My friends, I have seen “Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull” and as much as I’d love to say “hold on to your potatoes,” I’m feeling a little blue today (check out what all the other critics are saying here). Keep in mind, I’m reserving my final judgment on this one until I see it a few more times but my first thoughts upon leaving the screening were nothing short of abject disappointment.
I had a good time. Watching Harrison roll around and jump from moving vehicle to moving vehicle was glorious at times. Marian Ravenwood’s smile can still light up a room. Hell, I even thought Shia LaBeouf was the best Indy sidekick this side of Short Round.
BUT…and I’m afraid this is a truly all capital letter befitting BUT…this film doesn’t nearly compare with any of the previous three. It’s just not in the same universe. It’s a riff on Indy, as if a half-finished plot outline had been found by admirers of the original trilogy and done up in the best Spielberg-ian style they could muster. Musical cues by John Williams only call attention to the greatness of the previous works. Set pieces never soar. It’s a movie that feels rushed and padded all at the same time. Believe me, every word I write here kills me. Keep in mind, you’re reading the thoughts of a guy who still defends “The Phantom Menace.”
So what works? Harrison as I said before is by and large great. The physicality he brings to Indy remains spot-on and uniquely him. Shia and Cate Blanchett acquit themselves well (even if not for a moment did this Russkie villain have a fraction of the menace of Belloq or Mola Ram). Some of the action is inspired. There are moments, all too few and far between, that are blissful and will indeed take you back for a time to sheer joy that the originals brought you. But only hours after seeing it I can’t think of a single memorable moment from this film that I had been foaming at the mouth to see for literally years.
I’m being harsh. I know. And I may very well change my mind the next time I see it. But friends, lower your expectations as much as possible. I warn you.
A few other folks here at MTV News got a chance to see the film this week. I’ve asked them to weigh in. Some of their assorted thoughts are below.
Rachel Josue (Producer):
“All in all, I did enjoy the film. Much bigger and less subtle than the others, but still good.”
Vanessa White Wolf (Segment Producer):
“So I liked it…for the most part. At first I was eh, then I was totally into it, and then it got kind of silly. I thought Shia was great. I felt that most of the weak parts came when it tried to be too family-friendly.”
Jonathan Goldner (Director of Digital Operations):
I thought it was fun, but nowhere nearly as sharp or tight as the “original” Indy trilogy. A part of my brain kept talking through the movie saying “Mutt Williams is the new Jar-Jar Binks” over and over again. Lots of fun, definitely worth seeing. But the theory holds: The best Indy movies have Nazis in them.”
Shawn Adler (Reporter):
“I liked it. But I didn’t like it. The problem is that nothing is as ever as good as it was when you were 10. This is especially true of things that aren’t as good as the things you saw when you were ten. I need to see it roughly 25 more times.”
It has an 80% approval rating on Rotten Tomatoes.
May 22nd. Go See It. I loved it.
but again nonetheless im sure i will enjoy it =)
It's an enjoyable film; too many critics are expecting the next 'Raiders' which won't happen. It's a fun, likeable film.
Josh, the fact that you seem to like "The Phantom Menace" allows me to take your review with a grain of salt.
Kevin, you nailed it. MTV has sucked for years.
I felt this way after seeing the last Star Wars installment. I saw it a few more times to see if it was just my headache keeping me from enjoying it, or was it truly a "no magic" film. First impressions are accurate usually. If your impression was that this IJ movie has no magic- then most likely, it has no magic. :( sad as sad as it is to admit. I kinda figured this would happen for some reason. crap.
It's unfair to judge the new movie against childhood recollections- you are older now and have more critical abilities. So cheer up and enjoy the movie.
since when did everyone start sentences with the word 'So..' ...it is so lame. are you eight yrs old?? you're not hip, trendy, cool ( i don't care how many names you have). we know you have the scrubs box set..just give it up already...
Rick: Revealing little about the film is a courtesy. Everyone should get to see it fresh. If you'd like a beat by beat run down of the plot - what works and what doesn't - you can find that on other sites. Or you could email me. I'd be happy to tell you specifics about some of the silliness.
Chad: The movie will be a commercial success regardless of what critics say - you're right. And it should be. I hope it makes so much money that they make 10 more. I just hope they're better than this one.
VegasRage: I love, LOVE Jurassic Park. Actually, I think it's the best thing David Koepp (Crystal Skull screenwriter) has ever written.
As for my feelings on Indy, obviously I only posted a brief comment above. Did I think it was terrible? No - but it wasn't transcendent either. Except for the first act, it lacked that magic for me. And I'm going to see it opening night with a real crowd. So take everything I've said for what it is - a mixed, ambivalent, slightly disappointed, but still energized feeling.
Cheers
Let the real critics---THE FANS--make up their own minds and get a name change while you are at it!
It's scoring at 81% on rottentomatoes.com
I think MTV has sucked ever since they stopped showing music videos the way they use to, so why listen to what they think about my hero Jones.
What a d-bag.
I also watched AvP2 and enjoyed it more than Alien 3 and Alien Resurrection combined since Aliens is one of my all time favorite movies. The limited Marine skirmish along with the primitive pre-colonization APC scenes were worth the admission price alone no matter how the critics and fanboys thrashed it.
And although off topic, I need to throw my hat into the ring and agree MTV does indeed suck... I remember when I was a teenager and used to lift weights to a mix videotape of all my favorite videos (First of the Month, some Better than Ezra song, Come out and Play) because there was genuinely good and varied music videos and there was no such thing as MP3s (or the Internet) and no way to make a compilation except with video tapes or cassettes.
It's not MTV's fault it blows, btw. I can watch all the videos I want whenever I want on a little thing called the Internets. So can and does a humongous portion of the world and it makes sense that advertisers aren't going to pay for time on a channel with 24/7 videos like MTV and VH1 used to be. At the moment, networks are hard pressed to get the premium ad revenue from new airings of even the most popular shows like Lost and such since the writer strike.
MTV and VH1 need to keep up original programming to generate money. MTV caters to little girls and VH1 to nostalgic young and old adults. I find many programs entertaining on VH1 but not on MTV, so for me, MTV sucks.
For proof, if you look at the top 40/100 video countdowns of the early 90's on VH1 and MTV, these things ran all weekend sometimes and were fun to watch and if you got to a shite video you didn't care about, you went to cook a pizza pocket or whatever. Now, I couldn't sit through a weekend of nothing but music videos if you paid me too. I'd rather find the list on the web and go watch the ones I cared about online, which I wouldn't, because any music video I care about I can watch on a whim whenever I want.
One thing I can't find online is clips from an old HBO sketch comedy show I can't even remember the name of which featured a segment called Rastapiece Theater, a parody of Masterpiece Theater, which had a Rastafarian smoking a blunt while commenting on shows like The Andy Griffith Show and Gilligan's Island. "Litte di' dem know. Opi grow up ta be big time hollywood movie directa, and e' say, *@$~ you to all tha' Mayberry shit." Ah, funny times.