Support NeoGAF

[BobFromPikeCreek]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Er4MGAIv-wA

:lol Wow.

 

[perryfarrell]

* Too much bloom lighting
* 'The space between spaces'? For real.... :-/
* Too many chases, not enough exploring of temples or caves.

Besides that, pretty watchable.

 

[Jason's Ultimatum]

The plot and characters are forgettable, but it was still a fun movie. The past Indy films blow KotCS out of the water.

 

[jjasper]

I watched it yesterday. I liked it except for the overuse of CG.

 

[Lakitu]

I saw it, and I really enjoyed it. But I must say it's the worst of all the Indiana films. It was a fun popcorn flick, but that's about it. I think some people's expectations were a little bit too high.

7/10

Btw, Cate Blanchett was SMOKING in that

 

[SantaC]

But which of today's rollercoasters is better than this? Mummy Returns, Sahara, Fool's Gold, National Treasure 1&2?

Truth of the matter is, that despite some problems, this is the best adventure movie of it's kind since the last Indy movie, 15 years ago, and by some good margin. First Mummy and Romancing the Stone were probably the only other two decent movies in this genre, that have been made in the meantime.

uh the lord of the rings movies anyone? I know they're fantasy, but they're also adventure movies. And they sure smoke this movie.

Even fantasy movies like narnia and harry potter does it better also.

 

[Lord Error]

uh the lord of the rings movies anyone? I know they're fantasy, but they're also adventure movies. And they sure smoke this movie.

Even fantasy movies like narnia and harry potter does it better also.

I was thinking of movies that are some kind of quest for the treasure, taking place in our world. None of the movies you listed there offer any of that.

 

[genjiZERO]

I watched it yesterday. I liked it except for the overuse of CG.

felt the same way. I really enjoyed it though. Sometimes the acting was a little too campy

Spoiler

and I wish the bad guys were more than just a silly joke

, but it was fun and not at all mindless (which I appreciate). If I was 12 again - I'd probably have though it was the most bad-arse thing ever - but it probably takes real maturity to understand and appreciate something like that. The thing that I always liked about Indiana Jones is that he's a history/archaeology professor who goes on adventures - that's the type of thing kids need to be watching.

I keep reading on the internets that people keep calling the first three movies a "trilogy." They are not a trilogy. A trilogy is a unified contiguous story that takes the format of a 3 act play. Star Wars and LoTR (the film not the book; the book is a 6 act play) follows this, but IJ does not. IJ is just a character who repeats in loosely related serials.

 

[Snaku]

But which of today's rollercoasters is better than this? Mummy Returns, Sahara, Fool's Gold, National Treasure 1&2?

Oh I'd say the first Mummy was better. Hell, KotCS even took a couple things from it...

Spoiler

Benny = Mac
Benny's death = Mac's death
Scarab swarm = Ant swarm

 

[JasoNsider]

This movie...was complete dung.

I was in complete awe when it was over at how insanely bad the script was. I'm never, ever going to see another movie written by George Lucas in a theater ever again. When the big reveal happened it was denial city where I was. Nobody believed it, people were looking left and right "are they serious with this???"

I just have to shake my head....God damn you, Lucas!

edit: Was I the only one that, when done watching, thought "Oh my god the Angry Videogame Nerd reaction to this is going to be more entertaining than the movie itself" ?

 

[Evlar]

I marvel at the odd theaters people on GAF attend, where the audience shares a single reaction to a film, and even starts to talk in unison at good parts and bad parts. At the theater I attend everyone is pretty much still and silent throughout the picture excepting the teenage boys trying to impress their girlfriends.

 

[whytemyke]

i want a picture of indy silhouetted in front of the mushroom cloud. that was a sweet scene. that'd be a badass wallpaper

 

[JzeroT1437]

Anyone ever pointed out how terrible an archaeologist Indy is? He goes around tearing up everyone's shit all willy nilly, usually only to destroy or hide the precious artifact he's recovered.

 

[Cheebs]

Oh I'd say the first Mummy was better. Hell, KotCS even took a couple things from it...

Spoiler

Benny = Mac
Benny's death = Mac's death
Scarab swarm = Ant swarm

Except the ant stuff was in the Indy script before The Mummy came out. It was part of Lucas's initial draft in 1992.

 

[Spectral Glider]

My big problem with Skull is that the Kingdom turned out to be incredibly small and not at all foreboding. Well, ok, that was just one of my many problems with it. But apparently they thought a handful of natives with silly masks crawling around a Playskool set was all that was needed to make the place seem bad ass.

 

[rezuth]

This movie...was complete dung.

I was in complete awe when it was over at how insanely bad the script was. I'm never, ever going to see another movie written by George Lucas in a theater ever again. When the big reveal happened it was denial city where I was. Nobody believed it, people were looking left and right "are they serious with this???"

I just have to shake my head....God damn you, Lucas!

edit: Was I the only one that, when done watching, thought "Oh my god the Angry Videogame Nerd reaction to this is going to be more entertaining than the movie itself" ?

He will loove it since its a good movie.

 

[Anton Sugar]

I really don't see what the deal is. It was an entertaining movie. I laughed, I was anxious, I sneered a few times, but so what? What the fuck were you guys expecting?

Everyone who went to see it was there just to have fun in my theatre too, apparently. Half the audience was clapping at the end. It was just enjoyable. It's not a fucking archaeology simulation. Some of you are analyzing the "canon" and what should and shouldn't be in the film. Get over it.

 

[Tyrone Slothrop]

i happened to see it again. so i think i've reached my verdict

the only real offense in my book is how one-dimensional the characters become once indy & co. reach south america. i found no problem in the CG, the aliens, ect

if they wrote oxely and mac out the script, there'd be more room for the bond between the

Spoiler

jones family

to resonate more. i think that was the point of the movie, that

Spoiler

indy's a daddy! he's married!

... so, yeah, with a better thought-out script and no swinging with the monkeys, it could have easily been the best of the sequels. but it's about on-par with crusade (that is, if you're like me and rank it radiers>>crusade>>temple)

 

[JasoNsider]

I really don't see what the deal is. It was an entertaining movie. I laughed, I was anxious, I sneered a few times, but so what? What the fuck were you guys expecting?

Everyone who went to see it was there just to have fun in my theatre too, apparently. Half the audience was clapping at the end. It was just enjoyable. It's not a fucking archaeology simulation. Some of you are analyzing the "canon" and what should and shouldn't be in the film. Get over it.

I'm not even talking about canon. My love for Indy is only at the level of "really enjoyed it in my childhood, thought it would be swell as one more for old times sake". It's the writing for this movie that was in the shitter. Even if the direction was over the top like it should be, the writing was just atrocious on both a structure point of view and at a really basic perspective on premise.

Dialogue? Shit (minus the very first indy line in the film which was ace )

Structure? Confused, shitty. Okay point right directly after intro with school and diner, everything else was a mess.

Premise/scenario? Un-fucking-believably horrendous to the point where our entire crowd was walking out like holding our heads in complete disbelief that they did this.

Writing is the foundation for a film, and like Star Wars Episodes 1-3, this was just a sad script.

 

[NotWii]

Except the ant stuff was in the Indy script before The Mummy came out. It was part of Lucas's initial draft in 1992.

Can I read the initial draft?

 

[border]

"It was great fun, you guys are just too old and jaded for fun! If you were 12 years old you would have loved it!"

So less than a week after release, people are already backsliding to the same defenses they used for Star Wars Prequels. Not a good sign.

 

[Tyrone Slothrop]

lucas movies >> internet forum reaction >> will NOT be positive. no matter what.

srsly

 

[JasoNsider]

lucas movies >> internet forum reaction >> will NOT be positive. no matter what.

srsly

Or the logic could just go

Lucas movies -> will NOT be quality.

Not really sure you need to put forums in there. We did see the movie in real life! It's fair to be critical of shitty work.

 

[Defcon]

If you liked the movie, that's cool, but don't use the excuse that people who didn't are just old and jaded.

I've enjoyed plenty of films that were made for the young demographic, but Kingdom of the Crystal Skull was simply a bad movie in my opinion.

 

[Cheebs]

Can I read the initial draft?

Not that I know of. It is discussed in great detail in that giant making of book out this month. The ant stuff, the aliens, the rocket sled, the nuke and the fridge escape are all elements Lucas came up with in 1992.

 

[Christopher]

"It was great fun, you guys are just too old and jaded for fun! If you were 12 years old you would have loved it!"

So less than a week after release, people are already backsliding to the same defenses they used for Star Wars Prequels. Not a good sign.

By the same token people can say if you enjoyed it your young and stupid if people are using that excuse.

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

Anyone ever pointed out how terrible an archaeologist Indy is? He goes around tearing up everyone's shit all willy nilly, usually only to destroy or hide the precious artifact he's recovered.

Yeah, I was ranting about this after watching the older ones about a month ago:

For instance, he gets pretty hot and bothered that important artifacts should end up in museums... but he only seems to give a shit about the final artifact; anything standing in its way is worth destroying without a second thought. Want to get the Ark of the Covenant? Throw its coverstone to the ground and smash it into pieces. Want to see if X marks the spot? Grab a pole and beat a hole in an old library, burst through some walls, and desecrate human remains to make a torch. I'm willing to cut a bit of the destruction some slack when he's trying to escape from fatal danger.

 

[AniHawk]

"It was great fun, you guys are just too old and jaded for fun! If you were 12 years old you would have loved it!"

So less than a week after release, people are already backsliding to the same defenses they used for Star Wars Prequels. Not a good sign.

The prequels had a whole lot of other problems that Indy IV simply doesn't have. Those movies tried to be serious and complex in a series that had always told a pretty simple story (with a few plot twists thrown in for good measure). Indy IV's story was pretty straightforward: beat the Russians to the city of gold.

There are some series that try to make you think (which is partly why the SW PT failed), and there are some that are there just to be fun rides. Indy IV is the latter. I dunno, maybe knowing what to expect from the film (1950s B-movie) let me get some disappointment out of the way early. I remember earlier this decade when talk was starting up for the film that I thought they could dye Harrison's hair and set it a few years after Last Crusade or something. I hadn't really thought about Indiana Jones not existing in an era without Nazis until last year or whenever the first details of the script were leaked.

I don't think some people were jaded, just that their expectations weren't in line with what the filmmakers were going for. I loved the ant scene, Marion's return, and the nuke scene (which is a great "oh shit" moment when he realizes where he is). I didn't mind the vine-swinging thing, partially because I'd read about it earlier here, and partially because up until then, I was enjoying the movie a lot.

 

[BrodiemanTTR]

the nuke and the fridge escape are all elements Lucas came up with

I knew it!

For instance, he gets pretty hot and bothered that important artifacts should end up in museums... but he only seems to give a shit about the final artifact; anything standing in its way is worth destroying without a second thought. Want to get the Ark of the Covenant? Throw its coverstone to the ground and smash it into pieces. Want to see if X marks the spot? Grab a pole and beat a hole in an old library, burst through some walls, and desecrate human remains to make a torch. I'm willing to cut a bit of the destruction some slack when he's trying to escape from fatal danger.

I'm sure the fact that Nazis are breathing down his neck chasing the same artifacts he is has something to do with the amount of time he allots for careful inspection and cataloguing.

 

[border]

"It's okay for the film to fail on many levels because it's supposed to be like some B-movie from half a century ago."

Smells a lot like Prequel defense, too.

 

[Snaku]

Not that I know of. It is discussed in great detail in that giant making of book out this month. The ant stuff, the aliens, the rocket sled, the nuke and the fridge escape are all elements Lucas came up with in 1992.

Yeah, and James Cameron came up with the Avatar name over a decade ago. /giantrolleyes

Sorry, but if someone has beaten you to the punch after you sat around for 10+ years playing with yourself, at least have the decency and professionalism to move on and come up with something new.

 

[Cheebs]

Yeah, and James Cameron came up with the Avatar name over a decade ago. /giantrolleyes

Sorry, but if someone has beaten you to the punch after you sat around for 10+ years playing with yourself, at least have the decency and professionalism to move on and come up with something new.

The Mummy didn't have an ant attack though....

 

[AniHawk]

"It's okay for the film to fail on many levels because it's supposed to be like some B-movie from half a century ago."

Smells a lot like Prequel defense, too.

No where did I say the movie failed on many levels. And Indy movies have always been set a half a century back.

Here's my list of pros and cons:

Pros:
First shot of Indy's shadow through college
Graveyard sequence (classic Indy corpse destroying)
Ant scene, particularly the fight with the big Russian guy
Indiana Jones is actually Indiana Jones
Marion Ravenwood returns
Mutt/Indy chemistry
Some pretty funny lines
Callbacks to previous films

Spoiler

Indy grabs the hat for a perfect "damn straight" ending

Cons:
His name is Indiana Jones, motherfuckers
Explaining drysand vs. quicksand... why?
John Hurt replaces Henry Jones Sr.'s book.
Lack of Indy action in jungle scene
Fridge flying, yeah he would've died from broken bones and cancer, but there's at least the fortunate coincidence that he's Indiana Jones
Indy wigging out at the Crystal Skull
Racing in the desert was kinda dumb. Most excruciating opening since Temple of Doom, but not THE most excruciating opening since it didn't have Kate Capshaw.

Do not care either way:
Vine-swinging- such a small part of the movie to get so much hate
Mac. Switched back and forth too much, but was at least there for some good humor

Maybe I need to see it again. Like I said, our crowd was pretty good and everyone had a pretty good time overall.

 

[Ignatz Mouse]

National Treasure and Stargate are better adventure films than this. I never saw the Mummy.

 

[NotWii]

Not that I know of. It is discussed in great detail in that giant making of book out this month. The ant stuff, the aliens, the rocket sled, the nuke and the fridge escape are all elements Lucas came up with in 1992.

Fuck yeah! Lucas is GOD!

The fridge thing wouldn't have been bad if it didn't bounce around like a ping pong ball.

 

[Anton Sugar]

"It was great fun, you guys are just too old and jaded for fun! If you were 12 years old you would have loved it!"

So less than a week after release, people are already backsliding to the same defenses they used for Star Wars Prequels. Not a good sign.

I thought the prequels were pretty shitty. I honestly don't see this film as any worse than Temple of Doom, which has a fair share of cringeworthy moments.

 

[SantaC]

I was thinking of movies that are some kind of quest for the treasure, taking place in our world. None of the movies you listed there offer any of that.

Lord of the Rings is not a quest for treasure? In many ways they are.

 

[Snaku]

The Mummy didn't have an ant attack though....

Um, so? Everyone of my friends that I've spoke to after seeing the film pointed that scene out as having been just like the scarab swarm attacks in the Mummy. What difference does it make that the creature is different? It's like saying Mac and Benny are different because they were played by different actors.

 

[SantaC]

uh Mummy 1 is definitely more entertaining movie than Indy 4.

 

[AniHawk]

uh Mummy 1 is definitely more entertaining movie than Indy 4.

The Mummy was really good when Imhotep was a walking corpse, but it fell apart once the girl was kidnapped.

And Rick O'Connell is a poor man's Indiana Jones.

 

[The Librarian]

So I'm guessing the general Gaf consensus is that this movie is not worth seeing?

 

[SantaC]

The Mummy was really good when Imhotep was a walking corpse, but it fell apart once the girl was kidnapped.

That I can agree with, but that was like 80% into the movie. It wasn't perfect by no means. Indy 4 fell apart around 40% into the movie when they found the crystal skull. I really liked the opening stuff.

 

[Sapiens]

So I'm guessing the general Gaf consensus is that this movie is not worth seeing?

The man-boob jaded Star Wars fan GAF? Yes, don't see it.

The more reasonable GAF not deserving of good things (because we don't understand the true greatness of shitty movies)? Yes, see it.

 

[BocoDragon]

So I'm guessing the general Gaf consensus is that this movie is not worth seeing?

wrong.

The general GAF consensus is that it's flawed.

A lot of people have shown love for a big silly adventure movie...

....but it's the kind of movie a "comic book guy" type would rip to shreds.

 

[Anton Sugar]

So I'm guessing the general Gaf consensus is that this movie is not worth seeing?

I mean, come on. I think it's at 79% on RottenTomatoes. Anyone who says that is not worth seeing is ridiculous.

 

[BrodiemanTTR]

Explaining drysand vs. quicksand... why?

I think that, like the end of the motorcycle chase with Marcus' statue, was supposed to be an "Indy becoming like his dad

Spoiler

and Mutt being the new Indy

" moment.

Racing in the desert was kinda dumb.

I didn't mind the highway race. I thought it was a neat little head fake to kick off the movie, but I guess I could see where someone might not like it.

 

[Solo]

So I'm guessing the general Gaf consensus is that this movie is not worth seeing?

The general GAF consensus doesnt exist. Reading just one page in this thread will tell you that. For every person who loved it, there is one who despised it (this is my personal camp), and one who was lukewarm on it.

Go and see it and judge for yourself.

 

[border]

I mean, come on. I think it's at 79% on RottenTomatoes. Anyone who says that is not worth seeing is ridiculous.

Revenge of the Sith is at 79% on RottenTomatoes. And it's pretty fucking terrible.

 

[Gary Whitta]

I didn't mind the highway race. I thought it was a neat little head fake to kick off the movie, but I guess I could see where someone might not like it.

By head fake I think you mean "scene where nothing of consequence happens and goes nowhere." Seriously, what was the fucking point of that?

 

[AniHawk]

That I can agree with, but that was like 80% into the movie. It wasn't perfect by no means. Indy 4 fell apart around 40% into the movie when they found the crystal skull. I really liked the opening stuff.

When I rewatched The Last Crusade, I had confused some scenes from The Mummy, particularly Kazim's role with Ardeth Bey's.

Part of the fun I have with Indiana Jones is that the guy is sort of a superhero. He's a professor normally, but he's also this badass with a whip and a gun (I was kinda disappointed there was no gun joke in Crystal Skull when there had been one in each of the first three). Harrison Ford, while not a great actor, knows how to play a cool character and works well with humor. Brendan Frasier's good with humor, but not much else. It's hard to root for Rick O'Connell when the character in his adventures with the most charisma is Imhotep.