action, reclaiming meaning for his latter day existence. It even has a similar relationship with a young man who has a large chip on his shoulder, for very good reasons, and a woman from his past reappearing. Marion Ravenwood's name carries similar feelings as "Carol Marcus" in this context.

I've read another reviewer of this film claiming disappointment the character of Indiana Jones wasn't accorded the same introspection and ruminations of the last Rocky Balboa outing. The first and last "Rocky" movies, before the sequels became cartoonish caricatures, were both human dramas. They were character pieces heavy on dialogue and building towards inevitable finales in the ring. Indiana Jones is an action adventure series. While Indy acknowledges his advanced age, he does it in the context of how things are handled in "Indiana Jones" fashion. That doesn't mean halting his exploits to pontificate ostentatiously on mortality. Sorry, "It's not the mileage, it's the years" fits this world. Unlike Rocky, Indy steps into the ring for combat after the first reel.

What I loved most about the 1950s' milieu KOTCS takes place in, which Lucas still has his "American Graffiti" affinity for, is how Dr. Jones is now truly just a senior member of a college faculty. There's no way the young people around him could ever imagine this educator to be a world traveler and adventurer. He's the old guy, off in the corner, in the malt shop.

The atomic age motif works like a charm with a sequence set in "Doomtown" being particularly memorable not just for its jeopardy, but also a subversive satirical streak. The Russians more or less act like the Nazis in the first and third film, with a similar trace of historical accuracy underpinning the proceedings.

People have been gunning for Shia LeBeouf's character from the beginning, but the actor more than holds his own against a formidable leading man. Young Shia adds a lot to the proceedings, is physically adept and enjoys solid interplay with Ford… especially being the brunt of a lot of Dr. Jones' acerbic sarcasm.

Ray Winstone is a resourceful actor, making more out of his subordinate character than another performer would. Karen Allen is a welcome return as Marion although, I'll admit, she's not as pivotal to this film as I'd hoped. The initial dialogue between Indy and his old flame crackles like from the first film, so it comes as no surprise that writer David Koepp in a recent interview acknowledges he sought help from original ROTA screenwriter Lawrence Kasdan for this exchange.

Cate Blanchett's Soviet Agent Spalko was not at all what I was expecting, especially her being a disciple of the fabled "thought police," but once again… Russian obsession with ESP and psychic warfare are well documented. Ms. Blanchett engages in a psychological battle with our hero and her performance is so peculiar that on occasion I thought she was being directed by David Lynch. She distinguishes the film from all the others with her singular presence.

The crystal skulls and their extraterrestrial origin are dealt with from an archeological standpoint so, despite outcries that science fiction doesn't belong in the Indy series, it's consistent with the previously established mysticism that's come before. The culmination of this legend during the finale doesn't have the old style Hollywood theological impact of the first film, nor the emotional payoff of the third, but it's way better than the second. If anything, a lot of the finale's destruction and conversion reminded me of "Total Recall," but don't take that as a debit. You'll see what I mean.

Some will say this movie is overstuffed, but I viewed it as a second trilogy all rolled into one. There may never be another Indiana Jones film, so they went for broke with nonstop set pieces that remind us Steven Spielberg can easily best anyone currently making their career as an action director. Some of his "old fashioned" techniques serve as a revelation in the wake of current post "Matrix" styles. His long lasting shots without frenetic cutting are particularly enthralling to behold. Still, I do feel we were bamboozled at bit by their saying CGI was underemployed… especially when one of the villains is dispatched by teeming insects vacationing from "Jurassic Park."

I also liked the fond, deferential ending a lot, as Indiana Jones movies seem to have a subliminal "To Be Continued…" during their codas. Still, this feels like the last one, but so did "The Last Crusade." While they did ride off into the sunset there, Harrison Ford reminds us in an interview: "The sun came up the next day."

One thing's for sure, after the lights come up... true fans and new ones will continue "the man in the hat's" adventures in their imaginations.

While I can't profess to know what Indiana Jones movie people will be expecting to see at 12:01 on May 22nd, I can say this about the one Lucas, Spielberg and Ford have given us: I liked it, a lot.
And like all the others, I'll look forward to seeing it again with friends and having a good time. Sometimes, that's what a good movie is for.

Derek Flint