Indiana Jones

[Calliope]

Oh, the anticipation. This is the only reason I had children. I have to go see this and nobody around me will know that I'd go and see it anyway.

Quite relieved to see that Rotten Tomatoes has rated The Crystal Skull as 79% fresh. (http://uk.rottentomatoes.com/m/indiana_jones_and_the_kingdom_of_the_crystal_skull/).

Da-da da-da da-da-daaaa
da-da da-da da-da da-da-da
(You can hear a thrilling burst of the Indy anthem here (http://www.indianajones.com/site/index.html))

http://www.iwatchstuff.com/2007/12/10/indiana-jones-crystal-skull.jpg

[gg106]

Harrison Ford. AAAHHH :love:

Though given his taste in stick women I have very little chance!!!

[Calliope]

Harrison Ford. AAAHHH :love:

Though given his taste in stick women I have very little chance!!! I don't think his first wife was as much of a lollypop, was she? Perhaps he just lerves Calista, angles and all.

In any case, it's not Harrison Ford. It's Indiana Jones. Get it right. :p

[Hazel]

Tickets booked for this Saturday morning. Can't. Bloody. Wait.

[Adrian]

Now that River Phoenix isn't available, they should have got Julian Clary to play his son.

http://img2.timeinc.net/ew/dynamic/imgs/060504/135232__ford_l.jpghttp://www.bbc.co.uk/history/familyhistory/get_started/images/celebgal_04_clary.jpg

[David]

Now that River Phoenix isn't available, they should have got Julian Clary to play his son.
Mmmmm. I reckon he'd make a good fist of it...

[Adrian]

Now I'm not going to stoop to such cheap innuendo. I did just catch the end of an interview on the radio.

"It belongs in a museum!"

"Now that's no way to talk about your husband, Ms Flockhart."

[lucyb]

:lmao:

[Radders]

Sorry I have to admit that River Pheonix was the only reason I watched the previous film. Am I the only female who doesn't see what everyone else does in Harrison Ford?

[Stewart]

Now that River Phoenix isn't available, they should have got Julian Clary to play his son.Er, Phoenix played Indy.

[SlowRain]

Er, Phoenix played Indy.
Yes, but for continuity and that all-in-the-family feeling, Phoenix would have been a good choice to play Indy's son as well.

I'm worried that Ford is just too old. He looks like my grandfather did a few years before he died at the age of 85. I'm expecting some pretty lame jokes attempting to forestall criticism of his age. I'm also annoyed that he seems to be swinging around like Spiderman. I'll go see it, but I don't have high hopes.

Interestingly, I've been trying to get my wife pumped up about seeing it, but my efforts have had an unexpected result. Indiana Jones isn't popular in Asia, but she has seen Temple of Doom on TV, and we rented Raiders last year and Last Crusade a few months ago. While she doesn't mind the movies, I've discovered how much I've outgrown them--Last Crusade in particular, which used to be my favorite when I was younger.

They're hinting at a fifth, but I'd really like to see the franchise handed over to someone else and go back to Indy in the 1940's.

[SlowRain]

Well, I can't say that I'm a fan of this one. It's not a complete failure, but it's easily my least favorite of the series. More like The Mummy than vintage Indiana Jones.

[Hazel]

Just back from seeing it, and well, I am in two minds. I won't spell out the story at all, as I really don't want to spoil any of it for you.

Much has been made about Harrison's age and action hero status, and to be honest I thought he was great. Definitely looking his age, and not quite delivering the lines as he used to, but he is still Indy. The film makers have done a good job in accepting his age, detailing what has been going on in his life, and the result is that I totally accepted that what we were watching on screen is exactly what an action hero would be like in later life. There's no pathetic, ego-boosting, age-denying malarkey going on here - and thank the lord for that.

To be honest the film is enjoyable and a welcome addition. I am glad to see Indy back, just wish it was a little better. Blanchett is a poor baddie - entirely unthreatening, and actually laughable. Ickle Shia even manages to hold his own against her, even at a serious disadvantage.

But the thing that bugged me the most was the denouement of the treasure-hunt plot line (not the personal plot line). I could actually hear my inner voice begging Spielberg et al not to do what I knew they were about to. That is not a good thing.

[David]

That's a shame. In a sense it was always going to be a film that disappointed slightly because of the hugely iconic status of the previous entries. They've just taken such a hold on the imagination that returning to that territory is bound to fall short of twenty years' worth of expectation.

Still, it does sound as though even considering that Spielberg and Lucas could have cooked up something a bit better - especially since they made such a big deal of not doing it until the script was right.

[Hazel]

Don't get me wrong David, there is some cracking scenes that more than make up for the problems. Some great lines too. And did I mention that Harrison/Indy is just fab?

[gg106]

I agree entirely with your posting Hazel, specifically regarding the poor calibre
of the baddies. Hardly a match for Indi!! Though the time specific nature of them was spot on - 1950s reds under the beds as opposed to the Nazi threat of the 30s and 40s
I felt that the lighting/cinematography was rather unusual with the faces looking rather powdery - maybe it helped disguise the wrinkles a little.
It certainly held its own, both as a stand alone film and as part of the Indiana Jones series. No complaints from me.

[Hazel]

Though the time specific nature of them was spot on - 1950s reds under the beds Yes, for the time period they chose to set the story in, much was absolutely perfect, even the horrendous denouement. It fitted in with the era - but I just didn't like it - and only when more people have seen it can we discuss it fully but for me Indy has always been about history, ancient symbols, archaic lives - and to bring in aliens and a bleeding spaceship, well, really. Indy stood apart from the Spielberg/Lucas normal ouevre, by being about earth and its vast history - and this inclusion of aliens just ruined it for me.


I felt that the lighting/cinematography was rather unusual with the faces looking rather powdery - maybe it helped disguise the wrinkles a little. I noticed that - Cate was a little too perfect and dusted for all those romps in the Amazonian jungle - and definitely, Marion and Indy had a little soft focus going on!

I rather enjoyed Shia's performance though - he was very funny and held his own against Indy and others.

I enjoyed, also, the little nods to Indy's dad and Marcus Brody - but couldn't quite work out why Brody would have such a prominent monument in the school - did I miss something previously? Was he a war hero in the intervening years? Did he take over the school? Hmmm. I'll need to pause on his monument when we eventually get the DVD.

[SlowRain]

I agree about Indiana Jones being more about history, but the aliens didn't bother me too much on the surface. What bothered me was how it was developed.

Other problems:

- the gophers
- the refrigerator
- Indy's age at the beginning, however the lighting in the jungle and all the nighttime shots covered over it once he got to Peru; I still think Ford (one of my favorite actors, by the way) was too old and Indiana Jones should have been recast with an adventure set in the 1930's or 1940's
- the KGB can track him to the train station and a diner, but not back to his own house after the car chase
- the amount of time dedicated to explaining the plot, not that it was overly convoluted, but all the explanations when they could have been doing something useful with the characters
- the snake in the dry sand
- Indy's reaction to Mutt as his son
- the Russians put Indy, Marion, and Mutt--prisoners--into the back of a vehicle hauling weapons
- Mutt's whole sword fight with Spalko. Did anyone even laugh at the bushes?
- Mutt as Tarzan
- the CGI ants; Raiders had real snakes, Temple of Doom had real bugs, Last Crusade had real rats; this one was too much The Mummy with absolutely zero creepiness
- Mac as a triple agent; they basically took Elsa from Last Crusade and decided to make it one better
- if Indy had to use the crystal skull as the key to open the lair of the aliens' resting place, how did the Conquistadors ever get in there in the first place to steal the skull?

[Hazel]

:D Hubby brought up most of your points too. With an added the crystal skulls looked like they were filled with crumpled celophane.

[gg106]

I really have not got a problem with the UFO stuff. Like the Communist threat it really ties in well with what was going on during this era, in fact it makes explicit reference to the Roswell Incident. Cinema at the time was rife with Alien invasion movies, all of which were allegorical of the fear that Americans had of Communism. Perhaps I am reading too much into it, but I think that Spielberg and Lucas were actually being very clever.

Added to which, for all you atheists out there, how is is it any less believable than the idea that the Holy Grail exists guarded by a knight for hundred's of years?

[gg106]

I think the end of this article sort of backs up what I had already said above

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7406990.stm

[Hazel]

Added to which, for all you atheists out there, how is is it any less believable than the idea that the Holy Grail exists guarded by a knight for hundred's of years? It wasn't that it was unbelievable, for me, it was more about the realm that Indy and the films inhabitat for me, which is the vast history of earth and its people. Plus, I am not a fan of sci-fi stuff, and the spinning spaceship cliche was a step too far.

[SlowRain]

I've noticed a lot of fan backlash towards this movie, similar to the Star Wars prequels. Contemporary audiences (ie. viewers of The Mummy movies, the Tomb Raider movies, the National Treasure movies, et cetera) seem to be okay with it, but the older viewers, the ones who've been there from the beginning, don't really like it. It looks like Lucas, Spielberg, and Ford really nuked the fridge with this one (see IMDb and Wikipedia for the "nuke the fridge" campaign).

[gg106]

I've noticed a lot of fan backlash towards this movie, similar to the Star Wars prequels. Contemporary audiences (ie. viewers of The Mummy movies, the Tomb Raider movies, the National Treasure movies, et cetera) seem to be okay with it, but the older viewers, the ones who've been there from the beginning, don't really like it. It looks like Lucas, Spielberg, and Ford really nuked the fridge with this one (see IMDb and Wikipedia for the "nuke the fridge" campaign).

I have never seen any of the movies you list and I was there from the beginning, believe me, with regards Indiana Jones movies. Fans always hate sequels, especially when there has been a long gap. I don't know why directors even bother.
The film entertained me. That is all I ask. I have pretty simple needs. :rolleyes:

[Hazel]

I manage to straddle both camps - have seen all the modern alternatives to Indy and was there from the beginning with the real Indy.