Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull

[War Party]

The cinematography also was different..not necessarily better or worse, but definitely different. It didn't feel like Indy.

I found the cinematography to be beautiful. I don't think everything had to feel like the old films. Progression is good.

[cerealkiller182]

The cinematography also was different..not necessarily better or worse, but definitely different. It didn't feel like Indy.

They had a different cinematographer, the original was unavailable.

I didnt find the cinematography to be bad just different. And i expected different.

[Marx]

So everyone moaned in unison? I wish I could of seen that.

Yes. And no, I'm not kidding. We all moaned.

the wedding in general or Shia's hat. The wedding was weak but the hat scene was kinda funny

The Spaceship coming out of the ground and flying away. And yeah, the part where Mutt attempted to put on Indy's hat.

[The Amazing Lee]

Someone stated that the cinematography was more that of the 1950s films...including Vertigo by Alfred Hitchcock which has striking colours.

[The Man of Steel]

Someone stated that the cinematography was more that of the 1950s films...including Vertigo by Alfred Hitchcock which has striking colours.
i liked it

[cerealkiller182]

The Spaceship coming out of the ground and flying away. And yeah, the part where Mutt attempted to put on Indy's hat.

The spaceship could have worked if it was more subtle a la X-Files movies. But the hat I thought was great. I thought it embodies everyones feelings. They dont want tosee harrison replaced or shia take over

[War Party]

Yes. And no, I'm not kidding. We all moaned.]

I don't believe you. That stuff happens in movies and TV. Not in real life.

Someone stated that the cinematography was more that of the 1950s films...including Vertigo by Alfred Hitchcock which has striking colours.

I can see that. It definitely reminded me of a Hitchcock film.

[TLH]

From what I'm reading and what I saw on youtube, would this adjustment to the ending have been less awkward/wierd?

Instead of having the spaceship scene, why not just have the aliens somehow turn back into the statues or whatever after getting a brief glimpse of them. Then everything gets destroyed (similar to the Last Crusade) and that's pretty much it.

[The Man of Steel]

The spaceship could have worked if it was more subtle a la X-Files movies. But the hat I thought was great. I thought it embodies everyones feelings. They dont want tosee harrison or shia take over
agreed

[The Man of Steel]

From what I'm reading and what I saw on youtube, would this adjustment to the ending have been less awkward/wierd?

Instead of having the spaceship scene, why not just have the aliens somehow turn back into the statues or whatever after getting a brief glimpse of them. Then everything gets destroyed (similar to the Last Crusade) and that's pretty much it.
that could've worked to, but over all i'm happy with the film

[Marx]

The spaceship could have worked if it was more subtle a la X-Files movies. But the hat I thought was great. I thought it embodies everyones feelings. They dont want tosee harrison or shia take over

The Spaceship was too over the top. It was just too much. I can look beyond "surviving a nuclear bomb by hiding in a lead-lined refridgerator," beyond shia's attempt of being a convincing 50's greaser, but I have a very hard time seeing an alien spaceship taking off in an Indiana Jones movie. It seemed more like "War of the Worlds."

[TLH]

The Spaceship was too over the top. It was just too much. I can look beyond "surviving a nuclear bomb by hiding in a lead-lined refridgerator," beyond shia's attempt of being a convincing 50's greaser, but I have a very hard time seeing an alien spaceship taking off in an Indiana Jones movie. It seemed more like "War of the Worlds."

Pretty much my sentiments exactly, and I haven't even seen the whole movie. Just the last 10 minutes.

[Marx]

From what I'm reading and what I saw on youtube, would this adjustment to the ending have been less awkward/wierd?

Instead of having the spaceship scene, why not just have the aliens somehow turn back into the statues or whatever after getting a brief glimpse of them. Then everything gets destroyed (similar to the Last Crusade) and that's pretty much it.

Something to that affect would have been better.

[The Amazing Lee]

I don't believe you. That stuff happens in movies and TV. Not in real life.



I can see that. It definitely reminded me of a Hitchcock film.

When I finally see it...I may love it more. I am a huge fan of 1950s films and a very huge fan of Hitch himself. :woot:

I'm actually more excited about seeing the film, knowing all these mixed reviews from hypesters..because although I expect to roll my eyes at certain points...it's still going to be fun...and that's all I really expect from an Indy flick...fun. :yay:

[cerealkiller182]

The Spaceship was too over the top. It was just too much. I can look beyond "surviving a nuclear bomb by hiding in a lead-lined refridgerator," beyond shia's attempt of being a convincing 50's greaser, but I have a very hard time seeing an alien spaceship taking off in an Indiana Jones movie. It seemed more like "War of the Worlds."

I think you're reading too much into it. Indiana Jones has always been about a regular guy going up against something fantastic. If the alien elements at the end were mor subtle it would have worked great.

[TLH]

I do find it strange that people are saying the "fridge" scene is implausible (which it is) when we've seen guys rip hearts out of others with their bare hands, the power of God emanating from the arc, and a 4000 year old knight of the crusade etc...in the previous films.

[Marx]

Pretty much my sentiments exactly, and I haven't even seen the whole movie. Just the last 10 minutes.

I really did enjoy the movie until that point. I guess you could say that that scene left a sour taste in my mouth. I'm trying not to let it ruin the movie completely for me.

[TLH]

I think you're reading too much into it. Indiana Jones has always been about a regular guy going up against something fantastic. If the alien elements at the end were mor subtle it would have worked great.

Why'd you say he's reading too much into it? He said that part at the end was "too much", and therefore it's implied that to him it needed to be more subtle. You pretty much agreed with him.

[War Party]

I do find it strange that people are saying the "fridge" scene is implausible (which it is) when we've seen guys rip hearts out of others with their bare hands, the power of God emanating from the arc, and a 4000 year old knight of the crusade etc...in the previous films.

Seriously, nothing in these movies are grounded by reality. I'm still having trouble understanding people's gripes about certain things being over the top in the new film.

[Marx]

I do find it strange that people are saying the "fridge" scene is implausible (which it is) when we've seen guys rip hearts out of others with their bare hands, the power of God emanating from the arc, and a 4000 year old knight of the crusade etc...in the previous films.

I said that I can look past it. I was more making a point about how
ridiculous the spaceship was.

I think you're reading too much into it. Indiana Jones has always been about a regular guy going up against something fantastic. If the alien elements at the end were mor subtle it would have worked great.

Had it been more subtle, yes. But it isn't subtle Cereal and that's the problem.

[TLH]

Seriously, nothing in these movies are grounded by reality. I'm still having trouble understanding people's gripes about certain things being over the top in the new film.

Well, I think people are looking for a reason to alienate the film completely because it might not live up to the first three in their opinion. They may like parts of it but feel it's best just to forget it all together (hence excessive criticism that isn't always legitimate).

[CBG]

Anyone other than walked into the movie with knowledge of the various crystal skull stories and hypothesized origins beforehand? (had to do a paper on it once)

[cerealkiller182]

Had it been more subtle, yes. But it isn't subtle Cereal and that's the problem.

I know its a problem, but you sounded like you were dismissing the entire concept. I think the concept still has merit in the Indy world.

[Marx]

Seriously, nothing in these movies are grounded by reality. I'm still having trouble understanding people's gripes about certain things being over the top in the new film.

The previous movies dealt with some form of religion. Whether it was the Arc, the Indian Sankara stones, or the Holy Grail.

[bullets]

Seriously, nothing in these movies are grounded by reality. I'm still having trouble understanding people's gripes about certain things being over the top in the new film.



all these movies have supernatural endings and indy's hat hardly ever falls off. this is what should be expected. the ending are always somewhat implausible but that is how it goes.

[Marx]

I know its a problem, but you sounded like you were dismissing the entire concept. I think the concept still has merit in the Indy world.

I'm fine with the concept, I'm just saying it was too much.

[War Party]

The previous movies dealt with some form of religion. Whether it was the Arc, the Indian Sankara stones, or the Holy Grail.

They didn't deal with alien life forms flying about in a Spacehip

True, the other films didn't deal with it. But why do they have to continue with the religious motif? And personally, I find all that stuff just as ridiculous as aliens.
But it's all some damn ridiculous, that I love it.

[TLH]

Religious over supernatural. Nazis over Russians. That is all.

[Marx]

True, the other films didn't deal with it. But why do they have to continue with the religious motif? And personally, I find all that stuff just as ridiculous as aliens.


Overall, I enjoyed the movie. I'm just saying that that particular scene was too much for me.

[cerealkiller182]

Well hes an archeologist, not a theologist. He deals with things the created culture not religion in general and the concept that alien life jumpstarted human culture is not new.

[The Joker]

Religious over supernatural. Nazis over Russians. That is all.

Cause having nazis in the 1950's makes a whole lot of sense :huh:

[Majik1387]

Religious over supernatural. Nazis over Russians. That is all.
Lat I checked, religion pretty much falls under supernatural.:cwink:

[War Party]

Yeah, Darabont's script had left over Nazis from WWII as the villains in the 1950's setting. But pretty much everyone involved with the creative process wasn't feeling that.

[TLH]

Cause having nazis in the 1950's makes a whole lot of sense :huh:

For the franchise. Obviously that doesn't make any sense in 1950's. Nazis are the epitome of antagonism in Indiana Jones films.

[TLH]

Lat I checked, religion pretty much falls under supernatural.:cwink:

Your opinion. A lot of people would beg to differ. :oldrazz:

[The Joker]

For the franchise. Obviously that doesn't make any sense in 1950's. Nazis are the epitome of antagonism in Indiana Jones films.

Last I checked, this movie was part of the franchise, and was set in the 50's. So saying you'd rather have nazis doesnt make a whole lot of sense.

[CBG]

The previous movies dealt with some form of religion. Whether it was the Arc, the Indian Sankara stones, or the Holy Grail.

Though, I don't think Indiana Jones have to be necessarily tied with the mythical and the religious.

[The Joker]

Your opinion. A lot of people would beg to differ. :oldrazz:

From dictionary.com:

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source - Share This
su·per·nat·u·ral Audio Help [soo-per-nach-er-uhl, -nach-ruhl] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–adjective 1. of, pertaining to, or being above or beyond what is natural; unexplainable by natural law or phenomena; abnormal.
2. of, pertaining to, characteristic of, or attributed to God or a deity.
3. of a superlative degree; preternatural: a missile of supernatural speed.
4. of, pertaining to, or attributed to ghosts, goblins, or other unearthly beings; eerie; occult.

–noun 5. a being, place, object, occurrence, etc., considered as supernatural or of supernatural origin; that which is supernatural, or outside the natural order.
6. behavior supposedly caused by the intervention of supernatural beings.
7. direct influence or action of a deity on earthly affairs.
8. the supernatural, a. supernatural beings, behavior, and occurrences collectively.
b. supernatural forces and the supernatural plane of existence: a deep fear of the supernatural.

[Majik1387]

Your opinion. A lot of people would beg to differ. :oldrazz:
A cup that grants eternal life? An artifact that can destroy a whole Nazi army by sight? That's not supernatural to you?

[TLH]

Last I checked, this movie was part of the franchise, and was set in the 50's. So saying you'd rather have nazis doesnt make a whole lot of sense.

No, I'm saying that no antagonists in the franchise will ever match the Nazis. This isn't a complicated opinion here.

[Stevens25]

I do find it strange that people are saying the "fridge" scene is implausible (which it is) when we've seen guys rip hearts out of others with their bare hands, the power of God emanating from the arc, and a 4000 year old knight of the crusade etc...in the previous films.

The "fridge" scene wasn't something I thought much about. It didn't ruin the film for me at all,but I did ask myself how someone could survive a nuclear blast just by hiding in a fridge? lol All the other happenings you mentioned were supernatural or otherworldly,so the filmmakers could make those moments as "out there" as they wanted because those scenes couldn't happen in real life. But atomic bombs are real,so questioning the believability of the fridge scene seems a reasonable thing to do. Like also asking how could someone survive 3 long drops from giant waterfalls?
Again,these things didn't bother me but I kinda wondered how much we,as an audience were expected to buy them.

[TLH]

A cup that grants eternal life? An artifact that can destroy a whole Nazi army by sight? That's not supernatural to you?

I mean the notion of Religion in general. It's artifacts and their symbolism etc...of course. A lot of religious nuts out there would say that Religion is be-all-end-all and correct. But whatever.

[RickO'Connell]

What bothered me the most I think is the fact that After going through all of that trouble throughout the movie all they got in return was the confirmation that aliens were real & they can't even prove it. They did all of what they did literally for nothing in the end. There was no big pay off

[The Joker]

I mean the notion of Religion in general. It's artifacts and their symbolism etc...of course. A lot of religious nuts out there would say that Religion is be-all-end-all and correct. But whatever.

As my definition says, all supernatural means is literally "more than nature." Which religion is. It's not a matter of opinion, it's a very strict definition of the word.

[War Party]

The "fridge" scene wasn't something I thought much about. It didn't ruin the film for me at all,but I did ask myself how someone could survive a nuclear blast just by hiding in a fridge? lol All the other happenings you mentioned were supernatural or otherworldly,so the filmmakers could make those moments as "out there" as they wanted because those scenes couldn't happen in real life. But atomic bombs are real,so questioning the believability of the fridge scene seems a reasonable thing to do. Like also asking how could someone survive 3 long drops from giant waterfalls?
Again,these things didn't bother me but I kinda wondered how much we,as an audience were expected to buy them.

But the fridge was lined with lead. It makes perfect sense.:yay:

[TLH]

What bothered me the most I think is the fact that After going through all of that trouble throughout the movie all they got in return was the confirmation that aliens were real & they can't even prove it. They did all of what they did literally for nothing in the end

Isn't that the moral of all Indiana Jones films? The pursuit of something based on passion and not material wealth or glory?

After all, they didn't get the arc. They didn't get to keep a stone. They didn't get the grail.

[TLH]

As my definition says, all supernatural means is literally "more than nature." Which religion is. It's not a matter of opinion, it's a very strict definition of the word.

Religion itself = ideology/guide of how to live

Mythos in Religion = supernatural

[The Joker]

What bothered me the most I think is the fact that After going through all of that trouble throughout the movie all they got in return was the confirmation that aliens were real & they can't even prove it. They did all of what they did literally for nothing in the end. There was no big pay off

This happens in EVERY Indy movie though. In Raiders the Ark is taken away and locked in Area 51, in Temple he loses the two stones he was going to take, and in Grail is falls down a chasm and is literally swallowed by the earth. Even the idol from the beginning of Raiders is never recovered. The only thing I can recall him ever actually getting is the Cross from the beginning of Crusade.

[RickO'Connell]

Like also asking how could someone survive 3 long drops from giant waterfalls

My theory on this one is that the skull was protecting them like how it scared away the bugs & the Indian type dudes

This happens in EVERY Indy movie though. In Raiders the Ark is taken away and locked in Area 51, in Temple he loses the two stones he was going to take, and in Grail is falls down a chasm and is literally swallowed by the earth. Even the idol from the beginning of Raiders is never recovered. The only thing I can recall him ever actually getting is the Cross from the beginning of Crusade.

I know but it still sucked

[cerealkiller182]

What bothered me the most I think is the fact that After going through all of that trouble throughout the movie all they got in return was the confirmation that aliens were real & they can't even prove it. They did all of what they did literally for nothing in the end. There was no big pay off

what about their efforts to keep the artifacts out of the hands of the villains, helpingtheir friend Ox, and Indy's innate curiosity? Indy never really has anything but personal closure. The arc is locked away to never be heard from again, the sankara stones were given back to the rightful owners, and the cup was lost

No, I'm saying that no antagonists in the franchise will ever match the Nazis. This isn't a complicated opinion here.

The only advantage they have toany other villain was being in the most films. Other than that the villains are normally just evil doers who want the artifacts before Indy gets them.

[War Party]

How did they survive a jump from a plane with raft and then falling over a cliff in Temple of Doom? This kinda action has been done before. But why is it being called out in this film?

[TLH]

How did they survive a jump from a plane with raft and then falling over a cliff in Temple of Doom? This kinda action has been done before. But why is it being called out in this film?

Because people are expecting too much. They've forgotten that Indiana Jones was always about over-the-top sequences.

[Marx]

Though, I don't think Indiana Jones have to be necessarily tied with the mythical and the religious.

But when you have an entire trilogy basing Indiana Jones in a religious backdrop...it makes this movie seem awkward.

[Figs]

Isn't that the moral of all Indiana Jones films? The pursuit of something based on passion and not material wealth or glory?

After all, they didn't get the arc. They didn't get to keep a stone. They didn't get the grail.


Exactly.

Jones is an archaeologist. Archaeology isn't just about finding lost and ancient artifacts but Discovery.

Just got back from seeing it and I thought it was good.

The only negatives I had would be the Russian accents and a line or two that came off flat.

I truly believe a lot of people just had their expectations set to high. I hadn't read any of the reviews and went in with an open mind...it was fun and I think it's a good addition to the series.

That, and my gf and I have always liked the idea of Alien life forms starting life/civilization on Earth. Before some of you laugh, I don't mean we fully believe that's what happened but it's a fun and interesting possibilty if you know enough of your ancient history.

With that being said the whole Alien angle we loved. I guess if you scoff or roll your eyes at the possibilty of Aliens you wouldn't like this film as much but like I said before it was fun and that's what an Indiana Jones film should be.

[Kakihara]

But the fridge was lined with lead. It makes perfect sense.:yay:

It makes zero sense. Look up the tests at trinity site or the bombing of Hiroshima or Nagisaki. Radiation released, especially the amount of your average atomic bomb, spreads into every molecule of everything within its surrounding area. Indy would be dead, don't try to BS me with your hollywood science garbage. And even if he didn't die of that he would've died shortly after for how close he was to that mushroom cloud-ridiculous and insulting to the audience in my opinion.

[The Amazing Lee]

Who gives a ****...it's a movie...movies don't always make logical sense like in the real world.

[War Party]

It makes zero sense. Look up the tests at trinity site or the bombing of Hiroshima or Nagisaki. Radiation released, especially the amount of your average atomic bomb, spreads into every molecule of everything within its surrounding area. Indy would be dead, don't try to BS me with your hollywood science garbage. And even if he didn't die of that he would've died shortly after for how close he was to that mushroom cloud-ridiculous and insulting to the audience in my opinion.

Did you not notice the smile at the end of the sentence? Jeez, serious much. But seriously though, it's just a movie. Get over it.

[Kakihara]

Who gives a ****...it's a movie...movies don't always make logical sense like in the real world.

I give a **** because I hate to see ignorance spread.

[Figs]

It makes zero sense. Look up the tests at trinity site or the bombing of Hiroshima or Nagisaki. Radiation released, especially the amount of your average atomic bomb, spreads into every molecule of everything within its surrounding area. Indy would be dead, don't try to BS me with your hollywood science garbage. And even if he didn't die of that he would've died shortly after for how close he was to that mushroom cloud-ridiculous and insulting to the audience in my opinion.


I don't think so at all, both me and my gf were thinking "yeah right" when that fridge scene happened but it didn't ruin the movie for us.

Yeah, it's impossible that he survived but I'm watching a fictional movie in a series that has always dealt with impossible and farfetched situations.

What about that scene in Temple of Doom where they jump out of the plane and land in the life boat. That drop would have still killed them, it's supposed to be in good fun.

[War Party]

I thought that fridge scene was suppose to be taken with humor and not taken seriously? I didn't see any attempt of insulting the audience.

[cerealkiller182]

It makes zero sense. Look up the tests at trinity site or the bombing of Hiroshima or Nagisaki. Radiation released, especially the amount of your average atomic bomb, spreads into every molecule of everything within its surrounding area. Indy would be dead, don't try to BS me with your hollywood science garbage. And even if he didn't die of that he would've died shortly after for how close he was to that mushroom cloud-ridiculous and insulting to the audience in my opinion.

You must hate a lot of movies since so many have things that dont happen in real life

I think its insulting to think that way towards an obvious fun escapist work of fiction based in fantasy and sci-fi.

[Majik1387]

I give a **** because I hate to see ignorance spread.
I'm also pretty sure that as close as Willie got to the lava in ToD, her clothes would have caught fire and her skin would sear a bit.:whatever:

Indiana Jones has never been a realistic movie, thinking otherwise is just ridiculous and stupid.

[The Amazing Lee]

I give a **** because I hate to see ignorance spread.

About 3/4 of the moments in the Indiana Jones series are almost illogical and irrational...BUT they're fun AND inventive. :yay:

[Kakihara]

I don't think so at all, both me and my gf were thinking "yeah right" when that fridge scene happened but it didn't ruin the movie for us.

Yeah, it's impossible that he survived but I'm watching a fictional movie in a series that has always dealt with impossible and farfetched situations.

What about that scene in Temple of Doom where they jump out of the plane and land in the life boat. That drop would have still killed them, it's supposed to be in good fun.

That's the only scene out of the original trilogy that keeps being brought up and it stands out because its one of the only times in the original trilogy anything like that goes on. Now with this one, there's like five or six sequences with that crap going on in the same movie. It's a joke and the franchise deserves better, but some fans are so stubborn they don't want to admit that outright.

[War Party]

That's the only scene out of the original trilogy that keeps being brought up and it stands out because its one of the only times in the original trilogy anything like that goes on. Now with this one, there's like five or six sequences with that crap going on in the same movie. It's a joke and the franchise deserves better, but some fans are so stubborn they don't want to admit that outright.

I'm not stubborn, I just don't take movies like this seriously. I turn my brain off for 2 hours and enjoy the ride. I do that with all action films.

[Kakihara]

You must hate a lot of movies since so many have things that dont happen in real life

I think its insulting to think that way towards an obvious fun escapist work of fiction based in fantasy and sci-fi.

Nope, just this one, because eventhough the previous films were honestly out there, they never fell to such idiotic depths.

[StylishHokie21]

I haven't seen it yet, but how would you compare it to the other three?

[Episode29]

I haven't seen it yet, but how would you compare it to the other three?

As an adventure film, it's solidly entertaining.

As an Indiana Jones film, it's pretty disappointing.

[xwolverine2]

i dunno why everyones complaining....

the fridge scene was awesome.. and funny.
over the top? yeah... but so was the entire mine cart race in temple of doom lol.



the monkey swinging scene was a bit crazy though, and not funny.
I would understand if it was a little boy swinging, but it was 21 yr old shia lol.


i happened to love the movie...
partly because im fascinated by aliens and their purpose here on earth.

[EML]

But when you have an entire trilogy basing Indiana Jones in a religious backdrop...it makes this movie seem awkward.

So because the religion was Mayan, not Christian, it's awkward?

[StylishHokie21]

As an adventure film, it's solidly entertaining.

As an Indiana Jones film, it's pretty disappointing.

Thanks! I guess I'll see for myself. Does Shia LaBeouf ruin the movie?

[EML]

No.

[cerealkiller182]

Nope, just this one, because eventhough the previous films were honestly out there, they never fell to such idiotic depths.

:whatever:

such a buzzkill

[DarknessOfDeath]

Nope...Shia didn't ruin it for me - although there was this one scene in particular between Marion and Indy when they were about to...um... :D and he had to ruin their little moment but it was done in a cute way.

[Spider-X]

I give a **** because I hate to see ignorance spread.

LMAO...wow, if that kind of "ignorance spreading" gets you riled...i'm suprised you haven't killed yourself from actual harmful ingnorance like...oh say, Racism.

for funk's sake people...it's Indiana Jones, when have his movies been realistic?

I understand people wanting this to be the best movie possible but come on...there's a point at which expectations are so high that it's impossible to meet.

I'm interested to see how the general movie nerd population (that's us :D) feels about this movie within a year...when all the hype and expectations have simmered....i bet we'll have much more appreciation for it.

It wasn't the best Indy movie...but it wasn't the worst...this is no Star Wars fiasco...in my opinion, Crystal Skulls was more injoyable than Star Wars episode's 1 and 2 combined if Natalie portman was naked the whole time.

[Balthus Dire]

It was a decent movie, but it was a bad Indiana Jones movie.

[Spider-X]

I'd give it a solid 80% in my book. There were some seriously cringe worthy parts...but Shia was terrific...Harrison was great (of course), all the characters were fun, and while the alien thing is kinda farther out there then the rest of the Indy movies, it fits with the timeline of this one compared to the others. and the whole idea of aliens coming and giving technology to mayans, egyptians, etc. was great because it's an actual living and possible theory.

I enjoyed it...i didn't LOVE it, unfortunately, but I enjoyed the hell out of it. It was fun and it passes the torch to a very capable and lovable actor.

In my opinion, it was miles better than Temple of Doom and I look forward to seeing it again.

[mojo-x]

I gave this film a 7.5. There’s a lot of things I liked and I probably would of gave it a higher rating if it wasn’t for the ending which I thought lacked any real sense of danger. It was kind of like let’s return the artifact and run out of the ruins before they implode.

[mojo-x]

It wasn't the best Indy movie...but it wasn't the worst...this is no Star Wars fiasco...in my opinion, Crystal Skulls was more injoyable than Star Wars episode's 1 and 2 combined if Natalie portman was naked the whole time.

Yah she was like 14 in the first one.

[cryptic name]

LMAO...wow, if that kind of "ignorance spreading" gets you riled...i'm suprised you haven't killed yourself from actual harmful ingnorance like...oh say, Racism.

for funk's sake people...it's Indiana Jones, when have his movies been realistic?

I understand people wanting this to be the best movie possible but come on...there's a point at which expectations are so high that it's impossible to meet.

I'm interested to see how the general movie nerd population (that's us :D) feels about this movie within a year...when all the hype and expectations have simmered....i bet we'll have much more appreciation for it.

It wasn't the best Indy movie...but it wasn't the worst...this is no Star Wars fiasco...in my opinion, Crystal Skulls was more injoyable than Star Wars episode's 1 and 2 combined if Natalie portman was naked the whole time.

pretty sure it will still suck in a year

[Spider-X]

Yah she was like 14 in the first one.

oh...well..um..that's not ok. Let me rephrase that:

Crystal Skulls was more injoyable than Star Wars episode's 1 and 2 combined if Natalie portman was naked and 21 years old!! the whole time.

[Octoberist]

i can't see Krystal Skulls getting better with time unlike Temple of DOom (and god bless DOOM)

[Spider-X]

pretty sure it will still suck in a year

I guess we'll just have to wait and see then. I just don't see how Temple of Doom can not suck but this one can.

Temple of Doom, IMO, was way cheesier and less coherent than this one.

[The Man of Steel]

God Bless Crystal Skulls

[The_Vision]

Saw it last night and it was awesome!!! :D The only thing i didnt like was the cgi monkeys (wtf) lol Other than that it was what it was; a fun, family adventure movie. I will be seeing it again tomorow :)

[sglass03]

Quick question, because I can't find an answer anywhere else: I'm planning on seeing Indy this weekend at some point. For those of you who saw it, did they show a TDK trailer in front of it (any of them?) Weird question, I know, but if anyone has an answer, it would be appreciated.

[The Man of Steel]

I Agree, The monkeys were dumb

[Spider-X]

God Bless Crystal Skulls

um, no offense there Dr. Jones...but i think you might have a bias :ninja:

[Spider-X]

Quick question, because I can't find an answer anywhere else: I'm planning on seeing Indy this weekend at some point. For those of you who saw it, did they show a TDK trailer in front of it (any of them?) Weird question, I know, but if anyone has an answer, it would be appreciated.

not mine.

[Spider-X]

I Agree, The monkeys were dumb

that part was ultra cheese...kinda took me out of the movie for a second actually.

[cryptic name]

I guess we'll just have to wait and see then. I just don't see how Temple of Doom can not suck but this one can.

Temple of Doom, IMO, was way cheesier and less coherent than this one.

Temple of Doom had Indy's soul. It had Indy's wit and character and charm. Even if it was the weakest of the original three, it was way, way, way, way better than this movie.

[The Man of Steel]

that part was ultra cheese...kinda took me out of the movie for a second actually.
me too, it was pointless

[flickchick85]

I was disappointed with the clunky script, all the CGI, and Kaminski's TERRIBLE cinematography (the guy is talented, but clearly a bad fit for an Indiana Jones movie), but I was still entertained by the movie. Just disappointed. Still, I liked it better than Temple of Doom, has always been BY FAR my least favorite of the series. Surprisingly, I thought Shia LaBeouf was one of the better aspects, and Cate Blanchett is always great.

It's not a great movie, but still entertaining, and I do love the nostalgic nature of it. Anyone trying to say this is as bad as the Star Wars prequels needs to go back and watch those. Not only as a reminder, but also because you deserve the punishment. ;) That said, this may have been on par with the SW prequels if they had been directed by Steven Spielberg, but they were not, so they suck more, imo. NO LINE in this was as badly delivered as all of the lines in those, even though some of them were as badly-written.

Overall, I'd probably give this a 6.5/10.

[Octoberist]

I Agree, The monkeys were dumb

It was bad. it was bad in a weird way where I was like "huh"?

[Spider-X]

Temple of Doom had Indy's soul. It had Indy's wit and character and charm. Even if it was the weakest of the original three, it was way, way, way, way better than this movie.

I still don't agree. I remember buying the trilogy on DVD a year ago and watching all three back to back. When i got to Temple of Doom i thought "what the hell is this crap? it's no where near the quality of the first film."

Indy's soul aside, it was really poor compared to the others...even the sets were way cheeper looking. Crystal Skulls has Indy's soul (though older), more enjoyable characters, and looked a hell of a lot prettier.

[블라스]

:up:

http://img371.imageshack.us/img371/9541/creamdog05xh6.jpg

http://img371.imageshack.us/img371/6123/creamdog04bi9.jpg

http://img368.imageshack.us/img368/962/creamdog06fc2.jpg

http://img368.imageshack.us/img368/4158/creamdog03oi2.jpg

Hell yeah :up:
They should adapt the novels, some of them are pretty good.

[The Man of Steel]

um, no offense there Dr. Jones...but i think you might have a bias :ninja:
maybe :csad:

[The Joker]

oh...well..um..that's not ok. Let me rephrase that:

Crystal Skulls was more injoyable than Star Wars episode's 1 and 2 combined if Natalie portman was naked and 21 years old!! the whole time.

Let's not get carried away here...18 is old enough :o ;)

[The Man of Steel]

:funny::up:

[Spider-X]

Let's not get carried away here...18 is old enough :o ;)

to each his own :o

:oldrazz:

[cryptic name]

I still don't agree. I remember buying the trilogy on DVD a year ago and watching all three back to back. When i got to Temple of Doom i thought "what the hell is this crap? it's no where near the quality of the first film."

Indy's soul aside, it was really poor compared to the others...even the sets were way cheeper looking. Crystal Skulls has Indy's soul (though older), more enjoyable characters, and looked a hell of a lot prettier.

eh, i have a soft spot for short round. i'm glad you liked the new movie, someone should. lets leave it at that and be pals :word:

[Spider-X]

eh, i have a soft spot for short round. i'm glad you liked the new movie, someone should. lets leave it at that and be pals :word:

you have a soft spot for him huh...lets keep it that way mister, he's a young'n. :nono:

but all pedophile jokes aside...I believe we can hold a civil debate here AND be pals!

so, lets start with you, what exactly about Temple of Doom is so much better that Crystal Skulls, other than your reported "Indy's soul"?

[The Joker]

eh, i have a soft spot for short round. i'm glad you liked the new movie, someone should. lets leave it at that and be pals :word:

No :cmad: We must gather all the haters and all those who liked it, and assmble in an arena, like in Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome...2 teams enter, one leaves :cmad:

[The Man of Steel]

perfect :hehe:::up:

[The Man of Steel]

edit

[chaseter]

Alright…just got back from seeing this movie and here is my review:

The movie starts off (no the prairie dogs were not lame and were actually quite funny amidst all the action) with a bang, great suspense and of course a great introduction to our villains. Cate Blanchet is of course wonderful as the kinky/bondage seductress Russian Irina, a psychic bent on bringing back Stalin some mind control goodies. The first big fight as seen in the trailers is at the governmental warehouse where our plot and treasure is quickly introduced. As Indy makes an escape (look for an open box from a previous film…wink wink), a scene in which he enters is extremely hilarious as the lifeless town is prepared for a test. Although he hides in a lead laden fridge, the possibility of him surviving the long travel in it is a little over the top.

We are then introduced to Mutt in the second act and Shia does a good job amidst the bigger names and I give him credit for this even though I personally hate him…and guess what role he plays??? The amusing side kick of course…who would-a –thought? But I saw that coming. After the FBI is on high ‘Red’ alert, we see how 50’s America is shaping up amidst the Cold War and our duo is off to South America to find Mutt’s mother and answer the big question to the mystery at the end of Indy’s whip. Through a little archeological work, and grave robbing!...a great action scene happens in the jungle as Mutt, Mary (she goes by another name), Indy, and the Oxley fumble against the Russians for control of an artifact. Once again, a great Indiana Jones fight scene ensues, the best out of the entire series I must say and visually spectacular as well. The ants as others mentions were great, compelling, and damn creepy. However, another corny scene mucks up this act in the form of a swinging Mutt and guerrilla…I mean monkey task force. Another George Lucas moment in fact that seems to cut away from the thing at hand.

The last part of the film is great as it involves all the good ‘ole mystery solving from the past Indy films. I don’t want to give much away through a character/plot twist but the ending wasn’t what I expected. I loved the plot of the crystal skulls but showing the real alien was a bit too much for me. I think it would have been great to just show the room start to spin and the skulls destroy her…not morphing into a live alien But that is just me. A few minor/corny moments amidst all the great action, funny dialogue, and campy humor that we have all come to expect. Is this the best movie of the franchise…no but it fits in great with the series and ties up all the loose ends from the previous movies without making horrible or fake feeling character connections. Ford was great again but he did seem a bit out of it from his past performances as Indy. But it was great to see him do a lot of his own stunts. Anyways, I rate this better than Temple, God I hate Short Round, and on par with Crusade. Great movie, great time.

8.5/10

I would say this was one of the few franchises to survive the trilogy curse and can now be said to have moved into the 4 film hall of fame.

[chaseter]

I guess we'll just have to wait and see then. I just don't see how Temple of Doom can not suck but this one can.

Temple of Doom, IMO, was way cheesier and less coherent than this one.
God yes Temple of Doom was cheesy.:o I mean it still had great great moments but it was a major step down from Raiders and Crusade took back over the helm. Raiders' affects were practical but Temple's effects were pretty lame looking IMO and we have a great plot in Indy I, III, and IV but Doom had an incredibly less epic plot IMO. This movie was beautiful though.

[cryptic name]

you have a soft spot for him huh...lets keep it that way mister, he's a young'n. :nono:

but all pedophile jokes aside...I believe we can hold a civil debate here AND be pals!

so, lets start with you, what exactly about Temple of Doom is so much better that Crystal Skulls, other than your reported "Indy's soul"?

actually he's older than i am :cwink:

i can't really debate it further than this movie didn't feel like Indiana Jones to me. and what with the nuclear test site, the prairie dogs, the monkeys, the vine swinging, the whole lack of an opening teaser like the other three. it just didn't sit well with me at all.

[The Joker]

actually he's older than i am :cwink:

i can't really debate it further than this movie didn't feel like Indiana Jones to me. and what with the nuclear test site, the prairie dogs, the monkeys, the vine swinging, the whole lack of an opening teaser like the other three. it just didn't sit well with me at all.

The coffin was the opening teaser. It just happened to tie into the movie. If Mutt hadn't shown up, I don't think the adventure ever would have happened, and the coffin would have been just another event.

[Spider-X]

actually he's older than i am :cwink:

i can't really debate it further than this movie didn't feel like Indiana Jones to me. and what with the nuclear test site, the prairie dogs, the monkeys, the vine swinging, the whole lack of an opening teaser like the other three. it just didn't sit well with me at all.

i don't really get why the cgi animals bothered people so much other than the claims of them them being "Lucas's little digital creetons." THey didn't bother me at all. The vine swinging part i can see...but the prairie dogs?

what i need to do is watch the trilogy again (or maybe just 1 and 3) and decide for myself if i thought the movie fits in. as it stands right now, it's a little adrift from the feeling of the others, but it's 20 years later so it kind of makes sense and doesn't really bother me. It was Indiana Jones with all his charm, just quite older.

[Spider-X]

The coffin was the opening teaser. It just happened to tie into the movie. If Mutt hadn't shown up, I don't think the adventure ever would have happened, and the coffin would have been just another event.

good point...and to add to that, i thought the teaser was that after the credits were done roling through the whole driving credits scene, you find out Jones was in the trunk of the lead car the whole time.

[cryptic name]

The coffin was the opening teaser. It just happened to tie into the movie. If Mutt hadn't shown up, I don't think the adventure ever would have happened, and the coffin would have been just another event.

it fit in a little too well for my taste, i suppose. i prefer the to have little to do with the main adventure other than introducing characters, like Belloq, Willie, and Short Round. they should be the third act of a movie we never got to see. the Crystal Skull teaser just made it seem like there was 20 minutes we missed of this movie.

[Dangerous]

Strange most of you guys are picking at Temple of Doom, that was always my fav of the series.
It just has the best action sequences- the mine ride, the bridge, the molten pit etc.
Crusade is cool, but no way is it the adventure that Doom is.

Not seen the new one yet.

[britrogue]

Don't know how to use spoiler tags so I shall give my review as vaguely as possible.
I sat through the entire film and enjoyed every moment of it. My worst fear was that Harrison would end up being the Sean Connery style character while the younger Shia became the hero of the hour. I'm glad to say that didn't happen!
However, when it came to reviewing the film with my friend afterwards, we both agreed. Highly enjoyable film, but still basically a pile of crap. IMO, the plot had serious holes that were never explained, the film lacked a charismatic bad guy (in fact, the constant "I'm a bad guy, now I'm not, now I am" bit got a little wearing). In truth, the film was absolutely ridiculous, and by this I mean the fridge, the prairie dogs, the ladder building ants and of course Mutt and his faithful "army"..........lol. My problem with the prairie dogs? I half expected one to say "hello" when Indy fell out of the fridge. I felt that the backing characters were seriously underused, and that there were too many one liners.
I think that if they had announced 2 years ago that they were making a 4th Indiana Jones film, then I would have been perfectly happy with Kingdom of the Crystal Monkey. But because this has been in the pipeline for so long, only taking so long because they couldn't agree on a decent script, then I found the attempt to be slightly weak and in a way, desperate. Indiana Jones meets ET? Please! And did anyone else spot Gollum from Lord Of The Rings?
Although, on a good note, I really did enjoy the film. It's VERY entertaining. I'd reccomend it to anyone, but I would make sure I sent them in prepared! 7/10 for me. :yay:

[daywalker2007]

how can anyone diss Temple of Doom??

its got the bad ass Mola Ram for gods sake, he pulls out a still beating heart!!

haven't seen any other villian do that in an Indy film!!

[Spider-Bat]

Alot of fans like Temple of Doom but don't think of it as the best. Spielberg always says how it wasn't like 1 and that's why with 3 he wanted it to be more like Raiders changing the title font back to how it was in Raiders and all.

As for me I like 2 but I like 1 and 3 better.

1 is my fave.

4 is very good, I want to see it again. It's Indiana Jones it's always good, and like with part2 even though it's not like 1 and 3 it is still cool and fun to watch.

Some fans just nit pick if it's not a carbon copy of the others. Some know how to just go with it and have fun.
But, I do understand wanting good quality and substance and this new one has that but it's just not as detailed as 1 and 3 I think.

I think it felt a bit like there could have been a bit more story there, maybe a bit more bonding with Mutt in some ways, yet I'm really happy with it and don't really feel robbed of anything. I think everything that was done was enough.

Although I think Sallah should have been there at the end at least.

It is nice to have Marion back. I really like Mutt.

The prairie dogs were funny and cute but not campy at all. I was going nuts to see what the mountain scene would be in the opening, I thought that was funny to see what they did.

This was the first time I got to see Indy on the big screen and that was fun. I have to admit though, I like when Indiana deals with religious and magical artifacts instead of what he dealt with in this new installment.

In a way it felt out of character but he has after all avoided the spirits of the Ark, and faced voo doo, and met a centuries old Knight. So he's faced big outrageous things before which is the point but this was just the most out there thing yet. You can look at it as time has gone on, and this is the new fantastic type of thing for Indy to face, in a way it fits for the 50's.

I'd like to see just one more, most of the action being handled by Mutt, and this time something more on the magical side, for old times sake.

I loved it. And it's nice to see Indiana back.

[Kakihara]

Despite our differences over the film, gentlemen, I think we can all agree that my new subtitle is awesome, and so is Cate in that hot wig with that hot accent in that hot outfit...hard to type...:hehe:

[hame4479]

It had great moments, but also its fair share of cringe worthy ones as well. All the action was fimed in a top notch manner, but some of what went on aside from indy kicking ass was just stupid. Shia sword fighting and then gettin hit in the balls over and over was just over the top dumb and dont even get me started on his tarzan swinging. But everything involving Harrison was badass as usual, just wish he would have been at the center of more of it, because in the old flicks he certainly would have been.

[Kakihara]

Why doesn't Indy have his own set of threads? I want a Spalko appreciation thread started, with pics. :csad:

[Matt]

Just out of curiousity, to the people giving this movie a 10 out of 10, how would you rate National Treasure? I ask, because I know National Treasure and National Treasure 2 got a lot of slack on the Hype, where as it seems plenty of people are giving this movie a free pass just because it is an Indiana Jones movie when in reality, it was, at best, on par with National Treasure.

[Johnny Drama]

Strange most of you guys are picking at Temple of Doom, that was always my fav of the series.
It just has the best action sequences- the mine ride, the bridge, the molten pit etc.
Crusade is cool, but no way is it the adventure that Doom is.

Not seen the new one yet.

I agree, I think temple is the 2nd best, under raiders.
Last crusade was the weakest in my opinon.
Kingdom of the crystal skull was an 8 out of 10 for me, it starts out slow but by the time it picks up it doesn't let up for a second

[The Joker]

Just out of curiousity, to the people giving this movie a 10 out of 10, how would you rate National Treasure? I ask, because I know National Treasure and National Treasure 2 got a lot of slack on the Hype, where as it seems plenty of people are giving this movie a free pass just because it is an Indiana Jones movie when in reality, it was, at best, on par with National Treasure.

This was MUCH better than National Treasure. Either of them. Those movies are exactly what NOT to do with an adventure movie. And Nic Cage is no Harrison Ford. He's not even fit to shine Ford's shoes.

[Johnny Drama]

Just out of curiousity, to the people giving this movie a 10 out of 10, how would you rate National Treasure? I ask, because I know National Treasure and National Treasure 2 got a lot of slack on the Hype, where as it seems plenty of people are giving this movie a free pass just because it is an Indiana Jones movie when in reality, it was, at best, on par with National Treasure.


I don't think so. This was a great film but I wouldn't give it a 10,
And I didn't care much for National tresasure 2, tho I felt it was a big improvement from the first one.

[Johnny Drama]

This was MUCH better than National Treasure. Either of them. Those movies are exactly what NOT to do with an adventure movie. And Nic Cage is no Harrison Ford. He's not even fit to shine Ford's shoes.

:applaud

[The Amazing Lee]

Ugh...Nicholas Cage is like a bad taste in the back of my mouth in terms of acting is concerned.

[The Joker]

Ugh...Nicholas Cage is like a bad taste in the back of my mouth in terms of acting is concerned.

It's like he only takes the absolute best and absolute worst scripts he's offered. So for every Adaptation we get a Wicker Man, and every Face Off gives us National Treasure.

[Johnny Drama]

Don't forget Next...

or Ghost Rider...

What pieces of shiiiit

[Matt]

I agree Nic Cage is no Harrison Ford, but never the less. Can you really say Indy IV was that superior in terms of plot, humor, or action? I'd say both National Treasure movies had much stronger villains than Indy IV in the form of Ed Harris and Sean Bean.

My point is, if this were not "Indiana Jones," would it have been anything more than a mediocre action movie? I gotta say no. Ford and the character saved this movie from being total crap. Take either one out of the equation, and you have a movie that is not even on par with the dumb fun that is National Treasure.

[Kakihara]

It's like he only takes the absolute best and absolute worst scripts he's offered. So for every Adaptation we get a Wicker Man, and every Face Off gives us National Treasure.

Face Off, Wicker Man and National Treasure are all in the same boat for me as far as crap Cage has done. I still can't believe they actually had to have some random thug in the movie have the line, "So you want to take his face...off?" Jesus. A piece of me died the day I saw that movie.

[The Amazing Lee]

It's like he only takes the absolute best and absolute worst scripts he's offered. So for every Adaptation we get a Wicker Man, and every Face Off gives us National Treasure.

He's been in good movies...but his dull, monotonal, idiotic voice and wooden acting just makes me want to SMASH things. :cmad:

[Browncoat]

I give a **** because I hate to see ignorance spread.

ZOMG, Itza CONSPIRACY!

No, it's an Indiana Jones movie. And thanks for adding to the lingering feeling I'm getting that Spielberg didn't forget how to make good movies, but rather the audience forgot how to have fun.

[ultimatefan]

REVIEW: INDIANA JONES AND THE KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL

The first thing I find important to say about the long-awaited new Indiana Jones movies is no, it´s not THE PHANTOM MENACE. Steven Spielberg and George Lucas didn´t rape my childhood by any means. There´s no Jar Jar Binks or neverending stilted pseudo-Shakesperian dialogue. It didn´t become a self-parody. All that we love about the franchise is there. The second thing I find important to say is no, this wasn´t worth waiting almost twenty years and God knows how many script drafts. If the point was bringing Indy to the digital age, this could have been done at least five years ago.

Whatever were the reasons for the wait, it wasn´t coming up with a groundbreaking story that would reinvent the franchise and take it to a new level, the way CASINO ROYALE did for Bond or BATMAN BEGINS for the dark knight. It´s basically a formula movie, kind of a rehash of previous Indy movies. Then again, there´s nothing necessarily wrong with that – Bond got away with that for how long again? As far as formula movies go, CRYSTAL SKULL is a pretty well-executed one. The bits are familiar, but they still work. Yeah, the joke about his fear of snakes is there, but it´s still funny. The chase scene that seems to go on forever is there, too, but it still keeps you on the edge of your seat. Except for some really long exposition stuff in the second act, the movie moves ahead pretty swiftly. More than anything, like Bruce Willis with John McClaine, Harrison Ford still gets Indy inside and out. The amusingly cranky, sarcastic, intelligent but a bit rough around the edges, highly resourceful but not unfailable archaeologist still fits him like a glove.

It´s exactly where the movie tries to come up with new elements that lie its biggest flaws. My favorite sequel is THE LAST CRUSADE, with all its problems, cuz it feels like an honest effort to get more into Indy´s background and also where some of his issues seem to come from. I think Shia Labeouf is a talented guy and he has a good chemistery with Ford, but the whole concept of his character feels like one of those forced ideas that they use in aging TV shows when the ratings start to drop too much. And bringing back Marion, well, she WAS the best of all Indy´s girlfriends, but again shows how much the franchise still needs to rely on the glories of the past. There´s a potentially interesting subplot about Indy being a victim of the fifties anticommunist paranoia, but it´s dropped early and resolved all of a sudden without much of an explanation.

But still, this isn´t in anyway a big step down in the franchise. CRYSTAL SKULL deserves its place in the shelves with the other Indiana Jones movies. It´s a movie to forget life´s troubles as you munch a gigantic bucket of popcorn and drink a ridiculously large soda. Which is what the series is all about.

GRADE: B-

[Kanon]

Saw it last night... Good adventure, with I had this odd feeling I can not put my finger on it... I don't know what it is, if seeing indy almost retired or what... I guess it didn't feel like Indy's adventure, but like and adventure with Indy.
But:
Shia was great
Spalko was ****ing awesome! greatest Indy villain IMO

[Kakihara]

ZOMG, Itza CONSPIRACY!

No, it's an Indiana Jones movie. And thanks for adding to the lingering feeling I'm getting that Spielberg didn't forget how to make good movies, but rather the audience forgot how to have fun.

Lucas forgot how to write good stories and Spielberg forgot how to take control of his own projects.

Fixed.

But thanks for playing. :woot:

[Kakihara]

There's a lot of denial in this thread and just remember, the real healing doesn't begin until you accept reality head-on. Until then, I wish you gentlemen the best of luck on your road to recovery and who knows-maybe down the road there actually will be that worthwhile Indy movie. I know I'd love to see it, just like the old days.

Best Wishes,
Kakihara

[Kent]

There's a lot of denial in this thread

As it seems, there is also a lot of douchebaggery.

[Matt]

As it seems, there is also a lot of douchebaggery.

Like or hate the movie, you gotta admit that was damn funny. :hehe:

[chrisfishlock]

After seeing it last night i give it an 8, the majority of the film was really good, its just the ending spoiled it a bit, meanlike aliens, wtf didnt seem Indiana Jones like at all.

[turtlefocker]

8/10

Doom (9/10) > Raiders (9/10) > Crystal Skulls (8/10) > Crusade (7/10)

In my opinion... Doom goes a head of Raiders because I like to watch it more but overall they are both a 9.

The only thing that irked me about this one was Shia swinging with the monkeys and the alien at the end.

[Schlosser85]

Yea the Mutt Tarzan bit was cheesy with a capital C, but the alien ship taking off at the end really didn't bother me, I don't think it's any more "out there" than the Ark melting Nazis' faces, or Mola Ram pulling people's hearts out and they're still alive, etc.

Actually the weakest part for me was Indy and Marion's wedding. It just felt out of character for Indy, especially since they didn't have enough building up to it, and it was kind of a lame, trying too hard for closure epilogue, IMO.

[turtlefocker]

Has anyone seen "Curse of the Jackal (http://www.tv.com/the-young-indiana-jones-chronicles/the-curse-of-the-jackal-mexico-march-1916-2/episode/165675/summary.html?tag=ep_list;ep_title;1)"? It's referenced in Crystal Skulls.

http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/indianajones/images/thumb/9/99/YoungIndianaJonesAndTheCurseOfTheJackal.jpg/220px-YoungIndianaJonesAndTheCurseOfTheJackal.jpg

To keep him from getting into any more trouble, Indy is sent to visit his aunt in New Mexico. While there, he is kidnapped by Pancho Villa and swept up into the Mexican Revolution.

[Schlosser85]

By the way, just because we enjoyed this movie when a lot of people didn't doesn't mean we're "ignorant" or "in denial".

And as for National Treasure, Nicolas Cage can't act for crap. Harrison Ford is a better actor than he is, and some will roll their eyes at my saying this, but so is Shia LaBeouf.

[Rac]

Just came from the theater. Man the movie blew! What a piece ****!

[FilmNerdJamie]

Most of the arguments against Indy IV are legit. But damnit...I liked it; bloody, gaping flaws and all. It was fun and entertaining...albeit lazily done by Spielberg & Co. I mean...there wasn't any real imagination put into this film imo.

They should have called it Indiana Jones Returns. Seriously.

7/10

[Wolverini]

You need to stop *****ing on Lucas. All of you.

He gave us the most clear sound, the best visual effects company and one of THE greatest Sci-Fi Trilogy EVER. Yes, I said trilogy, as in the ORIGINAL Trilogy.

Like someone above me said :

"The audience has forgotten how to have FUN"

[turtlefocker]

This movie was awesome

[FilmNerdJamie]

I will say, "**** you!" to the nit-picky *****es regarding...

their disliking/hating of Indy and Marion's re-romance. Call me crazy, but it's actually refreshing to see an older couple in a big blockbuster tentpole; especially one with such great chemistry as those two imo

[Rac]

"The audience has forgotten how to have FUN"
Well KotCS was fun at some scenes, but I didn't like it overally. Too many over the top scenes. Though I liked the sword fight, but stuff like the tarzan homage was just plain stupid and ridiculous! So was the fridge. And the driving into tree.

I can have fun in movies. I had the most fun in a long time watching Inside. Granted, it's a horror slasher movie, but I've enjoyed more than anything else this year in theaters.

Also, I think Apocalypto is the best adventure movie of the 2000's.

KotCS was just too childish to my taste. Why did all the killings have to be offscreen? Back in the old days Indy's killings were shown and heart's were ripped from the chests. Spielberg has gotten too soft.

I've got no problem with people liking KotCS. It just didn't work for me. Best part of the movie was the old Paramount logo. Second best was Cate Blanchett.

[Gallagher]

You need to stop *****ing on Lucas. All of you.

He gave us the most clear sound, the best visual effects company and one of THE greatest Sci-Fi Trilogy EVER. Yes, I said trilogy, as in the ORIGINAL Trilogy.

Like someone above me said :

"The audience has forgotten how to have FUN"

I agree with the above. He was a genius, I appreciate everything he's done for filmmaking as a whole.

But he's lost his god damn mind along the way I swear.

Anyway on topic, I might catch Indy tonight :up:

[TNC9852002]

I might see this again when I get off work.

Usually, it would be no damn question about it (since I can get in free and watch whatever I want), but with gas prices as high as they are now, I don't want to make any trips anywhere if not absolutely necessary. :p

-TNC

[Cyrusbales]

I went to see Indy a few days ago(at a pre-release showing), review below:

INDIANA JONES AND THE KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL

Indiana Jones And The Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull,is the long awaited fourth film in the Indiana Jones franchise. Recent years have seen many franchises from past decades revived with almost guaranteed poor results each time, relying on the nostalgia to carry it through the box office, which usually works. But the level of secrecy surrounding this production has tended to suggest that it may break the mould of lacklustre sequels, rather than having to over market itself.

Our story opens in the year 1957, with Indy(Harrison Ford), being forced to help the soviets look for an artifact of value in the governments top secret ‘area 51’. As expected, he manages to escape in classic action adventure style and make his way back to society, only to be approached by Mutt(Shia LaBeouf), a young man who knows a friend of Indy’s, stating that he’d discovered an old legend of a Crystal Skull was more than just a legend, enlists Indy’s help in order to save his friend from the soviets.

After leaving the cinema, the first thing that really hit’s the viewer is the narrative, which is horrifically predictable and laughable in terms of the direction it takes. Feeling like it merely wants to begin cashing in on the franchise again and setting itself up for making more money rather than telling a worthwhile story.

Spielberg is once again the directors chair, and as with all of his recent works, fails to impress. The use of the camera is nothing special at all, becoming a point and shoot affair, rather than trying to add anything to the narrative, which desperately needs help. Almost entirely a genre piece in it’s direction, without any original creative flair, Spielberg also relies far too heavily on CGI that distances the viewer from the piece rather than drawing them in.

Performances here barely require comment, due to the underachieving level of the screenplay, most of the cast are relegated to cliché stereotypes, rather than being given the time and dialogue to grow, favouring the quick one liners and quips over any substance. Whilst Harrison Ford is still of reasonable quality, his performance hinges on the viewer having seen the previous movies in the franchise, and doesn’t really add much other than a few moments of verbal amusement.

The action sequences have also lost some of the charm, whilst still preferring to film stunts on the whole, rather than using CGI, there is still a frequent use of it which really damages the action adventure experience to a high degree. The big set pieces are too over the top, using CGI to try to heighten the moment, only to make it seem fake and fail to engage the audience properly.

In conclusion, this latest of Indiana Jones is definitely the poorest of the franchise, relying almost solely on the nostalgia of the previous films and the fact that audiences have been waiting nearly twenty years to see a sequel, that they’ll hungrily eat up anything put in front of them. It seems a case of trying to outdo the previous films, and just go far too over the top, in terms of narrative, effects and action, failing to pick up on the character and charm that made the initial film so successful. Remotely entertaining, but wholly disappointing on many levels.

[Chaos Bringer]

I don't believe you. That stuff happens in movies and TV. Not in real life.

the first weekends of pop-films like Batman, Indiana or Iron Man in Toronto is literally SWARMED by nerds, geeks and enthusiasts who indeed let their feelings be known. vocally. in unison.

many a groan during the new Indy film, same as the batmobile chase in BB which nearly derailed the film. groans. out loud. together.

i call it 'movie-vibes' and all midnight screenings or primetime showings of new and anticipated films have it.

[Darknightnomis]

I gave it a 7.

I would've gave it an 8 but the ending is weak...but sweet. It's about on par with Last Crusade and just a little better than Temple of Doom.

It's a good INdy movie but not a great Indy movie. It seemed like an homage to the previous 3 movies that came before it while trying to make something new, which itsn't a bad thing.

There are momments of Pure genuis (escape quakesand scene, CLASSIC!) but parts that made you cringe (Shia swingin on Tarzan vines?) but there are some scene that are instant classic....


Indy looking at the Atomic bomb and ALien Ship Taking off!


Still I want to see it again becasue it is a fun movie.

[ultimatefan]

I gave it a 7.

I would've gave it an 8 but the ending is weak...but sweet. It's about on par with Last Crusade and just a little better than Temple of Doom.

It's a good INdy movie but not a great Indy movie. It seemed like an homage to the previous 3 movies that came before it while trying to make something new, which itsn't a bad thing.

There are momments of Pure genuis (escape quakesand scene, CLASSIC!) but parts that made you cringe (Shia swingin on Tarzan vines?) but there are some scene that are instant classic....


Indy looking at the Atomic bomb and ALien Ship Taking off!


Still I want to see it again becasue it is a fun movie.

Yeah, the Shia swinging scene was cringe-inducing. It was just ridiculously cartoony, especially with the monkeys swinging along with him for no reason.

[ultimatefan]

You need to stop *****ing on Lucas. All of you.

He gave us the most clear sound, the best visual effects company and one of THE greatest Sci-Fi Trilogy EVER. Yes, I said trilogy, as in the ORIGINAL Trilogy.

Like someone above me said :

"The audience has forgotten how to have FUN"

We don´t need to stop anything, we´re all entitled to an opinion here.

As for forgetting to have fun, no, that´s not exactly true. I had fun with this movie, and I acknowledge so, but it has a lot of flaws, and I acknowledge so as well. I´ll agree, however, that some people may have come with overly high expectations for this. The Indiana Jones movies were never meant to be about deep characterization or anything like that. They´re not campy or silly in, say, the zero IQ Transformers approach, but they´re popcorn fun at its purest form, and the new installment acknowledges that. I think you can reinvent it and add new layers to it the way Casino Royale did with Bond, but it doesn´t mean I didn´t enjoy Crystal Skull for what it was.

[Cyrusbales]

We don´t need to stop anything, we´re all entitled to an opinion here.

As for forgetting to have fun, no, that´s not exactly true. I had fun with this movie, and I acknowledge so, but it has a lot of flaws, and I acknowledge so as well. I´ll agree, however, that some people may have come with overly high expectations for this. The Indiana Jones movies were never meant to be about deep characterization or anything like that. They´re not campy or silly in, say, the zero IQ Transformers approach, but they´re popcorn fun at its purest form, and the new installment acknowledges that. I think you can reinvent it and add new layers to it the way Casino Royale did with Bond, but it doesn´t mean I didn´t enjoy Crystal Skull for what it was.


No offence or anything, but this is what's wrong with the majority audience thesedays.

They're too happy to settle for less, people have become OK to tolerate far lower standards than they should, producing a goldfish audience. No wonder Hollywood just sticks to remakes and sequels, it's the easiest way to keep churning stuff out that is barely passable but will make money from the general populous.

[Kanon]

I didn't have any problem with Shia swinging... I guess I'm the only one :p

But my hearth stopped at the end when Shia almost puts Indy's hat on :cmad:

[GhostPoet]

This is EASILY my 2nd favorite film in the series...following closely behind Raiders.

[TNC9852002]

Yeah, the Shia swinging scene was cringe-inducing. It was just ridiculously cartoony, especially with the monkeys swinging along with him for no reason.
Uh, don't you remember? The monkeys were there swinging with them because monkeys are very strange and curious animals. They were put into the scene as to lend themselves later into the sequence when they're attacking the Russians in the car and lending a comedic moment.

It's not that it was unnecessary, I mean, they weren't in there for no reason. I just didn't like how it looked, despite conveying the "cartoon" feeling of VERY old-school filmmaking.

It's one of those things I mentioned that would be hard for current viewers to digest.

-TNC

[The_Vision]

The only bad thing about this film was the cgi monkeys lol other than that it was brilliant!!!

[GhostPoet]

Uh, don't you remember? The monkeys were there swinging with them because monkeys are very strange and curious animals. They were put into the scene as to lend themselves later into the sequence when they're attacking the Russians in the car and lending a comedic moment.

It's not that it was unnecessary, I mean, they weren't in there for no reason. I just didn't like how it looked, despite conveying the "cartoon" feeling of VERY old-school filmmaking.

It's one of those things I mentioned that would be hard for current viewers to digest.

-TNC



That scene didn't bother me for 2 very good reasons.
1) I like movies that are fun, especially indy films. And this was fun.
2) I like monkies.

:)

[TNC9852002]

The CGI monkeys DID look good. It's just that there were too many of them. lol. With Shia swinging around with them plus what I can tell, a greenscreen background and the intentional washed out look, it looked too much like an old school movie with old school effects and I'm not sure if I was prepared to adjust to seeing something like that. I think it was an effect intentionally used and like I said, I'm suggesting that a lot of people wanted to move away from that.

I felt the same way when I saw the old school effects of the older Indiana Jones movies for the first time just four or five years ago.

That's why I want to see this movie again so badly.

-TNC

[RickO'Connell]

2) I like monkies.


http://www5.picturepush.com/photo/a/715023/img/715023.png

"I hate monkeys"

Though I'll admit the CGI on them did look good but after Speed Racer I am tired of monkeys & they should cross over The Mummy with Indiana Jones that'd be golden :woot:

[~†~§iX~†~]

But the fridge was lined with lead. It makes perfect sense.:yay:
I personally loved the play on 50's nuclear propoganda during that scene. We all know in 2008 that a nuclear blast will burn everything in a very wide radius. But Indy in 1957, in a blind panic, basically did what all the popoganda told him to do: Duck and cover. That was a time when people were led to believe that you could easily survive a nuclear holocaust as long as you did what you were told.

Of course, the fridge being blasted away from ground zero, and Indy surviving the crash are ludicrously over the top, as previous Indy films have been (interest rate adjusted 19 years of course), but surely we all know going in that Indy is going to survive and save the day because he is the hero; the entertainment always comes from watching him on screen, because Dr. Jones isn't in on that fact like the rest of us!......

[Matt]

I personally loved the play on 50's nuclear propoganda during that scene. We all know in 2008 that a nuclear blast will burn everything in a very wide radius. But Indy in 1957, in a blind panic, basically did what all the popoganda told him to do: Duck and cover. That was a time when people were led to believe that you could easily survive a nuclear holocaust as long as you did what you were told.

Of course, the fridge being blasted away from ground zero, and Indy surviving the crash are ludicrously over the top, as previous Indy films have been (interest rate adjusted 19 years of course), but surely we all know going in that Indy is going to survive and save the day because he is the hero; the entertainment always comes from watching him on screen, because Dr. Jones isn't in on that fact like the rest of us!......

The thing is, it didn't serve the plot at all. I could let it slide if there were some great reason Indy found himself in a nuclear test zone and it someone how advanced the plot, but it wasn't the case. It was thrown in for cheap laughs. And on top of that, it wasn't THAT entertaining and it really just served to destroy suspension of disbelief the audience could've had simply because it was THAT ridiculously outrageous.

[cerealkiller182]

The thing is, it didn't serve the plot at all. I could let it slide if there were some great reason Indy found himself in a nuclear test zone and it someone how advanced the plot, but it wasn't the case. It was thrown in for cheap laughs. And on top of that, it wasn't THAT entertaining and it really just served to destroy suspension of disbelief the audience could've had simply because it was THAT ridiculously outrageous.

But the beginning of every Indy movie starts out with him miraculously or outrageously getting away.

[Matt]

But the beginning of every Indy movie starts out with him miraculously or outrageously getting away.

Being chased by a giant rock or a group of natives is hardly the same thing as being at ground zero of a nuclear blast and surviving due to hiding in a refridgerator. The warehouse escape was more than enough, in my opinion.

[luke1234]

But the beginning of every Indy movie starts out with him miraculously or outrageously getting away.

yeah but its not as outrageous as this one was

[cerealkiller182]

What about jumping out of a flying plane on a raft and sliding down the side of the mountain, or jumping off a ship that explodes leaving him in the ocean with just a lifesaver

[Matt]

What about jumping out of a flying plane on a raft and sliding down the side of the mountain, or jumping off a ship that explodes leaving him in the ocean with just a lifesaver

People have survived jumping out of a plane or being stranded in the ocean. No one has ever been at ground zero of a nuclear blast and lived to tell the tale.

[War Party]

People have survived jumping out of a plane or being stranded in the ocean. No one has ever been at ground zero of a nuclear blast and lived to tell the tale.

Indy did :yay:

[~†~§iX~†~]

The thing is, it didn't serve the plot at all.
Oh I totally agree. It only serves two purposes. Firstly, it tense danger for Indy to escape for the end of the opening sequence. Secondly, it is part of many elements within the movie blatantly ram down your throats that it is set in 50's America. I'm a 50's enthusiast, and even I thought they went OTT with the setting. But I guess, they wanted it to really show that it really is 19 years since Last Crusade!......

[cerealkiller182]

People have survived jumping out of a plane or being stranded in the ocean. No one has ever been at ground zero of a nuclear blast and lived to tell the tale.

But they are still outrageous. And a sense of ridiculousness combined with '50s sci-fi nuclear propaganda makes for fun entertainment.

It also led to the debriefing and the radiation scrub down

[Matt]

Oh I totally agree. It only serves two purposes. Firstly, it tense danger for Indy to escape for the end of the opening sequence. Secondly, it is part of many elements within the movie blatantly ram down your throats that it is set in 50's America. I'm a 50's enthusiast, and even I thought they went OTT with the setting. But I guess, they wanted it to really show that it really is 19 years since Last Crusade!......

I guess so. I thought the warehouse sequence was plenty tense and the rocket at the end was the perfect climax to it. As for the 50s, yeeeah, thats the truth. I wouldn't have even minded the nuclear scene so much, if it fit in with the theme of the movie. At the beginning it seemed like they were going for a "red-scare" theme and were going to include a subplot of Indy being suspected of being a commie, but they seem to have dropped that about 20 minutes in...If they maintained that plot, the nuclear scene would've fit as satire to the time (like the subplot)...but they just dropped it.

[Matt]

But they are still outrageous. And a sense of ridiculousness combined with '50s sci-fi nuclear propaganda makes for fun entertainment.

It would be fun if it weren't so goddamn stupid. Did you think Jar Jar Binks was harmless, fun entertainment?


It also led to the debriefing and the radiation scrub down

The radiation scrub down was a two second joke that could've been cut easily. The debriefing would've occured regardless being as Indy just aided Soviet soldiers in the invasion of a US military base.

[cerealkiller182]

I guess so. I thought the warehouse sequence was plenty tense and the rocket at the end was the perfect climax to it. As for the 50s, yeeeah, thats the truth. I wouldn't have even minded the nuclear scene so much, if it fit in with the theme of the movie. At the beginning it seemed like they were going for a "red-scare" theme and were going to include a subplot of Indy being suspected of being a commie, but they seem to have dropped that about 20 minutes in...If they maintained that plot, the nuclear scene would've fit as satire to the time (like the subplot)...but they just dropped it.

They left America. I wouldnt think there was a lot anti-red propaganda outside the US

[The_Vision]

The poison dart scene was just pure awesomeness :D

[cerealkiller182]

It would be fun if it weren't so goddamn stupid. Did you think Jar Jar Binks was harmless, fun entertainment?

Nuclear blast didnt follow Indy around the whole movie. it was 5 mins.

[Matt]

They left America. I wouldnt think there was a lot anti-red propaganda outside the US

Then maybe they should've never introduced the subplot that they did not/could not carry out to begin with.

[Matt]

Nuclear blast didnt follow Indy around the whole movie. it was 5 mins.

Didn't make it any less stupid.

[Matt]

The poison dart scene was just pure awesomeness :D

That it was. :up:

[cerealkiller182]

Didn't make it any less stupid.

But it made it harmless and fun unlike Jar Jar Binks

[Matt]

So you're saying fivbe minutes of sloppy, stupid writing is okay?

[cerealkiller182]

So you're saying fivbe minutes of sloppy, stupid writing is okay?

Im saying that as part of an action-adventure franchise that puts an average Joe in larger than life situations constantly, you should suspend your disbelief for 5 minutes.

I dont see why the unbelievable elements of 30s serials in the original Indy movies are so easily acceptable,and the elements of 50s serials are so scoffed at. Its nitpicky

[Internets]

The thing is, it didn't serve the plot at all. I could let it slide if there were some great reason Indy found himself in a nuclear test zone and it someone how advanced the plot, but it wasn't the case. It was thrown in for cheap laughs. And on top of that, it wasn't THAT entertaining and it really just served to destroy suspension of disbelief the audience could've had simply because it was THAT ridiculously outrageous.So you didn't see it as a metaphor for an aging adventurer attempting to shield himself from the onset of the atomic age?

[~†~§iX~†~]

I guess so. I thought the warehouse sequence was plenty tense and the rocket at the end was the perfect climax to it. As for the 50s, yeeeah, thats the truth. I wouldn't have even minded the nuclear scene so much, if it fit in with the theme of the movie. At the beginning it seemed like they were going for a "red-scare" theme and were going to include a subplot of Indy being suspected of being a commie, but they seem to have dropped that about 20 minutes in...If they maintained that plot, the nuclear scene would've fit as satire to the time (like the subplot)...but they just dropped it.

Thinking about it, I guess the nuclear test was also there to explain why a millitary base hiding all of America's secrets is only guarded by four grunts at the front gate. The Russians did have to get in easy after all, otherwise the action is pointless with Indy locked in the car!......

[protocida]

The chaucilla Cemitery Guardians are badass.

[The_Vision]

Loved the references to Marcus Brody and Henry Jones sr.

Arent both Indy and his dad immortal since they drank from the holy grail?

[SpideyLad]

Loved the references to Marcus Brody and Henry Jones sr.

Arent both Indy and his dad immortal since they drank from the holy grail?

No...Remember what the Knight said, the Grail can't pass the Seal, that's the price of immortality. To remain Immortal, they have to stay where the Knight was....

[Internets]

Arent both Indy and his dad immortal since they drank from the holy grail?No, because they passed the seal

[Bim]

What about jumping out of a flying plane on a raft and sliding down the side of the mountain, or jumping off a ship that explodes leaving him in the ocean with just a lifesaver
:hehe:

It amazes me that Indy has always had these crazy impossible moments, and yet it only *now* bugs some people.

Most people at the showing last night were all laughing and clapping at the insane monkey sequence, and just had fun with it. I must admit, i had a blast re-watching it last night with a room full of goofers.. at the end, all i saw were smiling faces :woot:

[Spider-Fan]

I saw this movie yesterday, but due to limited internet access I couldn't post about it. Having seen this movie, it is definately the worst of the series. However, I hold the other 3 in such high regard, it would've been tough to top them. This movie was a whole lot better than I thought it was going to be, and I give it around a 7.5 or 8 out of ten (RofLA-10, ToD-9. LC-10). Shia's character was a good one, the comedy elements were good (minus a couple), action scenes were awesome for the most part (some places looked poorly computerized, but alas), and the plot was interesting.

Now, this did have down points (SPOILERS AHEAD!!!). Some action beats looked poorly CGIed, John Hurt was totally wasted in his role (that role didn't require an actor of his caliber), Mac was a fairly weak character and since he was new his turning bad had no shock about it (in fact, I expected it), the credits were not gripping like the other 3 movies (teens drving alongside military vehicles? We can do better), and that scene where Marian drives the car onto a tree branch to land safely into the water was VERY outlandish (even for an Indy movie where outlandish is expected, but COME ON!!!). Also, him living through a nuclear test is unrealistic, but I can give that a pass cause it was funny. Also, that wind gust blowing Indy's hat to Mutt was super corny, but I get why they did it, so it gets a pass.

Overall, I was against this movie from the start, but it did manage to exceed my expectations, and served as a fun trip to the cinema. Not as good as the other movies, but I expected that. I remember people saying that there is no way I would enjoy this movie (since I was convinced it would suck), and like I told everyone, if it is good, I will acknowledge it. The movie was good, so I give it the props it earned.

[terry78]

I think only fanboys really gripe about the goofy CGI areas, to be honest. The mainstream love stuff like that, which doesn't make it bad or good. If something is fun to you, as long as it's not negative, I don't see what the issue is.

[Spider-Fan]

I think only fanboys really gripe about the goofy CGI areas, to be honest. The mainstream love stuff like that, which doesn't make it bad or good. If something is fun to you, as long as it's not negative, I don't see what the issue is.

I have non-fanboy friends who point out when effects look poor, so not exactly true.

[ultimatefan]

The thing is, it didn't serve the plot at all. I could let it slide if there were some great reason Indy found himself in a nuclear test zone and it someone how advanced the plot, but it wasn't the case. It was thrown in for cheap laughs. And on top of that, it wasn't THAT entertaining and it really just served to destroy suspension of disbelief the audience could've had simply because it was THAT ridiculously outrageous.

It felt to me as kind of a self-satyrical thing, joking with the fact that Indy survives anything you throw at him. I imagined it was going to have something to do with the whole political climate subplot that´s heavy in the first act, but then it´s completely dropped and then resolved in the end without any explanation.

[Spider-Fan]

The nuclear thing I think was added to give us moe of a feel for the time period, since nukes are the most basic symbol of the Cold War and the arms race.

[Lord Blackbolt]

people today are just way too overly critical than people of the 80's.

[Cyrusbales]

people today are just way too overly critical than people of the 80's.

Nope, the general standard the majority have are just far lower, and the producers know it!

[The Man of Steel]

i'm going to see it again in about 30m,

[Mr. Socko]

I'm going to see it again tomorow.

I'm just wondering what the town made of dummies was about?

But Indy surviving a nuclear explosion by staying in a fridge was awesome:woot:

[Matt]

I'm going to see it again tomorow.

I'm just wondering what the town made of dummies was about?

But Indy surviving a nuclear explosion by staying in a fridge was awesome:woot:

It was common in the 50s for the government to set up fake towns in the desert with dummy occupants to see the effect a nuclear blast would have on a society.

[Dark Donnie]

people today are just way too overly critical than people of the 80's.

100% correct

[Lord Blackbolt]

I find it laughable how some of you guys can find a guys heart being ripped out of his chest and still talking and moving like nothing happened, and magic boxes that have killer ghosts and hundreds of other things that totally unbelievable....but aliens...ohhh my god...Thats totally unrealistic. Personally I love the new storyline. At least it's not a basic rehash.

It's a shame we never had a Indy movie in the 90's. I'm sure Indy had a ton of cool adventures in the 40's. We probably will never see.

And like people have said before. Indy had survived some impossible things in the other movies as well. I think it's only proper to up the ante in every sequel.

All of these movies had questionable special effects, I think that's part of it's charm. It gives the serial movie feel to it. The series has also had it share of corny cheesy scenes as well. When you go into a Indy movie your suppose to just have fun, and laugh along with all the cheese. But people today are too cynical. People just nitpick too much. Who cares if CGI is bad. I grew in the time where they used Stop motion puppets. I could care less if the CGI is bad. People today got it too good.

[Rac]

The poison dart scene was just pure awesomeness :DYeah, that one I liked. Though I still don't know who those karate "Indians" were and why they were goofing there. Boring friday night? Let's go to the ruins and play with the tourists.

[GhostPoet]

The thing is, it didn't serve the plot at all. I could let it slide if there were some great reason Indy found himself in a nuclear test zone and it someone how advanced the plot, but it wasn't the case. It was thrown in for cheap laughs. And on top of that, it wasn't THAT entertaining and it really just served to destroy suspension of disbelief the audience could've had simply because it was THAT ridiculously outrageous.


An action scene doesn't need to serve the plot per say. Especially in Indy films. Indy has always been about the fantastic and escaping from hair-raising situations.

[Figs]

Yeah, that one I liked. Though I still don't know who those karate "Indians" were and why they were goofing there. Boring friday night? Let's go to the ruins and play with the tourists.


They were protecting the tomb and the skull...it was really obvious.

[Spider-Fan]

To some of the posters above:

People are not more critical today than in the 80's. People that are heavily critical of movies can just make their voices heard more loudly today than in the 80's.

Most movies today may not be as good as they once were, but there are still many gems being made today. I can see why some people hate modern cinema, but I think some take their hate a bit overboard.

Though Indy 4 is clearly not as good as the previous movies, I agree with many on that. Though it did surprisingly entertain me. Surprised no one has made fun of me yet :o

[Figs]

I'm going to see it again tomorow.

I'm just wondering what the town made of dummies was about?

But Indy surviving a nuclear explosion by staying in a fridge was awesome:woot:


Did you give a review yet Mr. Socko?

Just curious as to what you though of the film since I know it was one of the ones you said you really wanted to see this summer.

I'm also glad the fridge scene didn't ruin the entire movie for you like a lot of other people.

[Trainwreck2100]

I liked it, i just had 3 complaints

ants waterfalls and monkeys

[GhostPoet]

To some of the posters above:

People are not more critical today than in the 80's. People that are heavily critical of movies can just make their voices heard more loudly today than in the 80's.

Most movies today may not be as good as they once were, but there are still many gems being made today. I can see why some people hate modern cinema, but I think some take their hate a bit overboard.

Though Indy 4 is clearly not as good as the previous movies, I agree with many on that. Though it did surprisingly entertain me. Surprised no one has made fun of me yet :o


Interesting. I felt it was the 2nd best in the series.

[블라스]

(Warning: Language)

Haters:

v2LpJAD5AqQ

[Spider-Fan]

Interesting. I felt it was the 2nd best in the series.

On I think the previous page, I had my full list of why I felt it wasn't as good as the others. In case you wanted to see some of my complaints/criticisms.

[Lord Valumart]

I liked it, i just had 3 complaints

ants waterfalls and monkeys

what was wrong with the ants and waterfalls?

[The_Vision]

Oh yeah ^ i thought the ants were awesome and the waterfalls were just classic Indy :D

No...Remember what the Knight said, the Grail can't pass the Seal, that's the price of immortality. To remain Immortal, they have to stay where the Knight was....

Ah right, thanks :)

[mathhater]

There are some mixed reviews around here, which is expected. But I'm glad that my complete and total disdain for the film isn't widespread. If you can enjoy this, then I'm happy for you.

But I'm just wanting to comment on the fantastical aspects of "Indiana Jones" in general, and especially how it relates to the most recent film.

There seems to be a lot of justifying of all of the spectacular/supernatural aspects of this franchise as a whole. And until this fourth film, I didn't have a problem with it. It's with this outing in particular that just takes it too far.

I mean, previously in the franchise we've dealt with the power of God released from the Ark of the Covenant and the healing power/eternal Knight guarding of the Holy Grail, and what have you. And while those were fantastic things to see, they were bearable because, whether you believe in them (from a religious standpoint) or not, those are items that have a genuine historical signifcance in terms of human history over the past couple thousand years...and those magical/mystical events that unfolded around them just didn't seem so out of place given the nature of the items and the stories/events that have surrounded them over history.

But this movie? Actually incorporating aliens and spaceships into this franchise? It's just too far out of place for me. I can see an archeologist pursuing the Ark of the Covenant, the religious stones of a dangerous cult, and the Holy Grail. But discovering dead aliens, their telepathic skulls, and their flying saucer just goes too far. These are things that I wouldn't want or expect to see in an "Indiana Jones" story and it ruined the whole experience for me.

[DarknessOfDeath]

The waterfall sequence was my fave part :D The expression on Marion's face was priceless. Hilarious. Loved her in this one. So typical of Marion.

[Trainwreck2100]

what was wrong with the ants and waterfalls?

I think the ants were a weird way to end the chase scene. I get they didn't want the general to fall off the cliff cause it would have been the same as the nazi officer in TLC, they just seemed forced. The snakes were good for atmosphere in ROTLA and they didn't kill anybody As for the waterfalls, it was the same bit 3 times only "OMG they kept getting bigger"but I would have been fine with one or two

[War Party]

There are some mixed reviews around here, which is expected. But I'm glad that my complete and total disdain for the film isn't widespread. If you can enjoy this, then I'm happy for you.

But I'm just wanting to comment on the fantastical aspects of "Indiana Jones" in general, and especially how it relates to the most recent film.

There seems to be a lot of justifying of all of the spectacular/supernatural aspects of this franchise as a whole. And until this fourth film, I didn't have a problem with it. It's with this outing in particular that just takes it too far.

I mean, previously in the franchise we've dealt with the power of God released from the Ark of the Covenant and the healing power/eternal Knight guarding of the Holy Grail, and what have you. And while those were fantastic things to see, they were bearable because, whether you believe in them (from a religious standpoint) or not, those are items that have a genuine historical signifcance in terms of human history over the past couple thousand years...and those magical/mystical events that unfolded around them just didn't seem so out of place given the nature of the items and the stories/events that have surrounded them over history.

But this movie? Actually incorporating aliens and spaceships into this franchise? It's just too far out of place for me. I can see an archeologist pursuing the Ark of the Covenant, the religious stones of a dangerous cult, and the Holy Grail. But discovering dead aliens, their telepathic skulls, and their flying saucer just goes too far. These are things that I wouldn't want or expect to see in an "Indiana Jones" story and it ruined the whole experience for me.

But the crystal skulls are real, man.

[The_Vision]

I want to watch it again NOW :D

Also the bar fight was pretty funny.

[Wilhelm-Scream]

People are not more critical today than in the 80's. People that are heavily critical of movies can just make their voices heard more loudly today than in the 80's.Totally disagree.

I was there, watching the movies, in the 80's.

One of the most shocking, talked about scenes was in Poltergeist, when the guy starts ripping his face off.
The audiences were gasping and we were all :eek:
If you watch it now, it is very weak.

The Speeder Bikes in Return of the Jedi, the melting heads at the end of Raiders...everyone raved about how amazing these effects were.
They had prime time specials, "The Making of Raiders of the Lost Ark", on network TV (no DVD extras in those days), where they told you how they did it, because it was so "amazing".

Now, very often internet geeks see shots of REAL things, and complain of what fake CG it is. :o

People even bought the ridiculous hand puppets, the asteroid worm in Empire Strikes Back, and the Rancor in Jedi.
They don't look real for a second, but people loved it.

The Demon Dogs in Ghostbusters...everyone loved those and thought they were so wicked.
They look like something you'd see at a March of Dimes Haunted House. :o

Then, go back to the rickety, totally fake Ray Harryhausen animations. These scenes changed people's lives and filled their minds with magic.
They look totally phoney.

People are too savvy and too picky today and they're afraid to look "un-cool" by agreeing to be vulnerable enough to buy into the fantasy of a movie, for FUN'S sake.


Part of it is the way the general public knows so much about the behind-the-scenes workings of movie-making today.
And, I will admit that part of it is that there have been a few one-in-a-million great special effects, to which most effects can't compare...like the T.Rex in Jurassic Park.

But really...people were amazed much more easily in the 20's, 30's, 40's, 50's, 60's, 70's and 80's.

Then, everyone started to get their own computer...the internet happened, and it became a double-edged sword, because, when something you know can't be real, looked almost 99% real, you knew it wasn't, so your eye started to desperately try to detect any weakness at all, magnifying that 1% of fakeness.

If you did that in the 80's, with all the immobile rubber puppets, jerky doll animation and horrendous Blue Screen work, we wouldn't've enjoyed anything.

[Lord Valumart]

I think the ants were a weird way to end the chase scene. I get they didn't want the general to fall off the cliff cause it would have been the same as the nazi officer in TLC, they just seemed forced. The snakes were good for atmosphere in ROTLA and they didn't kill anybody As for the waterfalls, it was the same bit 3 times only "OMG they kept getting bigger"but I would have been fine with one or two

the ants were perfectly fine, they maybe went a bit far but they were still cool. and te waterfalls were just classic indy...it worked well imo

[mathhater]

But the crystal skulls are real, man.

I know that, and I know that there's a genuine mystery surrounding them, but does that explaination have to be aliens? I just wanted something more grounded in history and not science fiction...because even though sci-fi is cool, it just feels more out of place in an Indy film than the stuff that has come before. (IMO)

[Figs]

But the crystal skulls are real, man.


Exactly.

Not to mention in regards to the possibility that aliens started life on Earth or at least helped us start civilization, that's in the same realm as religion. In the fact that we haven't been able to prove that either are true or are facts, but at the same time there is a lot of clues left in ancient history...especially with Aliens.

Neither one is more farfetched than the other. It's just with this film and aliens, it involved a damn big spaceship. The other 'items' were smaller, a grail, a cup and some stones. They all had implausible or impossible(if your not religious) actions/effects to them.


As for the waterfalls scene. It didn't bother me at all since I've seen dozens and dozens of movies with scenes having people survive waterfall crashes. It's like some people think IJ4 was the first film to have a farfetched
waterfall scene.

I also agree with everything Wilhelm-Scream said in his post at the top.

[Wilhelm-Scream]

I just wanted something more grounded in history and not science fictionAliens are grounded in history, just as much as the angels of the Lord in Raiders of the Lost Ark.

[Spider-Fan]

Totally disagree.

I was there, watching the movies, in the 80's.

One of the most shocking, talked about scenes was in Poltergeist, when the guy starts ripping his face off.
The audiences were gasping and we were all :eek:
If you watch it now, it is very weak.

The Speeder Bikes in Return of the Jedi, the melting heads at the end of Raiders...everyone raved about how amazing these effects were.
They had prime time specials, "The Making of Raiders of the Lost Ark", on network TV (no DVD extras in those days), where they told you how they did it, because it was so "amazing".

Now, very often internet geeks see shots of REAL things, and complain of what fake CG it is. :o

People even bought the ridiculous hand puppets, the asteroid worm in Empire Strikes Back, and the Rancor in Jedi.
They don't look real for a second, but people loved it.

The Demon Dogs in Ghostbusters...everyone loved those and thought they were so wicked.
They look like something you'd see at a March of Dimes Haunted House. :o

Then, go back to the rickety, totally fake Ray Harryhausen animations. These scenes changed people's lives and filled their minds with magic.
They look totally phoney.

People are too savvy and too picky today and they're afraid to look "un-cool" by agreeing to be vulnerable enough to buy into the fantasy of a movie, for FUN'S sake.


Part of it is the way the general public knows so much about the behind-the-scenes workings of movie-making today.
And, I will admit that part of it is that there have been a few one-in-a-million great special effects, to which most effects can't compare...like the T.Rex in Jurassic Park.

But really...people were amazed much more easily in the 20's, 30's, 40's, 50's, 60's, 70's and 80's.

Then, everyone started to get their own computer...the internet happened, and it became a double-edged sword, because, when something you know can't be real, looked almost 99% real, you knew it wasn't, so your eye started to desperately try to detect any weakness at all, magnifying that 1% of fakeness.

If you did that in the 80's, with all the immobile rubber puppets, jerky doll animation and horrendous Blue Screen work, we wouldn't've enjoyed anything.

Movie audiences are spoiled based on new technology, I grant you. But, I guarantee that many felt those scenes in older movies looked fake. You just don't know they felt that way cause we didn't have the internet. This site has few audience members in a theater, so even today while that same group may love scenes in a movie, the perception is people hate it cause we see people expressing that on the net. Back in the 80's, there was no internet to discuss how fake these scenes you mentioned look, and by the time the internet came, no one cared to complain, cause they weren't new.

[Matt]

To some of the posters above:

People are not more critical today than in the 80's. People that are heavily critical of movies can just make their voices heard more loudly today than in the 80's.

Most movies today may not be as good as they once were, but there are still many gems being made today. I can see why some people hate modern cinema, but I think some take their hate a bit overboard.

Though Indy 4 is clearly not as good as the previous movies, I agree with many on that. Though it did surprisingly entertain me. Surprised no one has made fun of me yet :o

I don't think as many people are just hating on it for the sake of hating on it as are loving it because "ZOMG! ITS TEH INDY!"

Nearly 15 % of voters gave this a 10 out of 10. I do not see how by any standard this can be considered the perfect movie. I am not hating on it to hate on it nor will I praise it to praise it. I call it like I see it. This is an average action movie which is made a little better by the fact that Harrison Ford is still absolutely bad ass. Its not the second coming, but its also not a raping of one's childhood (ala the Star Wars prequels). It is just average. I do however find it ironic that plenty of the people screaming about how this is best movie ever are also eager to trash the hell out of National Treasure which had a better villain, a more indepth plot with more twists and a bit of mystery (when you really think on it, the plot of KOTCS was sparse), more humor, and decent action sequences.

If you are to say National Treasure sucks, then you must also say Indy IV sucks, and the entire original Indy trilogy for that matter as they are essentially have the same shortcomings.

[Spider-Fan]

This movie wasn't perfect by any means, nor did I say it was. It had flaws. However, I do think this was overall a good movie (though I do hate the NT movies).

[Matt]

This movie wasn't perfect by any means, nor did I say it was. It had flaws. However, I do think this was overall a good movie (though I do hate the NT movies).

But at the end of the day, what is the difference between the two? Both are corny as hell action movies that rely on bad effects, cheesey humor, and over the top action. I think a lot of the 10 out of 10 votes (and 9 and 8 for that matter) are a case of fan boy blinders (not directed toward you SF, just in general).

[Lord Valumart]

I do however find it ironic that plenty of the people screaming about how this is best movie ever are also eager to trash the hell out of National Treasure which had a better villain, a more indepth plot with more twists and a bit of mystery (when you really think on it, the plot of KOTCS was sparse), more humor, and decent action sequences.

If you are to say National Treasure sucks, then you must also say Indy IV sucks, and the entire original Indy trilogy for that matter as they are essentially have the same shortcomings.

i really liked both the national treasure movies, but i still felt that indy blew them out of the water. it was better on everything imo.

[The Agent]

I know that, and I know that there's a genuine mystery surrounding them, but does that explaination have to aliens? I just wanted something more grounded in history and not science fiction...because even though sci-fi is cool, it just feels more out of place in an Indy film than the stuff that has come before. (IMO)

Have you seen the 1st 3 indy movies??
Raiders had some supernatural stuff that ended up killing all the nazis, temple of doom had the use of fire to break free from some sort of supernatural mind control and don't get me started on the last crusade where some old knight comes to life after 100 of years to give advice about a cup.

I personally thought indy 4 was a good movie and a great addition to the series. Could it have been better? Sure, had it been made a lot sooner but the end result is still a positive one and I'm glad everything was on point. For me, the moment I saw the indy from the 3 previous films was when he and mut first found the crystal skull, since that point, everything to me felt like classic indy.

My list in order of preference

Last crusade
Raiders
kingdom of the crystal skull
temple of doom.

[The_Vision]

Do not even compare Indy to National Treasure lol :p No seriously this was a fun movie.

[Matt]

i really liked both the national treasure movies, but i still felt that indy blew them out of the water. it was better on everything imo.

Perhaps, it is all a matter of taste. They are about equal in my book. I just don't see how someone can give one a 10 out of 10 and the other a 1 out of 10 when they are essentially the same both in their strengths and flaws (aside from the obvious difference in leading man, but I think National Treasure's edge in supporting cast makes up for that). I'd say they are both 6s.

Anyhow, just to show I didn't completely hate this movie, the snake scene cracked me the hell up. Ford played that PERFECTLY.

[Spider-Fan]

But at the end of the day, what is the difference between the two? Both are corny as hell action movies that rely on bad effects, cheesey humor, and over the top action. I think a lot of the 10 out of 10 votes (and 9 and 8 for that matter) are a case of fan boy blinders (not directed toward you SF, just in general).

I gave it a 7.5, but I always round up in that case. Thing about the NT series is the characters are not interesting. Gates is not nearly as realistic an action hero than Indy is. Indy has the personality of an action hero about him. Gates is just goofy, and his supporting characters suck.I grant you the movie is corny at many points, but I like certain types of cornball humor.

[black_dust]

http://www.hfm2.com/photopost1/data/936/medium/realbikers14.jpg

I assume they must have been goofing about off camera on this shot then?

[VENOMisHERE]

CAN'T wait to see this agin today it kick A** http://i216.photobucket.com/albums/cc201/SUPERVENOM008/ug09fddc.gif

[Mr. Socko]

Did you give a review yet Mr. Socko?

Just curious as to what you though of the film since I know it was one of the ones you said you really wanted to see this summer.

I'm also glad the fridge scene didn't ruin the entire movie for you like a lot of other people.

Oh yeah I've reviewed it somewhere in this heap of a thread. For the most part I definitely enjoyed it:woot:


The only problem I had was that they showed the aliens. As Chase said earlier in this thread, seeing the commies being destroyed by the powers of the Crystal Skull should have sufficed, but actually showing the aliens took it a bit too far. It would have been like showing God in Raiders or Kali in Temple of Doom.

Oh yeah, that and Shia swinging like Tarzan.:o

Overall, very fun and very enjoyable movie. The action was great and Harry Ford proves he is still the greatest action hero of all time. He looked amazing, not once did I think he was too old while I was watching the movie.

[The Agent]

we don't call it a snake, we're supposed to refer to it as a rope ; )

[War Party]

But at the end of the day, what is the difference between the two? Both are corny as hell action movies that rely on bad effects, cheesey humor, and over the top action. I think a lot of the 10 out of 10 votes (and 9 and 8 for that matter) are a case of fan boy blinders (not directed toward you SF, just in general).

In my opinion, I saw an 8 film. The production values are fantastic and i love the cinematography. Reminds me of a Hitchcock film, more in line of Vertigo. I loved the acting and I found the acting appropriate for the film. Of course there's flaws, like the script, some spotty CGI, and yes I agree, having an alien and flying saucer appear seemed unneeded. I thought the direction was very good and the choreography of the action sequences were excellent. Made for all a enjoyable movie experience. It was a fun adventure. And I can't compare it with the National Treasure films, because I never seen them.

[Wilhelm-Scream]

I don't think as many people are just hating on it for the sake of hating on it as are loving it because "ZOMG! ITS TEH INDY!"

Nearly 15 % of voters gave this a 10 out of 10. I do not see how by any standard this can be considered the perfect movie.TOtally.

I liked it, and I also think a lot of the problems people had with it are ridiculous and unwarranted.

But no way in Hell is it a "10".
I don't even think that's a matter of opinion, lol.
One of the greatest films ever made?

HaHaHaHaHaHaHa...no way in Hell.

[Matt]

http://www.hfm2.com/photopost1/data/936/medium/realbikers14.jpg

I assume they must have been goofing about off camera on this shot then?


Harrison Ford strikes me as the type who can just jump on a motorcycle and start riding, regardless of if he has had any training to ride a motorcycle. In doing so he impregnates 8 women without even touching them. He is just THAT bad ass.

[The Agent]

Oh yeah I've reviewed it somewhere in this heap of a thread. For the most part I definitely enjoyed it:woot:


The only problem I had was that they showed the aliens. As Chase said earlier in this thread, seeing the commies being destroyed by the powers of the Crystal Skull should have sufficed, but actually showing the aliens took it a bit too far. It would have been like showing God in Raiders or Kali in Temple of Doom.

Oh yeah, that and Shia swinging like Tarzan.:o

Overall, very fun and very enjoyable movie. The action was great and Harry Ford proves he is still the greatest action hero of all time. He looked amazing, not once did I think he was too old while I was watching the movie.

Agreed. At first his age was a bit too obvious but when he was in full classic indy character (when he and mut find the crystal skull) that was when I was seeing the Indy from the 80s.

[Bim]

I think a lot of the 10 out of 10 votes (and 9 and 8 for that matter) are a case of fan boy blinders (not directed toward you SF, just in general).
I gave it a 9, and i stand by my vote... i re-watched it last night and i enjoyed it even more the second time around.

I'm not a blind fan-boy (or girl, since i'm female :hehe: ), so i think u should be a bit more aware that generalizing like that tends to rub people the wrong way, just because someone enjoyed this movie more than u.

[VENOMisHERE]

I can't wait to go see it AGIN woooo hoooo ....

[Mr. Socko]

But at the end of the day, what is the difference between the two? Both are corny as hell action movies that rely on bad effects, cheesey humor, and over the top action. I think a lot of the 10 out of 10 votes (and 9 and 8 for that matter) are a case of fan boy blinders (not directed toward you SF, just in general).

:huh:

I've only seen the first National Treasure movie(I'll get the second on DVD this weekend). I thought it was really enjoyable but one of my two biggest problems was that it didn't have any action at all...least not that I recall. It was just Nic Cage searching for historical artifacts, unlike Indy, I wouldn't consider him an action hero. He didn't even have a gun nor do I remember him getting in any fights, just running away at most:oldrazz:

The NT movie also lacked globe trotting, staying entirely in America is boring. But I did enjoy it overall.

[Matt]

I gave it a 9, and i stand by my vote... i re-watched it last night and i enjoyed it even more the second time around.

I'm not a blind fan-boy (or girl, since i'm female :hehe: ), so i think u should be a bit more aware that generalizing like that tends to rub people the wrong way, just because someone enjoyed this movie more than u.

Which is exactly why I said "a lot" not "all."

[HUMAN]

Okay, George Lucas REALLY needs to get this damn Tarzan fixture out of his system. First Chewy, then his Wookie friends, now it has infested the Indiana Jone franchise. I could deal with maybe ONE vine, but not SEVERAL of them. Too over-the-top, even for an Indiana Jones picture which is suppose to be over the top.

I LOVED the opening sequence. Even the cameo by the Ark. Best line of dialog exchange of the year:

"Any last words, Dr. Jones?"

"I like Ike!"

The middle slowed the movie down a little bit, but it had a few quirks to help spice it up and not make me fall asleep. The big problem I had with the plot was the fact that if Indiana or Mutt had NEVER been involved, the outcome would have still been the same.

But I guess the 'first' ending wasn't what the movie was about, it was the 'second' ending.

All in all, I had a great time watching the flick, even if it did have a few George Lucas cringe portions. INDY'S BACK!

7.5/10

Here's my list from best to worst in the series:

Raiders
Crusade
Crystal Skull
Temple of Doom

[Two-Face]

I give it 8. I like it I see it again.

[DarknessOfDeath]

we don't call it a snake, we're supposed to refer to it as a rope ; )


I enjoyed that part hehe.

Hilarious.

What really made me like this one was because it made so many connections to the other three if you paid really close attention.

The moment Marion showed up, I was grinning. I missed her in Temple and Crusade but if you were to watch Temple first (its a prequel) and then Raiders, then Crusade and then Skull... to me, it would still make you wonder why Marion wasn't in LC.

What the first 3 lacked was connecting all three together - not that it bothered me but it made me curious. Thats why I liked Skulls - cause of the connections that were made and I knew right away what they were all about since I remember what happens in the other three. It was awsome.

[Spider-Fan]

I enjoyed that part hehe.

Hilarious.

What really made me like this one was because it made so many connections to the other three if you paid really close attention.

The moment Marion showed up, I was grinning. I missed her in Temple and Crusade but if you were to watch Temple first (its a prequel) and then Raiders, then Crusade and then Skull... to me, it would still make you wonder why Marion wasn't in LC.

What the first 3 lacked was connecting all three together - not that it bothered me but it made me curious. Thats why I liked Skulls - cause of the connections that were made and I knew right away what they were all about since I remember what happens in the other three. It was awsome.

The Ark of the Covenant was mentioned in Last Crusade. The German doctor asked him what one of the drawings on the wall of the tomb of knight was, and he said the ark of the covenant.

[Omega Wizard]

Perhaps, it is all a matter of taste. They are about equal in my book. I just don't see how someone can give one a 10 out of 10 and the other a 1 out of 10 when they are essentially the same both in their strengths and flaws (aside from the obvious difference in leading man, but I think National Treasure's edge in supporting cast makes up for that). I'd say they are both 6s.

Anyhow, just to show I didn't completely hate this movie, the snake scene cracked me the hell up. Ford played that PERFECTLY.
The snake scene was hilarious.