Let's get this right out of the way. Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is not good. It's not all bad, but it's not good. The only thing it really has going for it is nostalgia. The script is extremely weak sauce and there are a number of instances that are so over-the-top that I was forced to hang my head in shame. Now I'll go ahead and rant about some specifics...
- What was with that opening scene? Hot rod kids playing chicken with some military dudes in a truck that ultimately meant nothing. This is Steven friggin Spielberg, here. I expect a memorable opening.
- The atomic bomb/refrigerator scene was just stupid. It was unnecessary and way too over the top. Indy is a tough guy for sure, but he's not fucking invincible.
- The lowest point for me had to be Shia's vine-swinging-with-monkeys scene. Just completely ludicrous. I don't even want to continue talking about it, I'm so disgusted.
- Cate Blanchett's character was unrealized. They hinted that she was some sort of psychic at the beginning but then never really followed through with that. She was a chick with a sword and an accent who was kinda greedy, I guess.
- Special effects can certainly be used to enhance a film and its storytelling. This is evident in a film like, say, Transformers, which really needs big special effects to pull off the necessary visuals. The scale of giant fighting robots is simply too massive to recreate in reality. But this means we are now in an age where computer effects are an easy alternative to practical ones and this is unfortunate in the case of Crystal Skull. The intensity of scenes is lessened by the fact that we can tell it's not real danger. The best action scene in the movie was the motorcycle chase because there were no effects. It was stunt men doing real stunts in a real setting. I really think that CGI should only be used when no other alternative is available. Remember how you felt when Indy was being chased by the boulder in Raiders or when he was on that rickety rope bridge in Temple of Doom? Yeah, there's nothing like that here.
- The supporting characters weren't handled well, either. Mack was too flip-floppy in his motivations to make logical sense and John Hurt's character was pretty useless overall.
- The script sucked, to be blunt. It was convoluted at times; too talky at other times. It wasn't clever. There were a lot of references to the previous movies in there but you can't rest a film on that alone. And, as is the case with most David Koepp scripts, the movie really degrades after the second act.
- Aliens and spaceships in an Indiana Jones movie? No thank you. The supernatural stuff from the original movies was fun but this is just too much. Plus, everything was so muddled in its presentation that I simply wasn't made to care. There were 13 alien skeletons that became one whole, living alien somehow. There was a portal that went somewhere I guess. It all felt lazy and out of place in Indy's world.
Think I'm off-base here? Feel free to leave a comment.
[update] just found this great article discussing many of the problems I had with Indy 4.
Posts
8 comments:
christ you are ruthless...
8.1 out of 10 at imdb.com.
it was a fun movie. period.
I'd give it a 6.1 at best. I'm not sure it was even as good as The Mummy. Coming from Spielberg, I expect more. Can I know who I'm arguing with at least?
it's me! your arch-nemesis of all things Lucas and Speilberg.
Just admit that your tastes have changed since you were a kid and move on. Don't keep trying to make them change along with you.
to not understand the inclusion of the alien element is to not understand the inspirations for indy in the first place. plus, it was the 50s and the dawning of the area 51 stories. it totally fit and is just as believable as the arc or the holy grail. there is scientific fact to back this story up as much as any of the other films.
79% on rotten tomatoes. http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/indiana_jones_4/
at least I'm not alone.
-B
I think the issues I've noted go far beyond the inclusion of an Alien-related story arc. When Indy was searching for the Ark, I was skillfully manipulated into believing that he was truly on a quest for something special. I cared and felt invested in the journey. Same goes for the Holy Grail. This search for crystal skulls was muddled and uninspired. I was never once made to feel like anything they were doing was important. After the halfway point, the film's only motivation seemed to be in amassing their 450 effects shots.
i think the only thing that might have improved it for me is maybe having a stronger villain. the other films villains seemed to have much more purpose. i gotta admit, there wasn't much going on with this one for bad guys. just lots of punching. cate was wickedly cute, but that's about it. perhaps you might have cared more for the journey if the stakes were a little higher? i think at the heart of the story this this more about family and less about the skull.
when indy said "i've got a bad feeling about this." i got real chills.
It's not like I hated the entire movie. There were references to the Indy mythology that I really enjoyed. I thought the "bad feeling about this" line was great because it was done for the fans. Lucas should care MORE about the fans and less about his ego. The vast majority of my complaints stem from the weak-ass script. It was great seeing Indy back in the saddle again but unfortunately they gave him a donkey when he should have had a stallion.
Wow. You know I hate Lucas as much as you for destroying my childhood with his wretched star wars prequels, but don't take your hate out on Indiana Jones. This isn't Lucas behind the camera its Senor Spielbergo! I loved the opening scene. You have to understand that the car scene wasn't the opening scene, but the opening credits scene. In Raiders you had an unseen Indy walking around a jungle with a very young Alfred Molina as the credits world. It was meant to be an introduction not just to the character, but the world he lives in. Same can be said here. Its been 19 years between indy jones movies and that is the same amount time that has passed in the film. The cars racing down the road scene is just a re-introduction to Indiana's world. Its changed a lot in 19 years: Music, attitudes and enemies. The actual opening scene was funny and incredibly exciting. I know the fridge scene seemed over the top, but is it any worse then him falling thousands of feet from a plane with an annoying blond and a smart mouthed asian kid in only an inflatable raft and somehow surviving? I think its been so long since people have seen this franchise that they forget how over the top these films can be. Its part of the fun. Its part of the adventure. As far as the vine swinging scene goes I can honestly say that is the only scene where my head fell in shame. I thought when he was stuck their surrounded by monkies that they would attack and cause him to fear monkies as his father fears snakes and his grandfather fears rats. Sadly instead he became one of them. I can only assume Lucas had a temper tantrum that day and would not allow his "brilliant" scene to be cut. I agree that the story had alot of great ideas in the start that disappeared (the whole red scare side plot), but the film is so frantic and fun that I did not even think of them until way after the end credits rolled. As far as the supernatural stuff in this film goes I was at first put off, but then really thought about it: a) how are dimensions traveling aliens burning Cates face up any odder then God's light popping out of a dusty box to melt the faces of nazi's off? or an angry Indian guy ripping a still beating heart of a human body before actually sacrificing him to a molten lava pool? or a man living since the time of Christ in a small cave without the benefits of beer and cable? They're all over the top, but its part of the fun. b) the original films were throwbacks to adventure films and comics from the 30's and 40's. Now in the film its 1957 and the popular fiction then was science fiction. So the film makers stuck to the their childhood fantasies, but updated their film to stick to the time period.
I honestly have no idea why so many people dislike this film. I personally think its the 19 year gap. Were we expecting too much? No. Did they not deliver? No. Have we all moved on in our lives and just forgotten about what made these films brighten our days years and years ago? Maybe. Have we become so accustomed to the over the top, over fx'ed films of Michael bay and the rest of techno obsessed Hollywood that we have been desensitized to these good old action films of our youth? Probably. I dont know anyone who lived through the eighties that still doesnt want to see a sequel to The Goonies, but do we deserve it anymore?
Rawson, if Barry wasn't already married I would totally hook you two up.
Post a Comment