Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull Review
Posted by Chad Webb on 05.26.2008
Indiana Jones is back in a new adventure. Is it a guaranteed winner?
Harrison Ford: Indiana Jones
Cate Blanchett: Irina Spalko
Karen Allen: Marion Ravenwood
Shia LaBeouf: Mutt Williams
Ray Winstone: “Mac” George McHale
John Hurt: Professor “Ox” Oxley
Jim Broadbent: Dean Charles Stanforth
Directed By: Steven Spielberg
Written By: George Lucas, David Koepp, and Jeff Nathanson
Release Date: May 22, 2008
Running Time: 124 minutes
Rated PG-13 for adventure violence and scary images.
The children who grew up in the 80’s adoring their hero Indiana Jones are now much older, and have the access of the internet. It has been nearly two decades since the last adventure of archaeology/history professor Dr. Henry Jones Jr. He must now contend with internet spoilers, early set photographs, and daily reports on script/production problems. Of course all these obstacles have prompted many critics and fans to sink fangs deep into the new installment, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. The result is not a motion picture masterpiece, but all those expecting something equal to Raiders of the Lost Ark are simply foolish. Plain and simple, this film is a blast of popcorn entertainment.
This is a sequel that must also be altered to fit the CGI age. Reports state that Spielberg wanted to use as little computer generated effects as possible. That might be, but those scenes are very noticeable. With all that time between The Last Crusade and now, Spielberg and Lucas had a strenuous mountain to climb. They had to reinvigorate loyal audiences, yet captivate new ones. To do that, the action needed to be bigger and bolder, the villains needed to be inventive and more intimidating, and the story had to be both nostalgic and imaginative. Most of these points have been achieved, but risks were taken in order to attain them. Risks that will certainly divide the masses.
The year is 1957, and Indiana Jones (Harrison Ford), along with his sidekick George “Mac” McHale (Ray Winstone) have been forcibly taken to a warehouse in Nevada by the Soviet villain Irina Spalko (Cate Blanchett). She and her gang need Indy to locate some sort of mysterious artifact. After he does this, he escapes, and eventually returns to the classroom. Unfortunately, Dean Stanforth (Jim Broadbent) informs him that he must go on a mandatory leave of absence. While he is angry and frustrated, Jones is approached by a young kid named Mutt Williams (Shia LaBeouf). He says that he needs Indy’s help because a mutual friend, Professor Oxley (John Hurt) and Mutt’s mother have gone missing. Oxley has gotten them into a situation concerning a treasure hunt for magnetic crystal skulls and a lost city of gold. Searching for these two will not be easy. Spalko and company are hot on the trail of Indy and Mutt, and stand in the way of them escaping the journey alive.
Every review, blog, and online article on Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull has the same whiny complaints. Some say it is too nostalgic. Others say that casting was too obviously just filling the spots of previous familiar characters. And still others argue that the suspense has dissipated. All this grumbling is causing you to miss the intentions of the franchise. I knew before hand that I was going to judge this in a different light. I am no longer the small boy that was addicted to breathtaking action and thrilling hunts for ancient relics. I am a reviewer that becomes more critical every year. Understanding that, I did my best to just sit back, and have fun. That is what many have failed to do. They would rather examine this with a fine tooth comb, and take note to all the examples where this was inferior to past adventures. I was not hoping for that, primarily because, that is impossible. Raiders of the Lost Ark was a fresh action classic, recalling the 1930's serials. The sequels that followed were simply more adventures to soak up and adore. When I watch Rambo, I want to see him annihilate people. When I watch James Bond, I want to see him flirt with women and battle cartoonish bad guys trying to take over the world. I ask you, what were you expecting?
Moving along. Harrison Ford looks, feels, and sounds as if he never left this iconic role. His hair is grayer, but the attitude is the same, and so is the knowledge of history, the witty responses, and the quick thinking that keeps him going. At this juncture, the quality of his performance is trivial. Shia LaBeouf steps in as a youthful partner for Indy. I applaud LaBeouf’s ability of rising to the occasion in these highly anticipated blockbusters. He held his own in Transformers, a goofy, but neat series of explosions. He proved that a remake of Rear Window, entitled Disturbia, could actually be effective. He has the potential to be a fabulous star if he continues to picks his cards correctly. As Mutt Williams, sporting a leather jacket and a ducktail haircut, he is funny and engaging to watch. Besides one scene where he is seen swinging with monkeys, which was just retarded, he stands out in most of the big action sequences.
It is true that many of the characters were changed due to various restricting circumstances from Sean Connery, Jonathan Rhys-Davies, and the late Denholm Elliot. We have been reading about the Connery developments for months, but even though I was a firm supporter of him signing on, in retrospect, he was better left out of the movie. It would have made no sense for him to be there. As a matter of fact, the alterations in casting did not bother me at all because the performers inserted are brilliant actors. John Hurt is a hilarious and disheveled Professor Oxley, Jim Broadbent is suitable as the Dean, and Ray Winstone is terrific as Mac. Give Spielberg and Lucas credit for filling these spots with people that treated the substance with the respect and exuberance it required.
Karen Allen returns as Marion Ravenwood. That glorious smile of hers was wonderful to see beside Indy once again. They exhibit that effortless chemistry so proficiently. Some have made the claim that The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull cannot stand on its own because of references to the past. Marion is the biggest example of this. I say this CAN stand on its own just fine. Most know exactly who Indiana Jones is, and where he traveled to on his quests. So the new viewers don’t recognize Marion? Whooptee dee. It is appropriately explained who she is, and what she meant to Indy shortly after she shows up. The other references, regardless of how many, are mostly subtle. These did not trouble me. No franchise is perfect in terms when it comes to this. James Bond did it a number of times. I appreciated the Pancho Villa line, which at least told the world that The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles existed.
Spielberg, Koepp, Lucas, and any of the army of screenwriters, or whoever took place in touching up this story took one big risk, and I can tell you all without giving away any spoilers. They combined the expected historical aspects with surprising science fiction elements. Some reviews will describe what this is in detail, but that is blatantly giving away excessive amounts of information. I will not. I thought it paid off extraordinarily well, but I can understand why some would disagree. It is a gamble that will not win over everyone. The main flaw is the CGI, which I mentioned earlier. When it is included, key moments are so sloppily palpable that one rolls their eyes in annoyance. Nevertheless, I still was at the edge of my seat during the action with red ants, waterfalls, and sword fighting. It was just what the doctor ordered. On a side note, the final scene with the hat, is outstanding.
When the smoke cleared, the discoveries were made, and the lights went up, I left Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull a satisfied customer. I have acquired the habit of taking notes as I watch movies (many critics do it), but I did not do this for Indy. I wanted to forget my position as a reviewer and columnist, and just enjoy the exhilarating action, the fascinating city of gold plot (which was better than National Treasure 2 btw), and the awesome villainess portrayed by the always excellent Cate Balnchett. Try to see this as an appetizing dish that still tastes good. Holding it up as inferior compared to Raiders, Temple, or Crusade means you have missed the point. Sure, some adventures are better than others, but as long as I am entertained, and as long as Indiana Jones decides to venture into the hidden corners of the globe to unearth history, I say bring it on.
The 411: Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is the first adventure with the legendary hero in almost two decades. After all that time, and many new difficulties to contend with in a different movie going world, supplying a satisfying installment was not easy, but Steven Spielberg and George Lucas delivered the goods even if it is not perfect. Harrison Ford and Karen Allen return with new characters portrayed by Shia LaBeouf, Cate Blanchett, Ray Winstone, and John Hurt. They are all fantastic, the storyline is fulfilling, and the action is stimulating . All in all, this is successful sequel that brought back memories of why I love Indiana Jones. I would gladly watch this again and again.
Funny thing is, I went into the movie also knowing that this was not going to be Raiders. I just wanted to have a good time. I didn't. I was never engaged, I was just there...
Posted By: Wes (Guest) on May 26, 2008 at 12:31 AM
IRONMAN KILLED IT
Posted By: Marc (Guest) on May 26, 2008 at 12:53 AM
I saw it tonight and thought it was just Ok. A bit over the top for my taste. I wish they would have made the film without so much CG. 6 out of 10.
Posted By: Mafaka (Guest) on May 26, 2008 at 01:02 AM
This never really felt like a real Indiana Jones movie, you never got any sense that he was in any real danger... It was mostly over the top (characterized by too many special effects)... The supporters are going to say this is typical for any Indy movie... Albeit it was mildly entertaining... it was just not what was to be expected from an Indiana Jones movie... This movie was 10 years in the making and this is the best they could do?
Posted By: Trev (Guest) on May 26, 2008 at 01:46 AM
I thought they did a great job with this Indy. Of course there were parts that were just plain stupid, but that is true with most action adventures. The Monkey scene definately could've been left out in my opinion. I agree with the 8.5 rating on this movie, any fan of the series should enjoy the movie. I was hoping for a little more out of Mutt Williams, he kind of annoyed me at the start, but did grow on me, Shia is a great actor, it was the character that grated on me at first. I'd rank this movie third in the series above Temple but behind the other two.
Posted By: Kevin (Guest) on May 26, 2008 at 02:15 AM
It's funnny how they have Karen Allens face on the movie poster her real face it looks nothing like it !!
Actually her mug looks like it's been bombed and depleted -like some old war zone or construction site
Posted By: WTF (Guest) on May 26, 2008 at 03:08 AM
I concur with your 8.5. It was a good, fun time at the movies. Not the best Indy film, but honestly it was a great entry into the series. I had fun.
Posted By: Beeker (Guest) on May 26, 2008 at 04:04 AM
How could anyone enjoy this movie? Seriously...the plot was absolutely horrible, acting was circumspect, and the CGI ruined ANY realism this film may have had. They completely ruined the series here.
Posted By: me (Guest) on May 26, 2008 at 09:42 AM
Spielberg has lost the plot!!!!
I was expecting Tom Cruise to come out at the End as the Alien Leader!
Simply terrible ending!!!
Posted By: steve0 (Guest) on May 26, 2008 at 10:14 AM
I mean, really? Aliens? There is plenty of good exciting shit here on earth. why bring fucking aliens into this? Its a good thing i never got into this series itfp
Posted By: Tim Infinity (Guest) on May 26, 2008 at 01:12 PM
Lucas and Speilberg need to learn when some special effects are just TOO MUCH.
Posted By: Drue (Guest) on May 26, 2008 at 01:22 PM
I thought it was ok, a typical Indy film, but I agree with Tim fucking aliens come on.
Posted By: Adam (Guest) on May 26, 2008 at 01:30 PM
OK, so the Ark, magical stones, and the Holy Grail are OK, but aliens aren't?
Hmm...
Posted By: Eric the Midget (Guest) on May 26, 2008 at 02:06 PM
I was fine with it until the aliens took off at the end. Now I am waiting for the next franchise, Aliens VS Indiana Jones...and to Eric the Midget, yes, religious artifacts OK, alien skulls...pick a different franchise (though I agree the magical stones from TOD sucked too).
Posted By: Mark Radulich (Registered) on May 26, 2008 at 02:38 PM
Come one you fucking fan boys. Half of you probably wasn't even born when the first three movies came to theater. It is meant to be watched for the cause of fun. It's a movie. Things are not going to be real to life. If it were, then it would be boring as fuck, just like the lives of all the fan boys. You better be lucky that this movie was made and if you are a real Indie fan from the 80's then you would appreciate it aliens or not. I thought it was a great movie. I'm just happy they put the effort into bringing one of my childhood heroes back to the big screen.
Posted By: Trent (Guest) on May 26, 2008 at 02:39 PM
o.k. i saw it twice just to make sure i'm not crazy, as I've read all the net nerds bashing the film like they are the next Kubriks or Argentos but are too lazy to leave their couches to do anything about it...is the plot great? no, but is it an awesome film thats a hell of a lot of fun? absolutely...its completely over the top and a great ride...every film has plot holes..hell in raiders no one happens to notice they are digging in the desert until the exact moment they haul up the ark?...you have to suspend your disbelief when you go into these films, anyone who knows what Lucas' vision of the character was understands that...go see it forget about everything you know for two hours and have fun...hell bring a date, if you can pull yourself away from moviepoopshoot.com long enough to talk to a girl
Posted By: josh (Guest) on May 26, 2008 at 03:10 PM
I like the movie,granted it was not filled with as much action as the other but I figured that would be the case since Harrison is north of 60 I think. The story was good and eventho people are complaining about aliens that is one of the stories about the crystal skulls so it made sense to me. I did like the nods to the former movies like seein the Ark as Indy crashed thru the wall of the storage building,the picture and statue of Marcus stuff like that. The one thing that bugged me was that they poked fun so to speak at Indys age a few to many times. I would say 8/10
Posted By: Salans (Guest) on May 26, 2008 at 04:08 PM
WHAT THE SHASTA MC NASTY are you guys talking about this movie was garbage, i like all the actors in it but since they did this movie they dont diserve jobs. COME ON this is crazy they should have just not done anything, and does it bother anyone else that at the end of last crusade they become immortal and yet sean connery isnt in this one
Posted By: 411 manias enemy (Guest) on May 26, 2008 at 04:15 PM
GOOD GOD MAN, SPIELBERGS AWESOME BUT HE SHOULD LOSER A FINGER FOR MAKING THIS MOVIE. i agree with everyone else who hates Close encounters vs. indiana jones(thats my title for it) Just go see iron man again reviewer watch what a real movie is like.
Posted By: 411 manias enemy (Guest) on May 26, 2008 at 04:19 PM
I believe the drink from the Grail only made the drinker immortal in that very chamber. I thought of that after I heard they were writing Sean Connery out as dead.
Posted By: Kevin (Guest) on May 26, 2008 at 05:21 PM
I'm sorry but anybody who liked this movie or gives it higher than a 6 out of 10 should not be reviewing movies. It was terrible.
Posted By: guest (Guest) on May 27, 2008 at 12:51 AM
"Holding it up as inferior compared to Raiders, Temple, or Crusade means you have missed the point."
What point would that be? That sequels are supposed to not only maintain the standard of its predecessor, but strive to surpass them? Pfft. It would seeem -you- missed a point, in a sense. Temple of Doom did not exceed that the standard set forth by Raiders, and neither did Kingdom. They were both inadequate sequels imo.
Posted By: Joe (Guest) on May 27, 2008 at 04:52 AM
joe you missed the point and its that every indy movie was great but this one, joe you suck at life
Posted By: 411 manias enemy (Guest) on May 27, 2008 at 08:08 AM
There is some really passionate hate for this movie. "Speilberg has lost it" "OMG Aliens WTF!" "This is the worst film I've seen in over a decade"
I don't get it really. It was a fun film and I would gladly watch it again as well. Agree with 8.5 rating
Posted By: Brent (Guest) on May 27, 2008 at 10:18 AM
I was enjoying this movie while watching it, but afterwards, it just pissed me off more and more.
The prairie dogs. There wasn't anything like that in previous movies, and it just screamed of a George Lucas "Let's throw some cute CGI shit in for no reason." It didn't take away, but it seemed out of place.
Shia LeBouf is a decent enough actor, but wasn't beleivable as a Jimmy Dean biker or traipsing through the jungle. A m ore inspired casting choice than Hollywood's current golden child would have been good.
The Monkey scene was stupid. Just stupid.
There wasn't any booby traps! How can there not be booby traps in an Indy flick?!
What the hell was the deal with the pygmies in the cemetary? No explanation? No need.
It's a shame we live in an age where we can no longer get a nice stop-motion gruesome death for a villain. We hafta settle for a weak-ass CGI death.
The aliens weren't the best thing, but I didn't mind that. Indy's searched for different religious type stuff in the past (Temple) than Christianity.
Those are the problems I can think of off the top of my head. The acting was good. And I enjoyed the car chase.
Oh, the FBI agent scene wasn't needed. It didn't add anything to the movie, it just kinda dragged it down. And on an unrelated note, I can no longer take Neil Flynn seriously in anything. He'll always just be the Janitor playing as somebody, to me.
Posted By: G-Walla (Guest) on May 27, 2008 at 01:37 PM
"joe you missed the point and its that every indy movie was great but this one,
joe you suck at life"
if you'd taken the three seconds to read my comment, you woulda noticed that i was kingdom-bashing. grow up.
Posted By: Joe (Guest) on May 28, 2008 at 06:07 AM
Chad Wedd: The best reviewer on 411Mania.com.
I thought the movie was good for what it was. Webb has hit the nail on the head on most counts. The CGI didn't bother me (it was goofy, and was meant to be goofy, when it was serious, it worked), and the cast didn't bother (although I think that Blanchett's character was extremely boring), but I disagree on the ending. It was a huge risk, but I think it was one needlessly taken. Especially when nothing was resolved by the reveal of it. They reached for epic and their hands closed on nothing.
Posted By: Matt Eli (Guest) on May 29, 2008 at 09:24 AM
I have to agree with the overall review. 8.5 might be a TAD generous in my view, but I think this was a really good, enjoyable little movie. Here's my opinion, if you were expecting this movie to be as good as the others, the problem was you, not the movie. It has been too long, and Ford is too old. There was no way this was going to be as good as the others. Going in with the proper expectations, then (particularly, that this would just be a fun, action, pop corn flick) you shouldn't have been too disappointed. This movie was fun. It wasn't a classic like the others, but I don't personally think it was inferior enough to be considered a "jumping the shark" like movie. It was just fine.
"and does it bother anyone else that at the end of last crusade they become immortal and yet sean connery isnt in this one"
Actually, they explained that in last crusade. Drinking from the holy grail did make you immortal, but only within that tomb. That is another classic aspect of Indiana Jones movies. The "power" the bad guys want to abuse never ends up being quite a great as they think.
"What the hell was the deal with the pygmies in the cemetary? No explanation? No need."
The ones in the skull masks? That actually WAS mentioned in the riddle. I forget the exact wording, but the riddle said something about the "living dead." With those skull masks, they looked liked the living dead.
Posted By: RavenEffect (Guest) on May 29, 2008 at 12:33 PM
I found Indy 4 highly entertaining. There were some points
where I said "What the hell?" but then I had to remember,
this is a Indiana Jones movie and that's why I like them.
The following has - - -
My top 10 "What the Hell" moments were...
1.) Exactly how many Soviets does it take to shoot one
Dr Jones? Appearantly many and still no one succeeds.
Not that I want Indy shot but for the love of all that's
good, at least have one graze his jacket.
2.) When in doubt, always jump into a lead lined
refridgerator in the event a nuclear bomb is coming
at you. This will not only save you from radiation but
will also cushion your landing when you're thrown miles
from the impact. CAUTION: I suggest you find one
like Dr Jones with the "easy open from the inside".
This model is not common and should be tested
before actual use.
3.) We come to find out in Indy 4 that Jones is a decorated military legend. Exactly how old was Indy when he enlisted
into the army? Let's do the math. He's 65 now. The Last
Crusade came out 19 years ago. That's right, Indy joined
when he was 46 or older. If this is normal somebody needs
to explain this to me.
4.) For a guy who always has that whip on his hip, where
was it when he was sinking in quick sand. I know, it
was conveniently misplaced to pull the snake gag.
5.) The waterfalls have been talked about to a great
degree. This could have been solved by having somebody
fucking die. Anyone, someone, somebody unimportant.
Instead we get the next shot after falling of people drying
off like they just got out of a swimming pool. If I was a
character in this movie I think through the rest of the
movie I'd still be talking about it, "Holy shit, can you
believe that shit! Shit! We're fucking alive! That's
some shit!"
6.) The little red ants reminded me of the scarebs in
The Mummy. Although entertaining, not very creative.
Ya know what, fuck it, when I think about it now, this
sequence was much more fun than the end sequence
of the movie with the silver saucer that does not fly
away but disappears because they are not alians but
dimensional tourists.
7.) Is it just me or was there more emphasis on Indy's
hat in this installment than any of the earlier three? The
answer is yes. The damn hat got top billing on some of
the movie posters and is even listed in the closing credits.
8.) The only thing that got more screen time than Indy's
hat was Mutt William's hair.
9.) Exactly who came up with the name Mutt Williams? WTF.
I guess we can blame George Lucas for this too without knowing
for sure because from what I've read on the internet is that
Lucas is Satan and from him comes all things evil.
Posted By: A. J. (Guest) on May 30, 2008 at 02:13 PM
Ok Aliens would not have been my first choice, but like the first 3 were based on 1930/40's movie serials this one was based on 1950's movies thus Commies, the Bomb, Aliens and Killer Monsters (the ants).
And as far as those claming there were no flat out silly things in previous movies check out the screaming guy who falls off the ladder onto the winshield of the truck durring the chase in Raiders.
I'm just happy Steven stopped George from putting a fart joke in the movie like he did in Phantom Menace.
Posted By: Eddie G (Guest) on June 03, 2008 at 04:25 PM