Friday, May 23, 2008

The Review


I enjoyed Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. More importantly, I enjoyed my time watching it.

Was it everything I wanted from another Indy movie? No way. I wanted no cg, I wanted Sean Connery, I wanted John Rhys-Davies, I wanted a Frank Darabont script. But I'm not going to attack this movie for not living up to my fantasies.

I still wish they had made one in the late '90's. Ford was still kick-ass, even in bad movies like Air Force One, Speilberg was doing phenomenal work with Saving Private Ryan and Lucas had yet to go back to Star Wars. An Indy in his early 50's would have been fantastic with this one ten years later. All the side comments of how Indy spent the WWII era made me me regret that lost movie more.

It's nto perfect. I found the sci-fi a little hard to swallow. The tone was just wonkier than the others. But when I think about it, the tone varied wildly on all the sequels. Temple of Doom went too far into horror, Last Crusade too far into comedy, and Crystal Skull goes too far into sci-fi. The characterization in the script flat at times. It really seemed that David Koepp was gluing pieces from other scripts together into a cohesive whole. Also, things looked a little too clean. It didn't have the gritty integrity of other three films. I know all the films use big sets but somehow this one felt like it.

But I did like this one a lot. It didn't blow me away but I left satisfied. There were TONS of temples and traps, good fistfights and jokes that fit in the tone of the series (love the kid in the library!). Ford felt like Indy, Ray Winstone's character surprised me, Karen Allen's chemistry with Harrison was right from the start (and I loved the backstory!) John Hurt was tremendously underrated, and Shia LeBeouf and Cate Blanchett did their usual best. And who would have thought that "Young Indy" counted?

It's not the best movie of the last 19 years. It's not even the movie of the summer (Iron Man was better and why didn't I write a review for that?). But it is definitely worth seeing, and it absolutely holds its own within the franchise. I'm going again.

5 comments:

Renee said...

I had a good time too; it was very clean and very 1950's, but that man can still use a whip and look good in a hat! :)

Great characters!

Speaking of characters, HAPPY BIRTHDAY JON!!!!!!

Catherine said...

I looking forward to the film. I'm going to miss most of the usual but it's still an Indy film

Sarah said...

Great review, thank you so much for a review that is much more indepth than some I have read. For example, 'it was rubbish', 'it wasn't like the others' - Well duh of course it wasn't.

I can't wait to see it and I am going to watch this movie and let it do what it was made to do - entertain me. I am not going to go and watch it and think it will be as good as the others.

I think people are so critical these days rather than just watching it and pick it to pieces when they should be just enjoying it!

Sarah

www.copywritingtipsandideas.com

Ken Armstrong said...

I saw it last night and I agree with your thoughtful review.

I'm going to post my own later - maybe I should just refer people to yours... :)

I enjoyed the cinematic references, I'm sure I missed loads of them but I got 'The Untouchables'.

Anonymous said...

Watched both Indy and Iron Man this weekend and sooo missed not being able to come in and talk about with you for three hours in our cube! ;-)

I enjoyed both but also liked Iron Man much better. Iron Man definitely seemed cooler, with a darker plotline and all that Tarantino-esqe hipster dialogue. Indy went a little too much into the shtick - they really milked the hat stuff, and what was with all those scenes of Shia combing his hair? But it was still satisfying and worth shelling out the $12.

Happy birthday too btw! -Elaine