^^ No such thing as "objectively bad". Good/bad is purely a subjective evaluation, it can't be used as an objective assessment.
And... you bumped a thread that had gone quiet for nearly a month for what reason? Other than to imply you're an authority on what's good or bad, that is.
edited 27th Dec '11 5:30:25 AM by Nohbody
All your safe space are belong to TrumpI thought it was okay, although that's probably because the only other Indy film I'd seen was Raiders.
Just shook my head and sighed at the UFO.
Looking for some stories?Ordinarily I defend the underdog (Wild Wild West and Constantine, among others), but this one left me cold.
It was just obvious that Lucas was chucking in decades-old ideas that didn't make the cut in previous films. And in someone else' script no less. The result was a lot of weird set pieces but no sense of movement.
It was obvious from the start that Cate was playing with forces beyond her comprehension - though her ultimate fate was the same as Donovan's, and your subconscious mind checks the boxes leading up to that.
Worst of all, every character was tertiary and boring. I shouldn't even need to go into Winstone. Hurt is just kind of there. Karen Allen is lovely but obvious nerd bait. Mutt didn't come into his own, mostly because they shoehorned him in as Indy 2.0. Apart from Shia's acting, he's empty.
It really was a death of a thousand cuts.
I'm a skeptical squirrelI liked the movie. I grant that it obviously wasn't as good as the older movies (though DS was right, I think, when he said that it's at least as good as Temple of Doom).
It was hugely great, but it wasn't terribly awful, either. It was a decent revival of an older series to try and finish things up, and so long as they don't make any more (ha, yeah right), it'll be a fine finish at that.
I am now known as Flyboy.I like it. Not as good as Raiders or Last Crusade, but better than Temple of Doom, and I do like Temple of Doom.
Don't know what the big deal is supposed to be about Shia La Beouf. He's never annoyed me.
Always, somewhere, someone is fighting for you. As long as you remember them, you are not alone.Frankly I enjoyed this film as much as the others. I wasn't as bothered by Shia La Beouf as others were, Mario Ravenwood's return was a nice touch, Cate Blanchett made a fine villian.
Really the only part that irked was the aliens, honestly Lucas.
So yeah I liked this film as much as the others despite its flaws.
But I do love how Spielberg and the others look back on it and wonder what they should've done.
Indeed, I thought it was rather fitting.
I can't really point to any specific thing I didn't like about the film, just that it wasn't as compelling as Raiders or Last Crusade, but still better than Temple of Doom (which I did like as well, so...).
"Shit, our candidate is a psychopath. Better replace him with Newt Gingrich."I heard they're making a fifth one. I hope it doesn't suck.
People are probably going to start throwing around theories of it being an Indiana Jones And The Fate Of Atlantis adaptation again.
Always, somewhere, someone is fighting for you. As long as you remember them, you are not alone.I'd never watched an Indy film until the movie was released in theatres. then I watched the first 3 in a marathon session before seeing the 4th one. I think i can say I'm one of the very few who has no nostalgia for any of the films, yet all of them fresh in my memory, when I saw the last one.
and Crystal Skull was definitely not the worst Indiana Jones film. Temple of Doom was. Without question. The ranking goes:
- Last Crusade (enjoyment requires seeing Raiders first)
- Raiders of the Lost Ark
- Crystal Skull
- Temple of Doom
Crystal skull was mostly a fanservice film and a "passing the torch" film. it gives the old hero all the happy endings he could want and still leave the possibility open for more sequels. Plot-wise, nothing silly. Although the first 3 all had mysterious religious magic to it, this one's actually semi-explained... as aliens. what's the big deal? Why is face-melting box good but brain-frying aliens bad? Also, lead-lined refrigerator? I considered it a hilarious take on the "duck-and-cover" advertisements of the 70's.
edited 28th Dec '11 12:12:14 PM by willyolio
That whole bomb-test sequence was actually lifted from an early idea for the time-travel sequence in Back To The Future, where the 1.21 gigawatts of power was supplied by a nuclear detonation (the time machine was originally a fridge in initial drafts).
edited 28th Dec '11 1:39:06 PM by Sporkaganza
Always, somewhere, someone is fighting for you. As long as you remember them, you are not alone.The aliens were a brilliant idea for the tone of the movie; they just clashed with the tone of the series. The movie also needed a few booster shots; it's very boring at some parts, and a few scenes don't really seem to fit in.
However, I don't see how anybody could consider this movie worse than Temple of Doom. Willy and Short Round make me want to hammer nails into my ears. The cult of Kali was even more ludicrously over-the-top than the aliens, and that's saying a lot when Crystal Skull had CGI to hurt it. The set design is horrible and at times looks like a cheap stage production version of Indiana Jones or, worse, a theme park ride version.
God, I hate that movie.
edited 28th Dec '11 3:15:21 PM by Scardoll
Fight. Struggle. Endure. Suffer. LIVE.I liked this one, but I didn't love it. The alien angle left me completely cold. My jaw hung open in disbelief at the opening, though; at no time in American history has the US army been that stupid. If the Soviets could sneak that many of their folks (heavily armed, be-uniformed folks, at that) onto US soil at one time, how is it we aren't all speaking Russian?
I enjoyed it. Most of it. God knows nothing was bad as Willie's constant unending screaming while bringing nothing to the plot. Marion's return was actually a blessing. I didn't mind the aliens, I thought they fit well with the film moving forward to 1957. I like that they do not attempt set up Mutt as Indiana's replacement, and heck, Shia Le Boeuf wasn't even that bad in the role (though I'd have wished to see a grown up Short Round played by Jet Li or some other martial arts actor, but one can only dream...)
It's by no means perfect. I found the treasure hunt aspect not as well explained as the two originals with treasure hunts (another reason I prefer it over Temple of Doom, since To D broke formula), kind of hard to follow on first viewing. Some scenes were kind of meh, like the Mutt-with-the-monkeys scene. I loved the fridge scene though, and the swordfight during the car chase in the jungle was fun.
Is it as good as Raiders or Last Crusade? No. But I do think it holds up to its forebear rather well.
Coz the soviets are just as dumb, sending KGB guys who decide to intercept Indy in a bar full of 40 or witness, not even bothering to hide the thick Russian accents, before getting into a very public chase. Rather than, ya know, drag him off when he's alone somewhere.
edited 28th Dec '11 11:15:12 PM by Ghilz
I don't think Crystal Skull is as good as Raiders or Last Crusade, however it's still better to me than Temple of Doom. Temple's not bad, it's just not nearly as entertaining as the others. I actually do like the progression of the series reflecting the times, with Commies and Scifi being the dominant force in serials in the 50's.
The refrigerator scene was groan inducing on first viewing, but now I just think it's awesome. The ending with aliens? Eh, but at least I wasn't bored.
"Tyyr's a necessary evil. " Spirit

The UFO that abruptly disappeared into another dimension.
It's not over. Not yet.