Weekend Review – “Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull”

The review is spoiler free, but I’ll give a quick encapsulation anyway: if I were to rank all four Indy flicks from best to worst, this would be third on the list.

Cast and Crew Information

Harrison Ford as Henry “Indiana” Jones, Jr.
Cate Blanchett as Irina Spalko
Karen Allen as Marion Ravenwood
Shia LaBeouf as Mutt Williams
Ray Winstone as George “Mac” McHale
John Hurt as Professor “Ox” Oxley
Jim Broadbent as Dean Charles Stanforth

Written by David Koepp, George Lucas and Jeff Nathanson
Directed by Steven Spielberg

Premise

Indiana Jones isn’t as young as he used to be, but that doesn’t make him any less adventurous. With sidekick and love interest firmly in place, he heads out on a quest to find an ancient religious artifact that has some sort of power beyond what can be seen.

High Point

“Told you I would.”

Low Point

There were a couple of moments that strain the suspension of disbelief. It’s hard to decide between two of them, which I’ll keep vague even under spoiler guard: “Monkey-Man” and the refrigerator.

The Review

As the first three drew inspiration from the movie serials of the 1930s, this draws inspiration from the “popcorn” flicks of the 1950s. That does mean it’s got a different “Big Bad” to work against, but not in a way that defies the tone of the originals. Some will be unhappy with the nature of the religion involved, but that’s a matter of personal preference. I suspect the crowd around these parts will be more accepting than the general public, particularly when we recognize the cameo from an earlier Spielberg work. I give it 4 out of 6.

The effects were well done. Some moments were CGI, but most were physical effects, maintaining the look and feel of the originals. Keeping ILM and Stan Winston studios on board helps a lot in this regard. I give it 5 out of 6.

The story was generally well done. The moments listed above were pushing things a bit in terms of credibility, and they weren’t the only offenders, but the broad strokes are definitely consistent with the Indiana Jones franchise. As weak as those moments were, there were just as many that were very strong. Though it’s probably the most uneven of the movies, it’s neither the best nor the worst. It maintains the serialized nature of the others, with frequent short action sequences, but a couple of them feel out of place. I give it 4 out of 6.

The acting was solid all around. LaBeouf fits in easily, delivering some great dialogue for the character. Ford slips back into the role quite comfortably, as does Allen. Blanchett is effective, but the real star is John Hurt. He’s just great in this one. I give it 5 out of 6.

The production is solid. We’ve got the same director, the same producers, the extremely dependable John Williams on music, the equally dependable Michael Kahn on editing, and so forth. Spielberg has a core group of individuals he trusts implicitly to put his movies together, and he has the kind of pull it takes to get them all on board when it’s time to make the movie. Spielberg wins, his favourite crewmembers with, and most importantly, the audience wins. These people know their jobs inside out. The problems individuals will have with this movie (and everyone will probably have some) start and end with the script. I give it 6 out of 6.

The emotional response was as uneven as the story. This drew a couple of groans, but also drew cheers and applause. I give it 4 out of 6.

Overall, it’s a good movie. Go in expecting another Indiana Jones instead of something new and better, and you’ll leave satisfied. I give it 4 out of 6.

In total, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull receives 32 out of 42.

8 replies on “Weekend Review – “Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull””

  1. Have to ask…

    … what was your ranking from best to worst of the movies that you implied in the story’s lead?

    I haven’t seen the fourth yet, but I want to. Unfortunately, babysitting arrangements aren’t as easy to make as I’d like them to be… makes seeing movies with the wife rather difficult.

    • Re: Have to ask…

      … what was your ranking from best to worst of the movies that you implied in the story’s lead?

      I’d say the best was "Last Crusade," "Raiders" was a very close second, this was third, and "Temple of Doom" was fourth.

      • Re: Have to ask…

        … what was your ranking from best to worst of the movies that you implied in the story’s lead?

        I’d say the best was "Last Crusade," "Raiders" was a very close second, this was third, and "Temple of Doom" was fourth.

        Yeah that’s about how I’d rank them as well. I don’t know what exactly it was about Last Crusade but I’ve always preferred it over the others. Must be the Connery effect. "Dad, are we hit?" "More or less. Son, I’m sorry. They got us." :-)

    • Re: Good but not Great

      I’d give it a 6/10. Definitely worth seeing, but not something to rave about.

      I would agree – I watched all four today. The fourth was not the greatest, but it was fun. The suspension of disbelief was painful at times, but overall it was a fun movie that followed the Indie formula.

      The only thing I am really worried about from this movie, (spoiler) is the possibility of a ‘indiana jones, Jr.’ I really can’t stand Shia – and if they make one without Harrison Ford, i would just vomit. the fact that Harrison Ford snapped the fedora at the end rather than Shia is a promising sign, though.

    • Re: Good but not Great

      I’d give it a 6/10. Definitely worth seeing, but not something to rave about.

      Right on. Better than a five, certainly not an eight. Just a good solid Saturday matinee. It was fun.

      I gotta say, IJ:KCS what you get when you have rich, famous old men like Lucas, Spielberg and Ford make a movie for one last glimpse of THEIR greatest hits as THEY ride off into the sunset. At least half of the set pieces in this flick were derivative of their OWN previous work. Lead instead of carbonite. Indy/Mutt instead of Vader/Luke. Russian ducks instead of Imperial landspeeders barreling thru the jungle. Monkeys instead of ewocks. Tall ET instead of short ET. Spirit trails and glowing eyes swirling around Commies instead of Nazis as they peer into the Big Bad for a glimpse of The Truth that they themselves are Evil. The list goes on…

      The biggest suspension of disbelief required in the movie was that a twice-jilted Marion Ravenwood would so joyfully embrace and reunite with Indy, understanding his youthful folly and transgressions while agreeing to marry and care for him as he settled down into being a respectable member of the establishment. Watch carefully, kids, and view the true innermost fantasy of old men as compared to young boys.

      • Re: Good but not Great

        I gotta say, IJ:KCS what you get when you have rich, famous old men like Lucas, Spielberg and Ford make a movie for one last glimpse of THEIR greatest hits as THEY ride off into the sunset. At least half of the set pieces in this flick were derivative of their OWN previous work. … Tall ET instead of short ET.

        That was a more direct reference than "ET." Those aliens were the actual aliens (ie. the original, redressed puppets) from "Close Encounters of the Third Kind," which was also directly referenced in the musical score during the big climax.

      • Re: Good but not Great

        At least half of the set pieces in this flick were derivative of their OWN previous work. The list goes on…

        Another example I remembered is fighting the bigest of the bad guys one-on-one inside a danger perimeter of ants vs. cool airplane. I totally missed the Close Encounters references, tho – thanks.

Comments are closed.