Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull 5/22 (Trailer is out!)

[prisonermonkeys]

Wow. Not entirely sure I'd be able to stomach that much George Lucas. Thankfully he only came up with the Indiana Jones storylines as opposed to writing the script; he simply cannot write dialogue, and nor should he be allowed to.

 

[Revheadnz]

I just saw this tonight and really enjoyed it, what I'll say about it is that Indy 4 is to the Indy series is what Die Hard 4.0 was to Die Hard. Like all the previous movies but more so, even more over the top.

But I liked it a lot. I could see how some wouldn't though. I strongly urge you to see it if you are curious but yea, depending on how you like your movies you might be disappointed.....

 

[prisonermonkeys]

POSSIBLE SPOILERS, or DON'T SAY I DIDN'T WARN YOU!













The way I see it, if you're looking for an Oscar-worthy film with Spielberg's name on it, go see Schindler's List. I just saw Kingdom (takes too long to type the full name out), and while I agree that people won't like it, there's no such thing as a perfect film. I felt there were a few wasted opportunities, and a few very silly moments, but I'm loving Irina Spalko as a villain (I could listen to that accent all day ... if I could be certain she wouldn't fillet me for it); she was way more memorable than Mola "my-heart-ripping-abilities-were-given-to-me-to-make-me-threatening" Ram and Walter "watered-down-version-of-Rene-Belloq" Donovan, even if a little one-dimensional (and there as a definite lesbian undercurrent going on there, even if it didn't manifest).

 

[YSSMAN]

Well, in all honesty, you've gotta be able to suspend your disbelief the entire time in order to get the best out of it... And in that sense, I felt like I was eight years old again. I absolutely loved this film, beginning to end, and I'm pretty sure that it will be one of the better movies of the summer.

I really didn't have anything wrong with it whatsoever, and over on my nerdy websites, people are already bitching. You have to enjoy it for what it is, and in my opinion, I think Lucas and Spielberg did a good job.

But yes, I will concede to the fact that Iron Man was better...

 

[prisonermonkeys]

I really didn't have anything wrong with it whatsoever, and over on my nerdy websites, people are already bitching. You have to enjoy it for what it is, and in my opinion, I think Lucas and Spielberg did a good job.

The problem is that a new Indiana Jones film is like a new James Bond one: everyone has their own ideas as to how it should be made. The die-hards are expecting something on par with Raiders of the Lost Ark, and when they don't get it, they instantly revolt. If you could put it on a sliding scale with Raiders being 100, they;d still be upset if the new film came in at 99.5 ...

 

[Joey D]

Ok I saw it tonight with the archaeology crew and my archaeology professor. After a long day in the field it was nice to just be able to kick back and relax with everyone and go see a movie. I must say, even though archaeologist are nothing like that, it's still a blast to see movies like this. Since why I, personally, liked it will ruin the movie I'll put it behind spoilers.

Spoiler

Why did I like it? Well it had everyone's favourite archaeologist, awesome actions scenes, and of course aliens. I know it's over the top but looking into the rather out there theory that "aliens did it" just had me thrilled to death. I realise that it's probably not how it happened but that little part inside of me has always wished that it was true and it's what I've dreamed about since pursuing the field. The movie was Indiana Jones mixed with James Bond and a little dash of Stargate.

 

[Anderton Prime]

When Shia started swinging on the vines I began to lose interest (and the film began to lose points). When they went over the third waterfall, I was done. Sorry, even as a kid I would have questioned that crap. Oh yeah, warning spoilers (though how you can spoil something which is already spoiled is beyond me).

I actually thought Cate Blanchett was the worst part of the movie. Even the villains I can't remember from Last Crusade were better than her, who I struggle to forget even now...

 

[McLaren]

I don't know. Personally....

Spoiler

I thought the Aliens were a far too much.

 

[Joey D]

I don't know. Personally....

Spoiler

I thought the Aliens were a far too much.

Spoiler

Yes and no, there is a lot of debate in the archaeology community about whether to consider these as possible theories or not. People like Erich von Däniken are well known figure in all of this. Yes it's far out there and I'm going to assume nothing like that really happened, but thinking about the Nazca lines really gets one thinking about other means for creating them.

 

[McLaren]

Spoiler

Yes and no, there is a lot of debate in the archaeology community about whether to consider these as possible theories or not. People like Erich von Däniken are well known figure in all of this. Yes it's far out there and I'm going to assume nothing like that really happened, but thinking about the Nazca lines really gets one thinking about other means for creating them.

I know that is a theory, but just the way they presented everything seemed even way too much for Indy.

 

[YSSMAN]

Well, Lucas made a valid point before when discussing the movie. Considering the time change, what were Americans most-concerned about in the late 1950s? Communists and outer space... It makes sense to go down this route. I'm really not sure what else they were going to do, they were running out of religions.

Just a guess for the next movie starring LeBouf:

China. Communists and some kind of ancient power.

 

[McLaren]

I hate to say it, but I hope there isn't another one. This one was fine, but it seemed to be devoid of the action I enjoyed from 1 & 3.

 

[Kent]

I got to see this movie today.
It was good but I wouldn't say great. There were a few scenes where I felt Ford's age showed itself and hurt the character's image.
That said, the movie was good. 👍

I'd say my favorite part of the movie was...

Spoiler

At the beginning in the government warehouse, a crate was broken open and revealed the Lost Ark.

I thought that was a great easter-egg.

Other than that, I thought the movie was satisfactory but not excellent.
To get that excellent rating I'd need to see Ford without any aging and Connery just playing a part. After both of them drank from the Holy Grail I have a hard time seeing Ford being so old and Connery not taking part on any level.

 

[hellnback]

Remember Kent, the power of the Holy Grail was only confined within the "building" (aka Lost City of Petra) and the 'seal'. And technically that structure started collapsing when the Grail went over the seal.

This movie, was 3/4 Indiana Jones with huge potential but personally I think they bailed on a plausible way out of it. Ark was plausible, Doom was darker but on the edge of plausible, Crusade was plausible too... but this? Not really, not in the end. (Heck and I'll argue 'we're not alone' as much as the next person).

Personally some kind of Egyptian theme (I know been done), Gold or Solomon Mine theme (I know been done), or 'Atlantis' theme (can't recall) or similar epic would served a better purpose and could've had the Russians competing for it.

Good film? I'll let history judge the four, but I think it's fighting third place with Doom.

Others, may, like they did with Matrix (with 2 & 3), choose to forget their was a forth.

 

[Dave A]

I saw it last night, if I wasn't able to just relax and suspend belief I would have hated it but I found it enjoyable to watch. Yes there was a fair few silly bits, but overall I still enjoyed the ride. Certainly doesn't match the old films though.

 

[Joey D]

Yes, Ford really showed his age during the movie but you have to remember the new movie took place in the late 50's with the older three taking place during the 30's. The character of Jones needed to look and act older in order for it all to make sense.

 

[MagpieRacer]

How's this for promotion?

Marco Andretti seaches for fortune and glory at the Indianapolis 500!

I love the paint scheme and the firesuit!

Now thats what I call an "Indy" car

 

[///M-Spec]

SPOILER!

SKIP NOW!

This movie, was 3/4 Indiana Jones with huge potential but personally I think they bailed on a plausible way out of it. Ark was plausible, Doom was darker but on the edge of plausible, Crusade was plausible too... but this? Not really, not in the end. (Heck and I'll argue 'we're not alone' as much as the next person).

I don't understand how interdimensional space beings are any less plausible than Yahweh melting the faces off Nazis, magic rocks that terraform barren landscapes and a cup that instantly treats and heals GSW ..not to mention keep a moldy old French guy alive for 400 years.

Seems pretty in line with the other stuff to me.


M

 

[Famine]

Interdimensional space beings, eh?

Sounds a hell of a lot like the plot to a certain Stargate: SG-1 episode (handily named "Crystal Skull")...

 

[///M-Spec]

Yeah, but this one has a totally dope scene where a guy is horrifically eaten alive by a killer swarm of giant mutant fire ants! That alone was worth the price of admission.


M

 

[Famine]

From that episode of MacGyver (also starring Richard Dean Anderson)?

 

[Kent]

On Plausibility...

The most recent movie is more plausible than Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom.
All of the other Indiana Jones movies were more plausible than the Temple of Doom.

There's nothing to prove or disprove aliens or religion. However, if you pull someone's heart out of their chest I am sure they will die within moments of removal- that can be proven over and over again.
But with that aside...

On The Holy Grail's Powers...
I don't recall the knight saying the powers of the grail were limited to the Temple. Instead, I only remember him saying the Grail itself could not pass the seal. The actual powers of the Grail were not mentioned (only shown in action with Connery's GSW).
Interesting subject for a fanboy discussion of Indiana Jones and possibly my only real complaint about the movie.

Btw, if you look up crystal skulls on wikipedia you can eventually find your way to a list of productions on the subject... Indiana Jones has used the Crystal Skulls before so I wouldn't say it was simply StarGate SG-1 influencing this story.

 

[Famine]

Crystal Skulls are well-known in mythology - particularly in connection to the Mayans. It seems as if Indiana Jones is drawing on the "Mayans were in contact with aliens which is why they were so apparently advanced" section of the myth - something Stargate also visited with Nick Ballard's "zhiand ellienz"*.


*(Stargate joke)

 

[Earth]

Well to me this movie started out at around 4 star quality but turned bad over time and ended up with my rating of ** 1/2 stars which means wait for the DVD/blu-ray.

Spoiler

When leaving the theater some guy was talking about the movie and made a good point. The Indiana Jones movies have been about religious artifiacts like the holy grail or Arc of the covenant. Now this movie was about space aliens who created civilization?

He made good points. The holy grail and the arc of the covenant actually existed, whether or not you believe they were anything special is up to you, but they existed and are now lost and it added a sense of realism to the movies.

Crystal alien skulls dont exist. Flying Saucers controlled by aliens don't exist.

This is just Speilberg forcing his obsession with aliens on the audience.

As for the movie itself, as I noted it started out strong with great scenes but soon became predictable and too much of "I've seen that before" especially in regards to the scene with the jeeps in the jungle, sure Indy had scenes like that in the previous movies but everyone has POTC fresh in their minds and to me, especially with the sword fighting, some of the scenes looked copied even though they probably weren't.

The final bosses, the alien skeletons, were laughable. They killed off the hot chick by giving her too much knowledge?! Lame

This movie could have worked even though there hasn't been an Indy film in a long time, but Speilberg ruined it with his alien obsession and the actions scenes were too cookie cutter when compared to today's films.

 

[McLaren]

I have to disagree with your

Spoiler

Aliens instead of religious artifacts.

IMO, with today's hissy fits and arguments over religion, going with aliens may have been a better way to go.

And the whole point of UFOs and aliens existing or not is irrelevant. The whole thing that makes it somewhat believable is the fact that in real life, aliens ARE theorized to have been the source of ancient technology which is what the movie touches on.

 

[Joey D]

Spoiler

There is no more proof that the holy grail or the arc of the covenant is real or exists then aliens. Although I'm going to guess aliens are more plausible.

The aliens theory, as I've already said, is going along with some current theories. People like Erich von Däniken shout this every chance they can get. I see nothing wrong with exploring this avenue in archaeology since there is a ton of discussion about it, in fact everyone of my anthropology text book discusses it at length. It's not Spielberg pushing it on anyone.

And crystal skulls do exist, although their authenticity is questioned along with who could have made them. For all anyone knows they might be alien skulls, it's quite a popular thing to explore in sci-fi.

 

[Mr P]

Watched this last night! ... Couldn't wait for it to finish tbh apart from the few funny scenes here and there ( like the motorbike chase etc.. ) it was not really my kind of movie.

I can honestly say the only one of these that was enjoyable for me was the 1st and original Raiders of the Lost Ark ... they all went downhill after that and this one was right at the bottom ... just my opinion but don't get your hopes up of reliving your childhood memories of the original 👎

Endings can't get much crappier than it did in this

 

[///M-Spec]

@Earth: Spielburg was not the person responsible for the basic story. George Lucus was. The timeframe (1950s), the skulls, the aliens, that was all Lucus. He wanted to do a 50s Sci-Fi B-movie, in the same vein as The Thing from Another World or Creature from the Black Lagoon.

Crystal Skulls do actually exist. It's just that experts believe they were made in the 1800s using modern tools and not in fact, made by pre-Columbian Mesoamerican peoples with alien technology.

On the other hand, as Joey D pointed out, there is no proof The Ark of the Covenant and the Holy Grail have ever existed... and if you ask Dan Brown, the grail was just a metaphor for a person.


M

 

[Kent]

Watched this last night! ... Couldn't wait for it to finish tbh apart from the few funny scenes here and there ( like the motorbike chase etc.. ) it was not really my kind of movie.

I can honestly say the only one of these that was enjoyable for me was the 1st and original Raiders of the Lost Ark ... they all went downhill after that and this one was right at the bottom ... just my opinion but don't get your hopes up of reliving your childhood memories of the original 👎

Endings can't get much crappier than it did in this

To some extent I have to agree with you about the ending.
It seemed like they wanted to finish the movie as bad as you wanted to get out of the theatre.

Further, I've found there is now a back-lash to CGI in movies... Years ago you could make some epic animated sequence and stun audiences with the image. Huge scenes of destruction and chaos were paramount. Now we are in an age where animation doesn't have the same affect and we end up with anti-climatic endings due to the lack of story and the under-whelming presentation of CGI.
Stuff like the CGI in this movie might blow away 60 year old movie makers but to the people watching the movie it's just another computer generated image doing what we've all seen a hundred times before.

 

[FoolKiller]

Further, I've found there is now a back-lash to CGI in movies... Years ago you could make some epic animated sequence and stun audiences with the image. Huge scenes of destruction and chaos were paramount. Now we are in an age where animation doesn't have the same affect and we end up with anti-climatic endings due to the lack of story and the under-whelming presentation of CGI.

It's the uncanny valley effect. We went from obviously fake, but still awesome to looking almost real, but off just enough to make us feel uneasy about it.

That and the bit where it seems that Hollywood throws in tons of effects and action and just doesn't try with the rest. I compare it to late night cable movies, where they throw in tons of nudity and hope no one cares about the rest. The problem is that the audience's end goal with an action/adventure, special effects movie is different


Back to the uncanny valley:
However, I think we are breaking into the happy side of the uncanny valley. A movie that showed me this was Cloverfield (let's ignore the monster itself for a second). Usually a movie that has to use CGI to recreate most of the environment needs a steady camera to match it all up. I assumed much of Cloverfield was shot in NYC because of how well everything matched up. I didn't realize that only a few minutes worth was actual NYC footage until I watched the features on the DVD. It was a huge step up from King Kong where much of the environment screamed green screen, and is even worse when seen in HD.

Now the monster on the other hand, King Kong put a lot of effort into Kong, whereas Clover looks only a smidge better than the I Am Legend creatures. Odd how those two flipped their effects focus.



pulling all this back on to topic

And while I haven't seen Indy 4 yet, based on recent Spielberg and Lucas works (special editions, new movies) I expect it to go overboard with CGI and get uncanny at points. I still can't believe that Frank Oz and Jim Henson were more believable with their hand stuck up a puppet than these $10 million/second CGI shots.