Renamed this thread since the movie opens this week and there's no sign of a name change.
The FIRST OFFICIAL REVIEW, from The Hollywood Reporter:
Bottom Line: A wearying onslaught of action and effects gives Indy little chance to charm as he did in days of old. By Kirk Honeycutt, May 18, 2008
CANNES -- What do you know, the film billed as a return of Indiana Jones turns out instead to be a sequel to "Close Encounters of the Third Kind."
Extraterrestrials and a spaceship mix it up with well-lit caves, tumbles over waterfalls and swings through the jungle that would make Tarzan gape. Director Steven Spielberg seems intent on celebrating his entire early movie career in "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull." Whatever story there is, a murky journey to return a spectacular archeological find to its rightful home -- an unusual goal of the old grave-robber -- gets swamped in a sea of stunts and CGI that are relentless as the scenes and character relationships are charmless.
"Crystal Skull" will have its huge audience when it opens worldwide Thursday. Indeed it had that audience the day the project was announced. What is disappointing to those who fondly remember "Raiders of the Lost Ark," lo those 27 years ago, is the loss of wit and romance. This film feels like work, whether it's poor Harrison Ford straining to keep pace with his younger self or Spielberg and writer David Koepp piling on the thrill-ride acrobatics that have only scant connection to the plot.
In the first 22 minutes, old Indy survives a kidnapping, shoot-outs, auto crashes inside a mysterious warehouse, a ride in a desert rocket and an A-bomb detonation. Spielberg is only getting warmed up. The film never pauses to let these characters enjoy a drink or take each other's measure. Indy's original flame, Karen Allen's Marion Ravenwood, also makes a welcome return; she even has a surprise for Indiana -- yet this moment is lost in the forward momentum.
Losing his job during the Red Scare of the '50s, Indy is persuaded by young Mutt (Shia LaBeouf) -- who keeps those iconic '50s images flowing by arriving on a motorbike like Brando in "The Wild One" -- to take off on a vague adventure in South America to save his mother and retrieve the Crystal Skull of Akator.
This trip hooks the duo up with a spy (Ray Winstone) who changes sides every half-hour; a Soviet villain (Cate Blanchett) with close-cropped hair, black skin-tight fencing garb and absolutely no point in her villainy; and a crazy loon (John Hurt) who, like Kurtz in "Heart of Darkness," has been in the jungle too long.
Once the group possesses the Crystal Skull -- it does keep changing hands between Indy and the Soviet army -- no one seems to know quite what to do with it. But it has its uses: At different times, it opens doors, triggers cave machinery, wards off giant red ants and scares hostile natives. For all anyone knows, it might pay the bill at a fancy restaurant.
After about an hour, the film abandons any pretense of story for a rush through fights, chases, machine gun fire, scorpions, quicksand, monkeys, huge snakes and finally a secret city -- part Mayan, part Aztec, certain to become both a video game and amusement park attraction.
At no time does any of Indy's gang seem in real jeopardy. Bullets splash all around, but not even the brim of his fedora gets nicked. Waterfalls are mere dips in the water, collapsing ruins an excuse for free-exercise tumbles and the villains mere annoyances.
The actors are asked to do little more than look reasonably alert. This proves to be Indiana Jones' greatest challenge.
Production: Paramount Pictures, LucasFilm
Cast: Harrison Ford, Cate Blanchett, Karen Allen, Ray Winstone, John Hurt, Jim Broadbent, Shia LaBeouf.
Director: Steven Spielberg.
Screenwriter: David Koepp.
Story: George Lucas, Jeff Nathanson
Producer: Frank Marshall.
Executive producers: George Lucas, Kathleen Kennedy.
Director of photography: Janusz Kaminski.
Production designer: Guy Hendrix Dyas.
Music: John Williams.
Costume designer: Mary Zophres.
Editor: Michael Kahn.
Rated PG-13, 123 minutes.
Hmmm...it sounds like it could be terrible - AND fantastic!
They've been running the Indy trilogy here every Sunday night and I still don't buy Ford as being the same Indiana as in those films...I think there's going to be more than an easy level of parody in there. But if it's as relentlessly action-orientated as it sounds, I hope it's not because they want to fill it with SO much action just to please those that said he couldn't do it - that would be overkill. Not sure about some of the other elements either - the Raiders films were always about historical goings on and the occult...mixing in such stuff from Spielberg and Lucas' other kinds of popularist films could potentially ruin the whole thing.
Oh yeah...they're predicting north of $150m box-office through the weekend, and Spielberg has already said at Cannes that another installment isn't out of the question. There have already been rumors that this could be a new trilogy...I guess they could drag Indy into the 1960s.
But then, isn't that getting away from what Indiana Jones was supposed to be all about?
PLEASE REMEMBER NOT TO POST SPOILERS without using the forums HIDE function. Let's not ruin the film for anyone. And if you have not seen the film you may want to avoid this thread!
Well...disjointed and confused...it was inevitable that Indy was going to be a disappointment, even though I was hedging my bets and kept my anticipation to a minimum.
It was, sadly, the confused ramblings of four old(er) men: Lucas, Spielberg, Ford and Williams, who all seem to be going through the motions without any lift or magic.
When the waterfall scene came, I had well and truly been lost, since this wasn't Indiana Jones I was watching. When Indy spoke Harrison Ford's <I>other</I> Lucas-created character's line, I thought it must all be so long ago that they can't remember who's supposed to say what. It totally dragged me out of the movie (again, since it's so talky in the middle and <I>nothing</I> happens except a <I>lot</I> of mumbo jumbo about mumbo jumbo that this is when a toilet break could be handy), as did Indy's last line, in which he suddenly becomes...<I>Yoda!!??!?</I>
I'll weigh in more when more of you guys have seen it. I <I>DID</I> enjoy many moments of it, but Ford looks bored most of the time, as did a lot of the (fairly packed) audience I saw it with this afternoon, and the old-school charm just isn't here.
That's too bad. I'm still seeing it, though. Regarding the score, though, the more I listen to it, the more I like it. Williams's new sound (since around AI or so) definitely gets some getting used to for me. Kind of like Goldenthal, but that's another story. One trait he's picked up that I'm not particularly fond of is what I'll call "tweets," or short, repeated flute statements doubled on xylophone. That said, they didn't bother me in IJ:KOCS as much as in, for example, that random use in "Battle if the Heroes" from Star Wars III that sounds way too light compared to the rest of the piece.
But I guess Williams has matured, and his tastes have evolved. He's subtler now and seems to be more inspired by "serious" films, as a listen to Memoirs of a Geisha will prove. His themes are less memorable, which may be disappointing, but I personally really like what he does with the development. There are no breakout moments like in Raiders (at least not on the same scale), and it's not as thrillingly furious and crazy as Temple of Doom. Jury's still out on whether I like it more than the score for Last Crusade. Though I haven't seen the movie yet to see how the score works in context with the film, I do appreciate it as a stand-alone work. Maybe not as much as scores of his past, but certainly more than something like War of the Worlds which (I think) does wonders in the film, but is not an immediate revelation on CD. I've also heard that the score is mixed relatively low in the film, though.
I saw it last night and really liked it. As others have said, it's impossible to outdo the Original(s), but I thought it was very good. I had no problem with it at all until the big ending, which may have gone too far over the top. But I'm planning to see it again soon.
I thought it was 'okay'. A little 'over-the-top' in some places .. but still a fun time at the movies.
The climax reminded me a lot of the ending of Mission to Mars, though .. which I did not consider to be a Good Thing.
I do think it's too bad we never got to see Indy's WWII adventures, which are hinted at during his FBI interrogation. How cool those movies could have been!
The first half was much better than the second half, IMO .. but that second half wasn't enough to ruin it for me; even with its high concentration of 'yeah, right!!' moments .. I still enjoyed it.
Even so, I'd rank the 'Indiana Jones' films in order of release. Raiders of the Lost Ark being the best (by far), then Temple of Doom, Last Crusade .. and Kingdom of the Crystal Skull bringing up the rear (but not too far behind LC).
I liked it. Not the best film I've seen by far, but it's far from the worst, too.
Given a choice between this film and Citizen Kane -- the most overrated movie I've seen--, I'd rather see this film hands down. Given a choice between this film and the last four Star Wars or Star Trek films, again, I'd rather see The Crystal Skull.
I don't know what people expect from this series anymore. It's not 1981. It's not 1984, and it sure as heck isn't 1989 anymore. We pretty much KNOW Indy's bag of tricks. What? You thought they were going to reveal he was a world-class sumo wrestler or mariachi dancer?
A lot of people are too stuck in their darn past. If I have to read another Fanboy or Geek scream "They (Spielberg and Lucas) raped my childhood!" again I'll personally drive over to their house,plow through their living rooms with a Hummer, AND back over those Fanboys with the Hummer again and again! There is such a thing as taking a reality check. It's just a damn film, folks. If you're taking it that seriously, you obviously need to get out more.
People's expectations have gotten ridiculous.
I pretty much KNEW what was going to happen going in to this film but I found myself presently surprised that it wasn't anywhere near as bad as the last three Star Wars films or as inplausible and numbingly nonsensical as Star Trek: Nemesis.
I'd agree that this film is a good way to close the chapter on Indiana Jones, but most of us know Lucas and Spielberg aren't going to leave it alone as nice as its ending was.
They (S & L) sure aren't the same people they were 30 years ago... No more than the rest of us.
Just got back from seeing it. I agree mostly with what's already been said. Many of the action sequences were either waaaaay too 'over-the-top" or utterly ridiculous
a perfect example being that scene where Shia LaBeouf decides to become Tarzan
It had it's share of flaws, but it was still a very fun flick. I'm glad I decided to see it on the big screen. ^__^
The only thing that was truly over the top was tarzan Shia. That was admittedly a little too far even for indiana jones. (and even THAT probably wouldn't have been THAT bad if they hadn't included the monkeys) Everything else, including the ending was no more ridiculous than than the god box that shot lightning and melted people's faces off.
