2519 replies to this topic

[Judo chop]

One great big piece of...

furniture.

Makes an excellent beer coaster. (I presume. I don't own it, as I already have enough beer coasters.)

[Safari Suit]

I think it doesn't particularly merit rewatching or recalling.

[Loomis]

Yeah. You're right.

[Harmsway]

If I was giving the film a letter grade, ala the ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY reviews, it would get a C. Not a great film, and pretty poor in some respects.

But, as an Indy fan, I have enjoyed it when I've seen it. I'm happy to own it. Don't know when I'll watch it next (probably not anytime soon), but it sits nicely beside the other Indy flicks (which I probably won't watch anytime soon, either).

[Loomis]

If I was giving the film a letter grade, ala the ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY reviews, it would get a C.

You generous fellow. I'd give it a Z. I even got rid of my DVD copy.

Indy's a great character, but he's been very ill served by at least three quarters of his movies. Especially this latest.... I don't really know what to call it. This thing.

A crashing disappointment, though. It could and should have been one of the greatest action romps ever. I keep hoping I'm somehow, like, y'know, wrong about this flick. But I don't think I am.

[Judo chop]

A crashing disappointment, though. It could and should have been one of the greatest action romps ever. I keep hoping I'm somehow, like, y'know, wrong about this flick. But I don't think I am.

I feel your angst Loomis. To be honest (really now… I’m not exaggerating) I think it’s a terrible movie. So bad, in fact, it leaves no doubt. I understand how middling efforts in beloved franchises can keep one hanging on, searching for a shred of hope. That's why (again, not exaggerating) I am GLAD that George and Steve managed to fail Indiana Jones so catastrophically. I’m not even tempted to look again. It eases my pain. The pain that seems to have you in its grips.

In the words of the great Sylvester Stallone in FIRST BLOOD: ”Let. It. Go.”

[Harmsway]

I don't blame you for your perspective, Loomis. INDY IV could have been fantastic.

But from my perspective, KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL - while a lazy, lazy film and all the rest - is rather harmless. And as an Indy fan, there's just enough about it I like that I can sit through it and have a decent time.

[marktmurphy]

In the words of the great Sylvester Stallone in FIRST BLOOD: ”Let. It. Go.”

Last Crusade, surely?

I'd give it a C+ probably. It's not bad and is perfectly watchable and diverting. It's not up to previous Indys but it's not exactly as souless as a Mummy sequel or, well, a Star Wars prequel. If you like Indy there's plenty to enjoy in this. I'm looking forward to watching it again with my dad, in fact. An action hero who's older than him is a rare thing now!

And now Spielberg's got his new Indy in the shape of the very promising sounding Tintin (Spielberg, Jackson, Steven Moffat, Edgar Wright, Daniel Craig- how can so many of my favourite people be on the same movie? It's like The Expendables but, y'know- with actual good people) there's more adventure to look forward to.

[zencat]

Bumpin' this puppy 'coz, now that CRYSTAL SKULL has been part of the furniture for about half a year, I wanna know: what do folk think of it now?

I've watched it several times on DVD. It's a very strange animal. Terrible script. I mean, TERRIBLE. And Harrison Ford is also not very good in the movie. These two aspects are undeniable for me. But I do like the old school Speilbergian film-making. It's very old fashioned. Nicely designed master shots that actually remain on screen for more than a second. Real sets. A lot of old school craft on screen. I like it for that. And it's Indy. Shame it isn't better (or even good), but I'm happy it exists.

[DamnCoffee]

I know in the past, my opinions on this movie have being going backwards and forwards like a game of ping pong. I think now I have made my decision. Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is a horrible, pathetic excuse for an Indiana Jones film. It starts of great, but goes dramatically downhill after he exits the warehouse.

The only good things about this turd of a movie is Harrison Ford and the score, (which I should comment, is NOT Williams best work). Looking back now, I could really cry. It could've been so good, but thanks to Lucas, raping me in the eyesocket, it is not.

[marktmurphy]

It starts of great, but goes dramatically downhill after he exits the warehouse.

I'm practically happy enough with that. I was happy with the original three, any more is a bonus. There are still glimmers of other good scenes in there- I love all the 50's stuff with the cafe and bike chase, even if that chase doesn't quite take off; the stuff with Marion works nicely and few other bits and bobs. It's not great but it makes me happy because it's all so well intentioned and fun.

The only good things about this turd of a movie is Harrison Ford and the score, (which I should comment, is NOT Williams best work).

Yes, I think Ford's really good in it- I thought he'd died several years ago and his corpse was just being dragged around the screen, but he comes alive again in this.
And the soundtrack is excellent- the tracks on the bootleg extended album actually help it immensely; there's a lot of great stuff on there. The Russian theme in particular is a great one. Put all of them together on shuffle and Skull holds up to the others easily.

Looking back now, I could really cry. It could've been so good, but thanks to Lucas, raping me in the eyesocket, it is not.

I dunno, I could moan about something I didn't get but I'm happy just to get the bits I like on top of all the other proper Indy goodness we already have. It's better than Young Indy- of that there is no doubt.

[Loomis]

And now Spielberg's got his new Indy in the shape of the very promising sounding Tintin (Spielberg, Jackson, Steven Moffat, Edgar Wright, Daniel Craig

Good heavens, I didn't know Craig was in the Tintin flick. I thought you were kidding at first, but then did a Google search and found it's true.

Why no CBn thread on this rather stunning development?

Back to Indy, I've said it before and I'll say it again: I find that the things in it I actually like are those things we're all not "supposed to" like, e.g. the gophers, the fridge-nuking and the whole alien concept. As for the rest of it, though....

And I even think it's worse than any of the STAR WARS prequels. At least it makes them look okay, even the truly wretched PHANTOM MENACE. I like CRYSTAL SKULL for that.

[Harmsway]

And I even think it's worse than any of the STAR WARS prequels. At least it makes them look okay, even the truly wretched PHANTOM MENACE. I like CRYSTAL SKULL for that.

Really?

I think it's a thousand times better than any of those disasters.

[DamnCoffee]

the stuff with Marion works nicely

That was one of my main problems with it. Marion. I dunno what it is about her, because she was FANTASTIC in Raiders, but in this. Hmmm, I dunno, there is something about her that just seems off. She's too ing cheesy aswell. Her acting is horrible, and, imo, the revelation that Mutt is Indy's son could've been handled alot better. The whole idea of them both sinking in quicksand, is a very interesting, but it was horribly executed. No tension, nothing. It's just so bad.

For example, In Temple of Doom, when Indy and Shortround were nearly crushed. That was brilliant, the spikes pushing down his hat was a nice touch aswell. With KOTSC it was just, "His name is Henry, he's your son!" - "My Son!" - "Grab the snake!" - "GRAB THE SNAKE!" - "DONT CALL IT THAT!" - "GRAB THE ROPE!". What the hell.

[Loomis]

Well, no. Believe me, I'm no STAR WARS fan, but the prequels do at least attempt a bit of storytelling, hamfisted though it mostly is. Also, they're far more inventive on a visual level than CRYSTAL SKULL ever vaguely toyed with the idea of being.

[marktmurphy]

Back to Indy, I've said it before and I'll say it again: I find that the things in it I actually like are those things we're all not "supposed to" like, e.g. the gophers, the fridge-nuking and the whole alien concept. As for the rest of it, though....

I genuinely have nothing against any of those- a lot of fuss over nothing. The alien thing is, to me, a perfect Indy plot. 'Runways of the Gods' and all that? It was crying out for Indy to dig up the little green fellas in South America. It's just that the story getting to it wasn't interesting enough- they just basically go there and dig it up and that's it.
The gophers are just those muppets outside Jabba's palace: nothing wrong there; and the fridge is just a big bold bit of movie logic for the sake of fun.
The bendy tree was the only moment I really cringed: just the wrong type of unbelievable for me.

And I even think it's worse than any of the STAR WARS prequels. At least it makes them look okay, even the truly wretched PHANTOM MENACE. I like CRYSTAL SKULL for that.

Heaven's no: Skull is a proper film. Not a great one, but it is a film. Those Star Wars films aren't just badly directed; they're not directed at all. To me they simply don't function as movies.

[Judo chop]

In the words of the great Sylvester Stallone in FIRST BLOOD: ”Let. It. Go.”

Last Crusade, surely?

Good point. But still a very tough call.

And I even think it's worse than any of the STAR WARS prequels. At least it makes them look okay, even the truly wretched PHANTOM MENACE. I like CRYSTAL SKULL for that.

Heaven's no: Skull is a proper film. Not a great one, but it is a film. Those Star Wars films aren't just badly directed; they're not directed at all. To me they simply don't function as movies.

I agree 100%. KOTCS is better than the STAR WARS prequels. However, its failure is more evident, because it falls so much farther from grace.

[marktmurphy]

I agree 100%. KOTCS is better than the STAR WARS prequels. However, its failure is more evident, because it falls so much farther from grace.

A friend of mine said that the quality drop is the same because Indy started out as being better than the original Star Wars films. I agree that Indy was always Lucas' best series, but I do think that the prequels fell even further in quality terms: I just don't recognise them as Star Wars films. Skull is the worst Indy film, but I'm quite happy to have all four next to each other on the shelf.

[Mr Teddy Bear]

As Harmsway said, a key flaw is that the film is lazy. It's true. It needed a tighter script, it needed more authentic location shooting, and it needed Speilberg to pull his finger out.

The single most disapointing aspect of the film is the way Marion is handled and the unsatisfying way in which Indy and Marion suddenly decide they are soul mates again. Allen is a bit rusty and a tad embarrassing, but I still find her chemistry with Ford to be dynamite. Indy and Marion as a couple just works. The scene where they are tied up in the back of the truck held captive by commies, but fighting over family squabbles was perfect as was "They weren't you, honey."

General sloppyness aside, the film is composed of some great moments (warehouse, doom town, a lot of the Indy-Mutt-Marion interatctions, the ants fight and more)even if the whole package is disappointing.

Overall, not as strong as the other Indy sequels, but still an entertaining flick.

[sharpshooter]

I’ve seen it once, that is enough. The film will be remembered for all the wrong reasons. It reduced the Indiana Jones brand to a joke. Pretty sad considering the film was largely unnecessary. It would be an embarrassing disgrace to end the series like this, but another film to set things right is a massive gamble that could really devastate things beyond repair.

[Harmsway]

Heaven's no: Skull is a proper film. Not a great one, but it is a film. Those Star Wars films aren't just badly directed; they're not directed at all. To me they simply don't function as movies.

Entirely agreed.

INDIANA JONES AND THE KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL is what it is: a lazy, lackluster nostalgia trip for an iconic character. But for all its laziness, it's ultimately harmless. I fail to see how this was severely damaging for the character or franchise at all; most of the ire for the film is of the moment and will fade with time (while ire for the prequels has only increased with time). I don't think it will ever really come to be beloved, like the originals are, but I daresay it won't be evoking all the intense ire it is right now, either.

[Mr Teddy Bear]

Developement of the latest Indy game has been shrouded in mystery. This leaked trailer found on YouTube is the first been seen of it in years:

http://au.youtube.co...h?v=CuZ59k8LlsQ

The game was originally planned for an Xbox 360/PS3 release but this trailer for a game titled Indiana Jones and the Staff of Kings seems to only indicate it is coming to Wii/DS/PSP.

I love me some Indy video game action, but the worrying thing is that this trailer shows no actual ingame footage and is just composed of pre-rendered sequences.

Edited by Mr Teddy Bear, 27 January 2009 - 04:34 AM.

[mrsbonds_ppk]

Developement of the latest Indy game has been shrouded in mystery. This leaked trailer found on YouTube is the first been seen of it in years:

http://au.youtube.co...h?v=CuZ59k8LlsQ

The game was originally planned for an Xbox 360/PS3 release but this trailer for a game titled Indiana Jones and the Staff of Kings seems to only indicate it is coming to Wii/DS/PSP.

I love me some Indy video game action, but the worrying thing is that this trailer shows no actual ingame footage and is just composed of pre-rendered sequences.

I've been trying to keep track of this video game so thanks for the link to the trailer.

I really hope it does come out on PS3. Maybe it's gonna come out first for Wii/DS/PSP then 360 and Playstation later this year. I hope that's the case because I have been looking forward to this. I'll go on Ign.com and see if they have any further news.

[Harmsway]

I'm marginally interested in INDIANA JONES AND THE STAFF OF KINGS, but given the track record with Indy games, I'm not expecting much.

[Mr Teddy Bear]

Indy has had some decent entries over the years nothing stellar, but I enjoyed Indiana Jones and the Infernal Machine and Indiana Jones and the Emperor's Tomb. And while I'm more into action oriented games, I hear nothing but praise for Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis.

As for this Staff of Kings word is that the only reason it's survived on Wii is because that is the version of the game that was outsourced. The PS3/360 version was internally developed by LucasArts and that company had a big clear out and is going through cut backs. I'm pretty sure Staff of Kings won't see light of day on those next-gen platforms.

Don't worry though the game will probably be very underwhelming on Wii/DS/PSP if it makes you feel any better.

[Harmsway]

Indy has had some decent entries over the years nothing stellar, but I enjoyed Indiana Jones and the Infernal Machine and Indiana Jones and the Emperor's Tomb.

I thought INFERNAL MACHINE was terrible, and EMPEROR'S TOMB was kind of dull.

And while I'm more into action oriented games, I hear nothing but praise for Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis.

FATE OF ATLANTIS is quite good.

[Mr Teddy Bear]

Fair enough, I liked 'em, but it's been several years since I played them, nostalgia may be clouding my judgement.

[Loomis]

Heaven's no: Skull is a proper film. Not a great one, but it is a film. Those Star Wars films aren't just badly directed; they're not directed at all. To me they simply don't function as movies.

Entirely agreed.

INDIANA JONES AND THE KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL is what it is: a lazy, lackluster nostalgia trip for an iconic character. But for all its laziness, it's ultimately harmless. I fail to see how this was severely damaging for the character or franchise at all; most of the ire for the film is of the moment and will fade with time (while ire for the prequels has only increased with time). I don't think it will ever really come to be beloved, like the originals are, but I daresay it won't be evoking all the intense ire it is right now, either.

It severely damages the character and franchise to end things with such a whimper instead of a bang. Imagine if ROCKY BALBOA had been as pisspoor as ROCKY V - Stallone would have had to change his name and go into hiding because of the embarrassment.

Some twenty years in development, INDY 4 was probably the most eagerly-anticipated film of all time. For it to turn out to be just "harmless" (wow, talk about damning something with faint praise!) just don't cut it. Believe it or not, I still dream of the INDY 4 that could and should have been, and I wake up feeling sad. What INDY 4 is, however, is a strong contender for the title of Spielberg's worst film, and that's just unforgivable.

And I see no evidence that the ire for it will fade over time or that it will somehow go up in people's estimation. There will be no OHMSS-ish re-evaluation of this flick. People won't realise they were "wrong" about it.

[marktmurphy]

You speak as if we all agree that Rocky Balboa is a great film! I would describe that as 'harmless' too: nice to see and there's nothing wrong with it, but it's merely an epilogue to a story that had already finished.
And there's no way Skull is Spielberg's worst film; he's not as noticably bored as in stuff like Lost World.

I'm curious as to why you're obsessed with going on about it so much: you expected it to be rubbish, you hated it when it came out and yet you're still bleating on about it. It's really tiring Loomis.

[Loomis]

Okay. Fair enough.

And, yes, THE LOST WORLD is wretched. Couldn't even finish that one, unlike CRYSTAL SKULL.