Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull

I reached a movie buff conclusion after the 2nd set of Star wars films. It's simply not possible to top an iconic, legendary film or series. The original can't be beat, and is next to impossible to match. Doesn't matter who directs, stars, the effects, etc - can't be done. Being sure of this in advance made the Crystal Skull easier for me to take - but I still have to be critical - because they let us down on the simple stuff. My other movie buff observation is - its ALWAYS the writing first. The STORY. The other stuff flows from that, making the film better or worse. In Indiana Jones and The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, the writing failed us. The story does not hold together well and the dialog rings intermittently false throughout the film. I wanted to love the movie - but I was disappointed. When I heard they were all waiting for the "right" script to make another Indy film - that sounded good. But it appears that wasn't really true. I have to assume they all just decided the timing was "right" and it would be fun to get the old group together to do a flick - because the script was poor. The movie is more like an attempt at what an Idiana Jones adventure SHOULD look like - but with no real substance. A series of Indiana like dangerous situations and exploits strung together loosely with some attempts at humor thrown in. But no clear beginning to end plot. No disaster to avert, no one to rescue. Nothing in particular to root for... The actors seemed a bit uncomfortable to me - even Harrison Ford himself. Indy's love interest from Raiders (Marian) was underutilized and apparently a bit rusty in the acting department. She seemed to be just "thrown in" to add a nostalgic romantic element. The young Mutt character was well cast and did a good job with what he had to work with. The story arc regarding Indys age, his old love and young Mutt is dealt with - but could have been a better, more solid part of a more well written story. I'm glad I saw the film. I enjoyed seeing Indy again, but my hope that I'd be wanting to go again didn't pan out. It's worth only one visit - and that just to see some Indiana JonesLIKE adventures - in a story that doesn't make much sense. Sorry to break bad news to anyone who reads fan reviews - but that's my story and I'm sticking to it. George - you should have fussed over the writing a bit more and Harrison - I'd have waited longer for the right script. This was a weak effort and it didn't need to be. Mr Lucas and Mr Spielberg -you surprised me on this one - and let us all down on the story. Just my opinion :) Scott (an Indy Fan).

Many will definitely argue this addition to the 'Indiana Jones' saga was unnecessary and somewhat confusing. But as another film, you can't deny Spielberg's crisp direction and Harrison Ford's slick leading performance. Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is visually a blockbuster success, though potholes could be avoided in its story and plot, it's still stable nonetheless.

Usually, when you go to see an action/adventure movie, especially an Indiana Jones movie, you're going to suspend your disbelief and just allow yourself to "get into" the movie. These kinds of movies are supposed to be mindless escapist fun. Still, one might expect some small modicum of plausibility or connection to the real world. When it comes to "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull," forget about suspending disbelief. Just pretend you're in another dimension altogether. If you do that, you'll have have met one of the two prerequisites for seeing this movie. (If you don't believe me now, you will when you see this film and see our hero survive a cataclysmic event in a fairly cartoonish manner a mere 15 minutes into the film.) The other prerequisite is that you've seen the other three movies...religiously. A huge chunk of the entertainment value of this film comes from nostalgia, in-jokes, and self-parody. It is an entertaining movie and I had fun and laughed while I was watching it and the reason for this is because we are either enjoying seeing all of the same old gags done once again in a bigger and cooler way, or we are enjoying seeing those gags mocked. Trusty bullwhip? Check. Fedora? Check. Long car chase with fighting and leaping and what-not? Check. Dark tombs lit only by torches? Check. Gross creepy crawly critters? Check.

This is what makes the movie entertaining, but is also what prevents it from greatness and what makes me hesitant to call it a true "Indiana Jones" movie. George Lucas (who co-wrote the screenplay) has tried to do here what he did to the "Star Wars" prequels, namely that he thinks that appealing to the fan base with in-jokes, self-parody, and re-hashing the same old stuff can take the place of actually writing a a story that can stand on its own merits. The "Star Wars" prequels failed because Lucas could not get past his constant references to the original trilogy and so instead created fan fiction instead of true prequels. (Well, there was also the fact that Lucas' dialogue SUCKED.) Here, the stunts and action sequences and in-jokes keep us feeling entertained during the course of the film, but when we walk away, we wonder where was the real story.

Indiana Jones is a homage to 1930s serials about treasure hunters. He's out of place in the 1950s. Also out of place are the Soviets(led by Cate Blanchett in a Rosa Kleb-like role). And there are many, many, MANY instances where you will get to wondering just how implausible the next stunt will be. All of that I can put up with, though, and in fact can and do add to the entertainment value of the film. What I could not put up with was the ending, which will remind you not of Indiana Jones but of the ending to another Spielberg movies that pre-dates "Raiders of the Lost Ark."

This movie is lots of fun to watch, but it doesn't take itself seriously and probably shouldn't be part of the Indiana Jones canon.

19 years after a perfect ending to the trilogy, behold, George Lucas, Frank Marshall and Steven Spielberg and Harrison Ford come together again to produce Indiana Jones' fourth adventure. This time, the film pays honor to the science fiction films B films of the time. The decision was certainly risky, since almost two decades had passed, having to introduce the character, now older and without the same mobility as before, to a new generation, in addition to having to overcome one of the most acclaimed trilogies of cinema at all times.

This fourth adventure by the American archaeologist continues to bring good doses of adventure, ingenious scenes and fun to those who follow. In the three Indiana Joness of 1981, 1984 and 1989, the MacGuffins are the treasures: the Ark of the Covenant, the Sankara stones and the Holy Grail, respectively. For the fourth film, Lucas wanted to put ETs in the middle; Ford and Spielberg, not so much. They reached a consensus that it is the translucent skull of Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. David Koepp's script follows the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull structure, which is identical to that of Raiders of the Lost Ark: good guys and bad guys fighting for terrain in a race that will only be solved in the final corner. The difference is that in the new cat and mouse game, the Nazis leave and the Soviets enter the full 1950s.

The script seeks to fill in the gaps left by Connery (who refused to abandon retirement), Elliott (who died in 1992) and John Rhys-Davies (who overcharged) from creating obvious and unimaginative substitutes: the teacher Oxley, which Hurt is forced to interpret distantly, as if in a trance, for almost the entire film; the dean who appears at the head of Jim Broadbent; and the poorly developed assistant experienced by Ray Winstone. Meanwhile, paling in front of the villains of the original films, Cate Blanchett plays the Russian Irina Spalko in an absolutely caricatural way, never sounding threatening and letting her hairstyle, costume and accent do all the work of "composing" the character. On the other hand, it is undeniable that Lucas had a good idea in bringing an impetuous young man as a counterpoint to the aging protagonist, which, in an ideal world, could recapture the wonderful dynamics established by Ford and Connery in "The Last Crusade", oscillating only Indiana's stance towards the frowning side of the spectrum - and, in fact, this effort can be seen in the scene in which Mutt, after a bold move, looks with a proud smile at Indy, who returns a sullen expression (exactly as it had happened so many times in the 89 film). Unfortunately, this dynamic appears only punctually throughout the projection, which prefers to spend more time on the repeated (and only occasionally funny) references to the hero's more advanced age. Likewise, Marion's return is disappointing for not rescuing the explosive chemistry seen in Hunters, since everything here seems just an uninspired imitation of what happened in the original: the couple's fights seem forced, as well as the eventual (and inevitable) romance.

The irregularity of the script, however, is not only characteristic of the development of the characters. Contrary to what happened in the previous films, the Indiana Jones plot and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is not only not interesting, it is also developed in a chaotic way. The plot of the crystal skulls is the worst of the entire series, even surpassing the already claudicating of Sankara stones in Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom: you never know what the skulls really are, what they can do, how they came to be here and why there is a need to return them. The story is so absurd that Spielberg, Koepp and Lucas simply have no idea how to end it, culminating in an ending that comes close to catastrophe.

If before Indy's missions were explained in a simple and objective way, putting the narrative in motion quickly, here the searches and deductions of the heroes take a long time - and the worst: nevertheless, they do not become clearer. Furthermore, although there is an obvious symbolic Catholic aspect in the presence of 13 aliens (Christ and the apostles), the nature of that temple and the objectives of the creatures are never clear. In fact, the fact is that the plot of The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is simply bad - and Lucas's insistence on using it is probably the biggest factor responsible for the failure of this new film, since not even Indy's motivations are explained satisfactorily: why, for example, does he insist so much on "returning" the skull as Oxley wishes? And why did Ox, after failing in his first effort to enter the temple, return the artifact to the place where he had found it instead of saving it for later attempts? And why do certain creature (s) act that way at Irina's request? Unfortunately, instead of trying to refine the plot, Koepp tries to disguise the absurdities through ridiculous lines like "They went back to the space between the spaces" (in fact, practically everything that John Hurt has to say in this film hurts his ears).

Another thing that bothers is the fact that Spielberg sometimes treats the characters as unbeatable. Some of the best scenes in the entire series are forced and exaggerated, like the mine chase in 'Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom' or the classic truck moment in 'Raiders of the Lost Ark'. These sequences, however, also worked thanks to the reactions of the characters, who were surprised by the facts. In Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, they seem to be sure they will never be hurt, resulting in moments that are difficult to swallow like the jump of Marion's jeep. There is a limit to common sense. Despite this, the action sequences mostly work. From the start in the car duel in the desert with Soviet soldiers, going through the whole sequence in the warehouse and in the bizarre ghost town (except the refrigerator scene, of course), the motorcycle chase in college, culminating in the forest race, including the falls in the geographically incorrect Iguazu Falls and the revelation of El Dorado, what we see is pure Indiana Jones, albeit with a Steven Spielberg much less inspired by evoking truly unforgettable moments. Again, he exaggerates like the endless sword fight on top of the cars and the dark "Tarzan moment" with Mutt in the vines, but, in general, the director gets it right by materializing Koepp's ideas in a harmonic set.

However, with the exception of a motorcycle chase in the first act, nothing in this project reminds us of brilliant moments like Indy and the Nazi trucks (in Raiders of the Lost Ark), the chase on the underground tracks (in Temple of Perdition) or the tank fight (in The Last Crusade). Yes, there is a long fight over jeeps in the jungle, but the most that Spielberg can create is a beaten mutt gag being hit between the legs by the local vegetation. In addition, the sequence is orchestrated in a confusing, almost chaotic, bordering on laziness when, after the fight comes to an end, new Russian vehicles appear out of nowhere. In the same way, if the joke involving the tree that hits the communist agents hanging from the rock is even funny, it is sad to realize that, soon after, those same henchmen reappear next to Irina, as if nothing had happened. And why does Spielberg insist on showing agile natives hiding in the temple and other ruins if their nature is never explained clearly and they have no effect on the narrative's development?

The production tried to use the maximum of practical and stunt effects to avoid overuse of computer graphics. Despite using many practical effects, a 2008 production could not very easily evade CGI, and here I have it that Spielberg made a premeditated - and ultimately misunderstood - choice to make computer graphics emulate the effects practical that would have been possible, to a certain extent, in the 1980s, bringing an "old-fashioned" veneer to the film which, I am the first to say, sometimes seems strange. Even with all its problems, however, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull works at least as an exercise in nostalgia: it is pleasurable, as a movie buff, to review the Paramount logo turning into a real version that opens the adventure or accompanies the hero's path through the red line on a map. In addition, Spielberg is adept at rescuing all the language of previous films, from the constant travellings that bring us closer to the characters at dramatically relevant moments to the occasional backlight that marks the (here, only supposed) strength of the villains. Likewise, director of photography Janusz Kaminski does an impeccable job in recreating the style of the now retired Douglas Slocombe, recapturing his preference for shadows and silhouettes, for plans that reveal only the characters' eyes and for the elegant sepia tone that gives the film a classic tone that, even beautiful, does not betray the homage to the B productions made by the series. Not to mention another soundtrack by John Williams. How not to shiver with the Indy theme? Revisiting classics and showing that he is still a master at what he does, this trio - Lucas, Spielberg and Ford - proves that the new doesn't always mean the best. In some cases, luckily, the experience still has a lot to say.

To be honest, I kind of expected this to happen. People are going nuts about aliens and area 51 stuff. Like Jurassic World Dominion, it's about locusts and a dinosaur sanctuary in Europe, but they gave more 10 star ratings than the other sequels. Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is better than what everyone is saying. It gives you good visuals and action to love and decent characters to have a rollercoaster ride to this movie. The only Issues I have with it is some of the alien stuff, Mac the traitor, and the storylines can't bring down the movie that much. Also, I like the beginning where it plays the song Hound Dog.