The Return Of The Great Adventure
Added 11/20/2009
I don't know why people complain about his one but it must be the even numbered Indiana Jones movies that nobody likes (very similar to how fans and others respond to the odd numbered Star Treks). This was a great adventure from start to finish and I couldn't have enjoyed it better. Ford steps back into the role seamlessly. Though a little older, he still handles the action scenes just like he did back in the 80s. The Russians are now the villains of the picture and Cate Blanchett plays Spalko brilliantly, bringing Lotte Lenya's Rosa Klebb from James Bond to mind (right down to the bob hairstyle). And it was enjoyable to have a female villain (Elsa from The Last Crusade doesn't really count in my opinion as she just didn't scream "evil" to me) and, other than Mola Ram from Temple, the only villain to get into the fights. And she was a step up from Donovan, who also just didn't seem villainous enough. Shia Labeouf I could've done without. I didn't like him in Transformers and I don't like him in this. Action doesn't seem to suit him and I didn't like the fact that Lucas/Spielberg made him Indy's son, which I was hoping throughout the film that he wasn't but I was disappointed. Karen Allen makes a welcome return and I enjoyed the bickering that she and Ford did. The rest of the supporting cast is also well played. The references to Connery, Elliot and other people/artifacts from the previous films were enjoyable (especially the Ark). I didn't mind the aliens at the end as it was set in the 50s and the sci-fi tone fit in well enough (Indy locking himself in the fridge was also something that didn't bother me). I don't why people think that its implausible/impossible for aliens to make an apperance, I mean the character did go up against a guy who could take your heart out and still live so extra-terrestrials aren't that far-fetched. Action sequences are excellent but everything just seems to be CG now and I blame Lucas for that. And finally, this will be the last time (for now anyway) that I have to praise (well I guess I don't have to but he's so good) John Williams, who brings in excellent new material while working in some of the old themes as well.
0 out of 0 people found this helpful.
|
almost as bad as the holocaust
Added 10/24/2009
People condemn Lucas for this atrocity, but Spielberg can also be condemned. His nostalgia got the better of him, so we have three (THREE) references to Marcus Brody and one to Indy's dad, along with a very unnecessary Marion Ravenwood return and the predictable Indy jokes about getting old. This was their chance to do something new with Indy. Lucas and Spiel blew it, serving us a feast of rotten tidbits we'd eaten too many times before: the evil bad guy, the car chases, the big huge guy indy has to fight at some point, the ancient relic that hold ancient powers.
How can two legends of film armed with hundreds of millions of dollars, a legion of crew members, one of America's most beloved characters and nineteen years in which to do it accomplish what will go down as one of Hollywood's most embarrassing films?
4 out of 7 people found this helpful.
|
An open mind will yield positive results
Added 10/3/2009
I went into this movie worrying about several things: First, will it be as bad as the detractors are saying? Is it still an Indy movie? Will Shia LaBeouf take Willie's spot as the most annoying sidekick in the Indy series?
Thankfully, I found that I really enjoyed Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. It's no Raiders or Last Crusade, but why would anyone want the same movie all over again? No, Crystal Skull is a different breed of Indy film. As the great Bob Dylan sings, "the times they are a changin'" and that idea fits here well. Harrison Ford and Steven Spielberg work well together making Indy's age a factor in the movie, but not one that takes all of the attention. Shia LaBeouf is more tolerable as the tenacious Mutt than his character in Transformers, and Cate Blanchett and Karen Allen provide solid performances.
The story is not as clogged and confusing as the film's detractors are saying; in fact, it's rather easy to follow. It's pretty entertaining and makes the 2 hours plus seem a lot less, a sign of good storytelling since no part of Crystal Skull really felt slow or dragging. The whole alien/Soviet concept is not as unbelievable as one might think; in fact, it works rather well and breathes new life into the franchise. Sure, it's a bit different than the usual crusty tomb full of treasure or shrines to strange gods, but that's what is so appealing about this movie; it takes Indy in a new direction while not straying from the pulp lifeblood that flows through the series' veins.
Disregard all the hatred toward this film, go see it and form your own opinion. If you want Raiders 2, then just watch Raiders. The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is a NEW Indy movie, therefore it's not going to be the same as the original three. On that note, if this had been a carbon copy of Raiders, there would be a bunch of people complaining that Lucas and Spielberg are too afraid to move the franchise forward or some nonsense. Go see it with an open mind and expect a new Indiana Jones, not a rehash, and you shouldn't be disappointed.
2 out of 2 people found this helpful.
|
The moans about Jones
Added 9/24/2009
George Lucas and Steven Spielberg's overdue, overbaked, and overhyped entry into their treasure hunting series, starring Harrison Ford maintaining all of his rugged charm, has the potential to be at least as fun as Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom if expectations are checked at the door. A convoluted story is built around an alien crystal skull that is fabled to unlock ultimate knowledge, which Indiana Jones is coerced into finding by Cate Blanchett and her Russian comrades. Although Indy is prone to feats that reach out of the realm of realism, implausable stunts involving vineswinging with computer-generated monkeys and being bombed inside a refridgerator seems out of place, as much of the appeal of the first three films was derived from the authentic B-movie style of filmmaking. But Spielberg's approach to directing action can still recall the fun of the originals - in the opening warehouse sequence and the chase through Connecticut in particular. It's ashame Crystal Skull didn't contain more of this content, as much of it is talky and inconsequential. Delightfully, Karen Allen comes back after 27 years, and Shia Labeouf adds a youthful energy amoung a cast skewing older.
Spielberg isn't in the practice of providing audio commentaries for his films on DVD or Blu-Ray, but the insightful making-of documentaries on these discs thoroughly monitor all the phases of production with several interviews with cast and crew.
1 out of 2 people found this helpful.
|
Ain't Not Half Bad This Thurr
Added 9/11/2009
Doubters doubt no more. Indiana Jones and The Kingdom of the Crystal Skulls is funny, highly entertaining and surprisingly exciting! Personally I think the best entry into this series was, is and always will be Temple of Doom so I really wasn't expecting this to top that in any way, which it didn't, but it did however come awful close to topping what I felt was the weakest entry, The Last Crusade. Not by all that much though. Both had their strengths and weaknesses, both are exciting but Kingdom of the Crystal Skulls had the benefit of falling back on CG environments and action sequences, The Last Crusade did not.
It was great to see Karen Allen return to this entry and, despite not being the biggest fan of his work, I felt Shia LeBeouf really did do a decent job as rebellious greaser Mutt Williams but ultimately this is all about Harrison Ford, am I right? Ford's presence was 100% necessary to make or break this film and thankfully I feel the film worked quite well without actually upping the ante. He came, he saw, he kicked ass and that appears to have been the intention all along, give the fans what they want and give `em lots of it. We weren't offered much of a glimpse into Indie's between film relationship with Marion, just a failed engagement, but there is indeed a shocker awaiting those of you that don't see it coming the first 25 minutes of the film.
I've heard a few complaints about this film ranging from the CG gophers to the outlandish story, and I certainly agree with the goofy gophers, but I'll be damned if this concept isn't any more or less outlandish than a magical box, magical stones and a magical cup. C'mon folks, withdraw that stick from you know where and have fun with this entry! This was entertaining as heck and occasionally laugh-out-loud funny. Perhaps it "could have been better" but what film couldn't be?
2 out of 3 people found this helpful.
|
The Return Of The Great Adventure
Added 11/20/2009
I don't know why people complain about his one but it must be the even numbered Indiana Jones movies that nobody likes (very similar to how fans and others respond to the odd numbered Star Treks). This was a great adventure from start to finish and I couldn't have enjoyed it better. Ford steps back into the role seamlessly. Though a little older, he still handles the action scenes just like he did back in the 80s. The Russians are now the villains of the picture and Cate Blanchett plays Spalko brilliantly, bringing Lotte Lenya's Rosa Klebb from James Bond to mind (right down to the bob hairstyle). And it was enjoyable to have a female villain (Elsa from The Last Crusade doesn't really count in my opinion as she just didn't scream "evil" to me) and, other than Mola Ram from Temple, the only villain to get into the fights. And she was a step up from Donovan, who also just didn't seem villainous enough. Shia Labeouf I could've done without. I didn't like him in Transformers and I don't like him in this. Action doesn't seem to suit him and I didn't like the fact that Lucas/Spielberg made him Indy's son, which I was hoping throughout the film that he wasn't but I was disappointed. Karen Allen makes a welcome return and I enjoyed the bickering that she and Ford did. The rest of the supporting cast is also well played. The references to Connery, Elliot and other people/artifacts from the previous films were enjoyable (especially the Ark). I didn't mind the aliens at the end as it was set in the 50s and the sci-fi tone fit in well enough (Indy locking himself in the fridge was also something that didn't bother me). I don't why people think that its implausible/impossible for aliens to make an apperance, I mean the character did go up against a guy who could take your heart out and still live so extra-terrestrials aren't that far-fetched. Action sequences are excellent but everything just seems to be CG now and I blame Lucas for that. And finally, this will be the last time (for now anyway) that I have to praise (well I guess I don't have to but he's so good) John Williams, who brings in excellent new material while working in some of the old themes as well.
0 out of 0 people found this helpful.
|
almost as bad as the holocaust
Added 10/24/2009
People condemn Lucas for this atrocity, but Spielberg can also be condemned. His nostalgia got the better of him, so we have three (THREE) references to Marcus Brody and one to Indy's dad, along with a very unnecessary Marion Ravenwood return and the predictable Indy jokes about getting old. This was their chance to do something new with Indy. Lucas and Spiel blew it, serving us a feast of rotten tidbits we'd eaten too many times before: the evil bad guy, the car chases, the big huge guy indy has to fight at some point, the ancient relic that hold ancient powers.
How can two legends of film armed with hundreds of millions of dollars, a legion of crew members, one of America's most beloved characters and nineteen years in which to do it accomplish what will go down as one of Hollywood's most embarrassing films?
4 out of 7 people found this helpful.
|
An open mind will yield positive results
Added 10/3/2009
I went into this movie worrying about several things: First, will it be as bad as the detractors are saying? Is it still an Indy movie? Will Shia LaBeouf take Willie's spot as the most annoying sidekick in the Indy series?
Thankfully, I found that I really enjoyed Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. It's no Raiders or Last Crusade, but why would anyone want the same movie all over again? No, Crystal Skull is a different breed of Indy film. As the great Bob Dylan sings, "the times they are a changin'" and that idea fits here well. Harrison Ford and Steven Spielberg work well together making Indy's age a factor in the movie, but not one that takes all of the attention. Shia LaBeouf is more tolerable as the tenacious Mutt than his character in Transformers, and Cate Blanchett and Karen Allen provide solid performances.
The story is not as clogged and confusing as the film's detractors are saying; in fact, it's rather easy to follow. It's pretty entertaining and makes the 2 hours plus seem a lot less, a sign of good storytelling since no part of Crystal Skull really felt slow or dragging. The whole alien/Soviet concept is not as unbelievable as one might think; in fact, it works rather well and breathes new life into the franchise. Sure, it's a bit different than the usual crusty tomb full of treasure or shrines to strange gods, but that's what is so appealing about this movie; it takes Indy in a new direction while not straying from the pulp lifeblood that flows through the series' veins.
Disregard all the hatred toward this film, go see it and form your own opinion. If you want Raiders 2, then just watch Raiders. The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is a NEW Indy movie, therefore it's not going to be the same as the original three. On that note, if this had been a carbon copy of Raiders, there would be a bunch of people complaining that Lucas and Spielberg are too afraid to move the franchise forward or some nonsense. Go see it with an open mind and expect a new Indiana Jones, not a rehash, and you shouldn't be disappointed.
2 out of 2 people found this helpful.
|
