'Indy Jones & Crystal Skull' review *SPOILERS!*

[rushgoober]

QUOTE (goose @ May 28 2008, 07:57 AM)

QUOTE (Jack Aubrey @ May 27 2008, 09:27 PM) All I'm saying is that in the case of an Indiana Jones movie people shouldn't have to do that! We should have high standards where this movie is concerned and those standards should be met! Then you must hate the first movie, a film in which an average strength archaeologist/professor can simply push huge stones out of tombs in order to escape, can interact with thousands of snakes and escpae without a bite, can outrun dart guns, evade bullets, and on & on...   Jones movies are pure fantasy, and are much easier to accept when you're 12, 13 or 14. That's why i went with kids, so i could enjoy it for what it is through their eyes. Every Jones film has been ridiculous...and ridiculously fun (except for number 2, which in my book really was number 2!).   My only standard for this genre is entertainment value, and I thought it had it, warts and all. Totally agreed (except I really liked the 2nd Indy movie). I don't have to lower my standards, because I don't think of these kinds of movies as great art anyway. They're pure popcorn fun kinds of movies. Like Iron Man. Admittedly, I like Iron Man better, but I don't go to a movie like that for anything deep, just for pure entertainment.   There are movies that have both imho - pure exalted entertainment and some kind of message or commentary on humanity. I'd put movies like the first Star Wars trilogy and the first Matrix movie in that category.   I go to different kinds of movies with different expectations. I go to a movie like Indiana Jones or Iron Man purely to be entertained. I go to a comedy like Forgetting Sarah Marshall or Superbad just to laugh.   If I want something meatier and deeper in a film, something with more depth, I go to a Juno or Lost in Translation or A Beautiful Mind or a Blade Runner.   In one respect I do consider it lowering my standards to see a movie like Iron Man or Indiana Jones. It's lowered down to the standards of pure entertainment movies, which is purely to have fun. I don't consider (and please understand this is my own personal view and one I expect no one else to adopt) those kinds of movies to carry the same weight as the more artistic films that speak more about the human condition. Those kinds of movies will always be my preference, but sometimes you gotta have fun too. It's like with music. I enjoy Yes and King Crimson and stuff that's complex and deep, but every once in awhile it's fun to rock out to AC/DC as well. Again, just my take on things.   That's why I enjoyed Indiana Jones as much as I did. My standards were low, my expectations were low, I just wanted to have a good time and I did.

[JDL2112]

QUOTE (GhostGirl @ May 26 2008, 07:32 AM)

QUOTE (Storm Shadow @ May 26 2008, 08:28 AM) We're all on a message board for Rush, the nerd insult doesn't work. Seriously.   I'm a self-professed nerd. Doesn't bother me in the least.   Also, if expecting a movie to be good makes me nerdy, so be it. Hi...my name is Jay and I'm a nerd...

[Jack Aubrey]

QUOTE (goose @ May 28 2008, 10:57 AM)

QUOTE (Jack Aubrey @ May 27 2008, 09:27 PM) All I'm saying is that in the case of an Indiana Jones movie people shouldn't have to do that! We should have high standards where this movie is concerned and those standards should be met! Then you must hate the first movie, a film in which an average strength archaeologist/professor can simply push huge stones out of tombs in order to escape, can interact with thousands of snakes and escpae without a bite, can outrun dart guns, evade bullets, and on & on...   Jones movies are pure fantasy, and are much easier to accept when you're 12, 13 or 14. That's why i went with kids, so i could enjoy it for what it is through their eyes. Every Jones film has been ridiculous...and ridiculously fun (except for number 2, which in my book really was number 2!).   My only standard for this genre is entertainment value, and I thought it had it, warts and all. Wait...what?   Suspension of disbelief is an entirely different thing than the lowering of one's standards.   Come on, man. You know that.

[Jack Aubrey]

By the way, that is a really good review, Presto. I might draft you as an official TRF reviewer.

[Presto-digitation]

QUOTE (Jack Aubrey @ May 28 2008, 01:25 PM)

By the way, that is a really good review, Presto. I might draft you as an official TRF reviewer.

Thanks. Bring it on.

 

Hated to generally agree with you on this film, by the way. I'd heard so much mixed stuff that I continued to hope I'd fall in line with what I hoped for versus the negatives I'd heard. It'd be easy to say I looked for that stuff, but really...no. I was affected by them just the same and had I not even known this film was coming out until I was watching it, I'd no doubt have the same gripes.

[Jack Aubrey]

QUOTE (Presto-digitation @ May 28 2008, 02:34 PM)

QUOTE (Jack Aubrey @ May 28 2008, 01:25 PM) By the way, that is a really good review, Presto. I might draft you as an official TRF reviewer. Thanks. Bring it on.   Hated to generally agree with you on this film, by the way. I'd heard so much mixed stuff that I continued to hope I'd fall in line with what I hoped for versus the negatives I'd heard. It'd be easy to say I looked for that stuff, but really...no. I was affected by them just the same and had I not even known this film was coming out until I was watching it, I'd no doubt have the same gripes. I understand how you feel. I wanted it to be great, too. I actually had plans to get together with a friend and go see it last Friday but I'd read so many negative advance reviews that I decided to wait until I heard official reviews in case they were off for whatever reason. I hate that they weren't. My friend wound up going alone and told me that he wished he'd have saved his money.

[goose]

QUOTE (Jack Aubrey @ May 28 2008, 01:17 PM)

QUOTE (goose @ May 28 2008, 10:57 AM) QUOTE (Jack Aubrey @ May 27 2008, 09:27 PM) All I'm saying is that in the case of an Indiana Jones movie people shouldn't have to do that! We should have high standards where this movie is concerned and those standards should be met! Then you must hate the first movie, a film in which an average strength archaeologist/professor can simply push huge stones out of tombs in order to escape, can interact with thousands of snakes and escpae without a bite, can outrun dart guns, evade bullets, and on & on...   Jones movies are pure fantasy, and are much easier to accept when you're 12, 13 or 14. That's why i went with kids, so i could enjoy it for what it is through their eyes. Every Jones film has been ridiculous...and ridiculously fun (except for number 2, which in my book really was number 2!).   My only standard for this genre is entertainment value, and I thought it had it, warts and all. Wait...what?   Suspension of disbelief is an entirely different thing than the lowering of one's standards.   Come on, man. You know that. Yes, I know. And for me to enjoy this type of film, I have to totally suspend my disbelief. I think in the Indy world that I've accepted, just about anything is fair game.   As far as standards, I'm in line with Goob in that I'm not a big fan of these kinds of movies as a whole. I'd even go so far as to say I prefer films over movies, which is really snobby and pretentious, but true. But I did enjoy this latest installment of Jones, which made me smile several times and didn't bore me like a lot of action movies do.

[PariahDog]

Wow, I'm glad I saw Crystal Skull before reading this thread. I thought it was a lot of fun. Sure, it's no Citizen Kane but I think it's about as good of a new Indy movie as I could have hoped for (realistically). It was certainly no stinker like Phantom Menace. I definitely enjoyed it more than Temple of Doom and maybe even Holy Grail (though it's been a while since I've seen HG).

 

I don't really understand the big problem with the alien angle. We knew they wanted to go in a new direction, and they've already done the metaphysical/spiritual angle in two previous films. Where else would you expect them to go? Would a strictly realistic/archeological Indy film have worked, or even been consistent with the series?

 

Anyway, I'd give Crystal Skull 4 out of 5 stars.

 

 

[Presto-digitation]

QUOTE (PariahDog @ May 29 2008, 07:35 PM)

Wow, I'm glad I saw Crystal Skull before reading this thread.   I thought it was a lot of fun.  Sure, it's no Citizen Kane but I think it's about as good of a new Indy movie as I could have hoped for (realistically).  It was certainly no stinker like Phantom Menace.  I definitely enjoyed it more than Temple of Doom and maybe even Holy Grail (though it's been a while since I've seen HG).  I don't really understand the big problem with the alien angle.  We knew they wanted to go in a new direction, and they've already done the metaphysical/spiritual angle in two previous films.  Where else would you expect them to go?  Would a strictly realistic/archeological Indy film have worked, or even been consistent with the series?  Anyway, I'd give Crystal Skull 4 out of 5 stars.

Phantom Menace was infinitely more enjoyable and better quality. There is NOTHING in Indy IV that tops (or approaches, quite frankly) the Maul-Kenobi-Jinn duel at the end, and that's just those 10 minutes.

 

Williams' score is much better for Episode I as well.

 

But then again I like the prequels.

Edited May 30, 2008 by Presto-digitation

[Jack Aubrey]

QUOTE (Presto-digitation @ May 30 2008, 09:37 AM)

QUOTE (PariahDog @ May 29 2008, 07:35 PM) Wow, I'm glad I saw Crystal Skull before reading this thread.   I thought it was a lot of fun.  Sure, it's no Citizen Kane but I think it's about as good of a new Indy movie as I could have hoped for (realistically).  It was certainly no stinker like Phantom Menace.  I definitely enjoyed it more than Temple of Doom and maybe even Holy Grail (though it's been a while since I've seen HG).  I don't really understand the big problem with the alien angle.  We knew they wanted to go in a new direction, and they've already done the metaphysical/spiritual angle in two previous films.  Where else would you expect them to go?  Would a strictly realistic/archeological Indy film have worked, or even been consistent with the series?  Anyway, I'd give Crystal Skull 4 out of 5 stars. Phantom Menace was infinitely more enjoyable and better quality. There is NOTHING in Indy IV that tops (or approaches, quite frankly) the Maul-Kenobi-Jinn duel at the end, and that's just those 10 minutes.   Williams' score is much better for Episode I as well.   But then again I like the prequels. QUOTE Williams' score is much better for Episode I as well.   'Duel Of The Fates' is the second-best piece ever composed for the series, right after 'The Imperial March'.

[Presto-digitation]

Dead-on right.

[PariahDog]

QUOTE (Presto-digitation @ May 30 2008, 08:37 AM)

Phantom Menace was infinitely more enjoyable and better quality.

You've got to be kidding, right? Have you WATCHED Phantom Menace recently? I thought it was okay when it came out, but when watching the DVD before episodes two and three I was struck by how disappointing Menace is compared to all other SW films. It almost doesn't seem like a "real" Star Wars film; it's more like one of those made-for-TV Ewok movies. Yes, the duel at the end, the pod race, and the soundtrack are great, but so much of Menace is almost cringe-inducing. I do like Clones and especially Sith, but I can barely stand to watch Menace.

 

For me, Crystal Skull fits right in with all the other Indy films. But Phantom Menace REALLY pales in comparison to the other Star Wars films.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[WCFIELDS]

I'll wait and rent it, I think..........

[streak85]

QUOTE (WCFIELDS @ May 30 2008, 01:15 PM)

I'll wait and rent it, I think..........

 

 

It was quite above decent on the big screen

[-D-RocK-]

QUOTE (streak85 @ May 30 2008, 12:59 PM)

QUOTE (WCFIELDS @ May 30 2008, 01:15 PM) I'll wait and rent it, I think..........     It was quite above decent on the big screen F**kin' Ayy streak!

[Jack Aubrey]

QUOTE (streak85 @ May 30 2008, 02:59 PM)

QUOTE (WCFIELDS @ May 30 2008, 01:15 PM) I'll wait and rent it, I think..........     It was quite above decent on the big screen That's not ungood to hear.

[nic2112nic]

It's funny how the spaceship is like the mid 1900's concept of an alien spaceship: flying saucer. Fits the time setting perfectly!!

 

However, I'm still getting the DVD...

[King Rygar]

I enjoyed it....

 

I loved the others (even Temple), and yes, this one seemed at bit worse than any of the first three.. But, I say it was worth seeing. I have gone and seen FAR worse movies recently. It was "fun" but not "perfect" like Raiders. It was almost sad at points.

 

Lucas and Speilberg both were very reluctant to make this movie for the very reasons many here have stated. Speilberg stated that there wasn't much new as far as action goes to do, basically the genre has been done to death... They also knew that no plot devices could top the Ark or the Holy Grail, but they made it anyway because they wanted to have fun again like they did back in the old days.

 

So they had their fun, and the movie is whatever you make of it.

 

Sorry, I'm rambling

[PariahDog]

QUOTE (streak85 @ May 30 2008, 01:59 PM)

QUOTE (WCFIELDS @ May 30 2008, 01:15 PM) I'll wait and rent it, I think..........     It was quite above decent on the big screen Yeah, I think it's definitely worth seeing on the big screen. Especially for the chase and alien/temple sequences at the end.

Edited May 30, 2008 by PariahDog

[LowLifeFlatHeadScum]

Edited May 31, 2008 by LowLifeFlatHeadScum

[Slime]

It was an enjoyable two hours, but to me it felt like just another Indy movie. It seems that every time Indy finds something cool, the site destroys itself or the people who find it destroy themselves.

 

I give 3 out of 5. Harrison Ford is still awesome, but the rest of the movie wasn't as awesome as he was.

[Rushian King]

An entertaining movie, I was never bored. That's because I couldn't wait to see what ludicrous, over the top, completely implausible scene was coming next. Was there one thing in this movie that was remotely believable?

 

The magnetized box which sometimes attracts metal, but not always?

Surviving a nuclear explosion in a fridge?

Indy getting followed everywhere but to his own home?

Using a snake to pull someone out of a sinkhole?

Why was a path-clearing vehicle needed when for the next 15(?) minutes we saw multiple vehicles driving all through the jungle with no problems?

The fencing on moving vehicles?

Indy Jr. swinging like Tarzan?

Attack-the-villain only monkeys?

Flying off a cliff only to land on a tree?

Dropping over 3 waterfalls?

 

Entertainment 4.5/5

Quality 1.5/5

Total 6/10

[progrush2112]

I saw Indy 4 twice in theaters. (so far...)

Once at the first midnight showing and again with the Parents.

I've been waiting for Indy 4 for awhile, as a long time fan I wasn't skeptical whatsoever when I saw the trailer. While the movie had is pros and cons, I won't say any cause they've all been mentioned pretty much, I thought it was great. Could it have been better? Well, of course. And I really hope this isn't the last we see of Dr. Jones.

 

My rating of the series:

Crusade>Raiders>Crystal>Doom

[DonnaWanna]

hiyaz all

 

i just got back from seein this flick, i took my mom, good way to

get our minds off things for awhile,

IMO.. ehhh it was alright...i was surprized to see the

janitor from scrubs in it

and it was cool seein whats- her -face from the 1st Raiders in this flick

some cool graphics too.

 

personaly i woulda rather of saw

the new Adam Sandler flick but i let my mom choose .

she seemed to enjoyed it, but said the others were better.

 

ehhh it was a lil escape for lil bit for us so thats good imo

[-D-RocK-]

QUOTE (Rushian King @ Jun 1 2008, 11:54 PM)

Surviving a nuclear explosion in a fridge?

Been done.