So it's been 12 years since I saw it last, so I thought 'Hey, maybe I should give Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull another shot, maybe I've been too hard on it'.
I wasn't hard enough on it. Just an endless parade of nostalgia cues, mediocre direction, missed opportunities, poor editing, actors who're completely checked out (save for Shia and sometimes Cate, who are an island of effort in a sea of 'fuck it'), and a script that feels like a Frankenstein's Monster of disparate bits. Oh yeah and the 'this shit was gross in the 80s why is it here in 2008' stereotypes.
What a bad movie. What a bad bad movie.
The Mac character was one of the most confusing bits of the movie for me. Like the implication is we should know or care who this character is, but its literally the first movie he's ever been in and it just felt like "I don't know nor care about this character and his constant betrayal not betrayal."
To be fair, it was supposed to be like Short Round, or Sallah, in which they have a history that we haven't seen. It didn't work because the rest of the script was garbage, but I understand what they were going for.
Crystal Skull could have been good, even keeping all the same actors and the same concepts. The Boof isn't totally incompenent. At least, not any more than a young Harrison Ford. They just chose to play the straight parts dumb and the silly parts so fucking goofy as to be irredeamable. They should have just cloned The Last Crusade with the Boof and Ford in Ford and Connery's roles, respectively.
PSN,Steam,Live | CptHamiltonian
+2
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
Crystal Skull could have been good, even keeping all the same actors and the same concepts. The Boof isn't totally incompenent. At least, not any more than a young Harrison Ford. They just chose to play the straight parts dumb and the silly parts so fucking goofy as to be irredeamable. They should have just cloned The Last Crusade with the Boof and Ford in Ford and Connery's roles, respectively.
That is absolutely what they were attempting. Personally, I don't think Labeuf is nearly as charming as Ford, but that may be a personal thing.
0
Options
knitdanIn ur baseKillin ur guysRegistered Userregular
So it's been 12 years since I saw it last, so I thought 'Hey, maybe I should give Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull another shot, maybe I've been too hard on it'.
I wasn't hard enough on it. Just an endless parade of nostalgia cues, mediocre direction, missed opportunities, poor editing, actors who're completely checked out (save for Shia and sometimes Cate, who are an island of effort in a sea of 'fuck it'), and a script that feels like a Frankenstein's Monster of disparate bits. Oh yeah and the 'this shit was gross in the 80s why is it here in 2008' stereotypes.
What a bad movie. What a bad bad movie.
The Mac character was one of the most confusing bits of the movie for me. Like the implication is we should know or care who this character is, but its literally the first movie he's ever been in and it just felt like "I don't know nor care about this character and his constant betrayal not betrayal."
To be fair, it was supposed to be like Short Round, or Sallah, in which they have a history that we haven't seen. It didn't work because the rest of the script was garbage, but I understand what they were going for.
Am I misremembering or did Indy have no idea who the dude was until Marian told him?
So how could they have a shared history?
“I was quick when I came in here, I’m twice as quick now”
-Indiana Solo, runner of blades
Yeah, he didn't even know he had a kid in the first place, much less that Mutt was his kid.
The whole thing felt like a National Treasure knockoff, instead of an Indiana Jones movie.
+2
Options
knitdanIn ur baseKillin ur guysRegistered Userregular
The real problems with Crystal Skull are:
1. Cold War Russians don’t make good villains in the same way Nazis do
2. Over-reliance on CGI even in cases where practical effects would have been possible and likely cheaper
3. The Crystal Skulls are a stupid MacGuffin without the stakes of the Ark or the Grail
“I was quick when I came in here, I’m twice as quick now”
-Indiana Solo, runner of blades
1. Cold War Russians don’t make good villains in the same way Nazis do
2. Over-reliance on CGI even in cases where practical effects would have been possible and likely cheaper
3. The Crystal Skulls are a stupid MacGuffin without the stakes of the Ark or the Grail
It's not fair to lay blame on cold war Russians.
They're totally effective villains, when not surrounded by bad writing and abysmal direction in a production that only trying to wring the last few bucks out of people's nostalgia.
The Mac character was basically a lift from Benny in The Mummy, but whereas Benny's constant double-crosses were motivated by weasely cowardice Mac's just happened. They even get killed off in almost the same circumstances (Ooh. Treasure! I'd better stop trying to escape this deathtrap!).
1. Cold War Russians don’t make good villains in the same way Nazis do
2. Over-reliance on CGI even in cases where practical effects would have been possible and likely cheaper
3. The Crystal Skulls are a stupid MacGuffin without the stakes of the Ark or the Grail
Crystal Skull is what it is because of the time period. Moving the timeline ahead for an older Indy into the 50s means Nazi Germany is no longer around. But the 50s did have the Russian "Red Scare" as the pop culture threat, concern over nukes, and saw the rise of UFO sightings. The crystal skulls are real artifacts whose folklore involves mystical properties, South American/Mayan rituals, impossible manufacturing, and aliens. So all the elements fit into the same old adventure serial mold that Indiana Jones has always been. It's just let down down by poor writing and some really dumb and unnecessary cgi sequences.
As for other movie's mcguffins, even Lucas thought the Grail wasn't a good mcguffin.
"The Holy Grail was sort of feeble," says Lucas. "But, at the same time, we put the father in there to cover for it. I mean, the whole reason it became a dad movie was because I was scared to hell that there wasn't enough power behind the Holy Grail to carry a movie."
I can't imagine that movie being nearly as good if they hadn't put his father in it. And that is an issue with Crystal Skull, the relationship and interactions with Mutt is not nearly as good or even as believable as it was with Henry.
SiliconStew on
Just remember that half the people you meet are below average intelligence.
1. Cold War Russians don’t make good villains in the same way Nazis do
2. Over-reliance on CGI even in cases where practical effects would have been possible and likely cheaper
3. The Crystal Skulls are a stupid MacGuffin without the stakes of the Ark or the Grail
Crystal Skull is what it is because of the time period. Moving the timeline ahead for an older Indy into the 50s means Nazi Germany is no longer around. But the 50s did have the Russian "Red Scare" as the pop culture threat, concern over nukes, and saw the rise of UFO sightings. The crystal skulls are real artifacts whose folklore involves mystical properties, South American/Mayan rituals, impossible manufacturing, and aliens. So all the elements fit into the same old adventure serial mold that Indiana Jones has always been. It's just let down down by poor writing and some really dumb and unnecessary cgi sequences.
As for other movie's mcguffins, even Lucas thought the Grail wasn't good.
"The Holy Grail was sort of feeble," says Lucas. "But, at the same time, we put the father in there to cover for it. I mean, the whole reason it became a dad movie was because I was scared to hell that there wasn't enough power behind the Holy Grail to carry a movie."
I can't imagine that movie being nearly as good if they hadn't put his father in it. And that is an issue with Crystal Skull, the relationship and interactions with Mutt is not nearly as good or even as believable as it was with Henry.
Nah, you can easily do a "Indy races the Russians for some historical mcguffin" story. The inclusion of actual aliens is just weird and doesn't fit.
Temple of Doom obviously has a lot of problems, but I thought it really had the right idea as far as plot leads. Different exotic location, different religion, Indy still finds out the supernatural power is "real." I don't even think Nazis are a key part of the formula, although obviously they work well as bad guys.
I've always thought going back to Judeo-Christian mythology was a weakness of Last Crusade. I think switching over to alien magic-science is a weakness of Crystal Skull.
There are legends of Nazis being around TODAY, it's very easy to have a remnant Nazi faction hunting for some final last ditch power in the 50s that will let them raise the Third Reich. They work because they were a global enemy. The Russians were mainly a US enemy, and a crap one at that. They weren't experimenting with the occult, raising Hellboy, and creating uber men, they were making people work for a crap wage. There's a richer fictional mythology behind one and not the other.
And aliens are not elements similar to two artifacts that allow the bearer to interact with God with a capital "G".
And Shia LaBeouf, even at the time, was an annoying jerkoff. Pinning your film on his relationship with a bored Harrison Ford was never going to end well.
AND! George Lucas has fluked his way into some incredible hits, but he's had far more failures than successes so when he says the best Indiana Jones film is not that good, I'm content to ignore his opinion.
1. Cold War Russians don’t make good villains in the same way Nazis do
2. Over-reliance on CGI even in cases where practical effects would have been possible and likely cheaper
3. The Crystal Skulls are a stupid MacGuffin without the stakes of the Ark or the Grail
Crystal Skull is what it is because of the time period. Moving the timeline ahead for an older Indy into the 50s means Nazi Germany is no longer around. But the 50s did have the Russian "Red Scare" as the pop culture threat, concern over nukes, and saw the rise of UFO sightings. The crystal skulls are real artifacts whose folklore involves mystical properties, South American/Mayan rituals, impossible manufacturing, and aliens. So all the elements fit into the same old adventure serial mold that Indiana Jones has always been. It's just let down down by poor writing and some really dumb and unnecessary cgi sequences.
As for other movie's mcguffins, even Lucas thought the Grail wasn't good.
"The Holy Grail was sort of feeble," says Lucas. "But, at the same time, we put the father in there to cover for it. I mean, the whole reason it became a dad movie was because I was scared to hell that there wasn't enough power behind the Holy Grail to carry a movie."
I can't imagine that movie being nearly as good if they hadn't put his father in it. And that is an issue with Crystal Skull, the relationship and interactions with Mutt is not nearly as good or even as believable as it was with Henry.
Nah, you can easily do a "Indy races the Russians for some historical mcguffin" story. The inclusion of actual aliens is just weird and doesn't fit.
As opposed to believability of the actual power of god melting the faces off Nazis, the power to pull a man's still beating heart out of his chest without killing him, or a drinking cup that can turn a man to dust in an instant, instantly heal any wound, or grant eternal life?
Just remember that half the people you meet are below average intelligence.
1. Cold War Russians don’t make good villains in the same way Nazis do
2. Over-reliance on CGI even in cases where practical effects would have been possible and likely cheaper
3. The Crystal Skulls are a stupid MacGuffin without the stakes of the Ark or the Grail
Crystal Skull is what it is because of the time period. Moving the timeline ahead for an older Indy into the 50s means Nazi Germany is no longer around. But the 50s did have the Russian "Red Scare" as the pop culture threat, concern over nukes, and saw the rise of UFO sightings. The crystal skulls are real artifacts whose folklore involves mystical properties, South American/Mayan rituals, impossible manufacturing, and aliens. So all the elements fit into the same old adventure serial mold that Indiana Jones has always been. It's just let down down by poor writing and some really dumb and unnecessary cgi sequences.
As for other movie's mcguffins, even Lucas thought the Grail wasn't good.
"The Holy Grail was sort of feeble," says Lucas. "But, at the same time, we put the father in there to cover for it. I mean, the whole reason it became a dad movie was because I was scared to hell that there wasn't enough power behind the Holy Grail to carry a movie."
I can't imagine that movie being nearly as good if they hadn't put his father in it. And that is an issue with Crystal Skull, the relationship and interactions with Mutt is not nearly as good or even as believable as it was with Henry.
Nah, you can easily do a "Indy races the Russians for some historical mcguffin" story. The inclusion of actual aliens is just weird and doesn't fit.
As opposed to believability of the actual power of god melting the faces off Nazis, the power to pull a man's still beating heart out of his chest without killing him, or a drinking cup that can turn a man to dust in an instant, instantly heal any wound, or grant eternal life?
I never said anything about believability, so what are you talking about?
As opposed to believability of the actual power of god melting the faces off Nazis, the power to pull a man's still beating heart out of his chest without killing him, or a drinking cup that can turn a man to dust in an instant, instantly heal any wound, or grant eternal life?
In my opinion: kinda, yes!
The previous films leaned heavily into the occult/supernatural. That's not the same as out-and-out sci fi which is what Crystal Skull seemed to be going for.
That doesn't really fit into the previous Indiana Jones "universe" so to speak.
1. Cold War Russians don’t make good villains in the same way Nazis do
2. Over-reliance on CGI even in cases where practical effects would have been possible and likely cheaper
3. The Crystal Skulls are a stupid MacGuffin without the stakes of the Ark or the Grail
Crystal Skull is what it is because of the time period. Moving the timeline ahead for an older Indy into the 50s means Nazi Germany is no longer around. But the 50s did have the Russian "Red Scare" as the pop culture threat, concern over nukes, and saw the rise of UFO sightings. The crystal skulls are real artifacts whose folklore involves mystical properties, South American/Mayan rituals, impossible manufacturing, and aliens. So all the elements fit into the same old adventure serial mold that Indiana Jones has always been. It's just let down down by poor writing and some really dumb and unnecessary cgi sequences.
As for other movie's mcguffins, even Lucas thought the Grail wasn't good.
"The Holy Grail was sort of feeble," says Lucas. "But, at the same time, we put the father in there to cover for it. I mean, the whole reason it became a dad movie was because I was scared to hell that there wasn't enough power behind the Holy Grail to carry a movie."
I can't imagine that movie being nearly as good if they hadn't put his father in it. And that is an issue with Crystal Skull, the relationship and interactions with Mutt is not nearly as good or even as believable as it was with Henry.
Nah, you can easily do a "Indy races the Russians for some historical mcguffin" story. The inclusion of actual aliens is just weird and doesn't fit.
As opposed to believability of the actual power of god melting the faces off Nazis, the power to pull a man's still beating heart out of his chest without killing him, or a drinking cup that can turn a man to dust in an instant, instantly heal any wound, or grant eternal life?
I never said anything about believability, so what are you talking about?
That you're seemingly willing to accept the other films' premises that gods and their powers are real and provable but somehow the idea of aliens also being real in this fictional universe is a step too far. Aliens "fit" because Indy is a period pop culture serial, and aliens were pop culture in the 50s.
SiliconStew on
Just remember that half the people you meet are below average intelligence.
This was a common argument back when the film was released.
The original films are grounded in thousands of years of mysticism. If you did say Indiana Jones and the Magical Lamp (Better name not withstanding) you could buy into that because we have a long history of Djinn's, wishes, magical items, etc, and it's always bunk until Indy actually finds it. You don't know the Ark is real until its opened, or the Grail until the bad guy drinks from the wrong one. And at least two of them tie into an actual omniscient being and religious meanings which most people would have at least a cursory understanding of.
Like the Ark of the Covenant, if such an item is mentioned, isn't as common an item as the Holy Grail, but the general gist of "here is an evil army, and this thing can let them speak to God" is understandable even its grandeur.
But interdimensional or intergalactic beings are not. They're a relatively new creation for a start, but we have a billion alien films, so not only are you not covering any new ground, and not only is that mythology comparatively boring, they find the skull pretty early on and there's nothing left to find after that so it just becomes a bad film over all. It's not "aliens are so unrealistic", it's that there is absolutely no established lore for them in the Indy films. But catacombs built by Knights Templar? Yeah we've heard of Knights Templar. We know about the Nazis. X marks the spot.
If you can't understand why religious mythology and aliens don't mesh I don't know what to tell you except go watch Prometheus.
Indiana Jones is an archaeologist. Aliens are science fiction. Aliens don't fit in what was a 40s pulp adventure story.
If it had gone all-in on late 50s atomic age sci-fi, had Mutt be a scientist/government agent trying to stop the Soviets with Indy relegated to a supporting role like his father had been, dropping cutting one-liners and coming through in the clutch, it would've worked. But that's not what they did.
They did an extended CG sword fight on moving vehicles through a jungle instead.
+10
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
I don’t think the aliens fit, but I also don’t think the mere concept hindered the movie substantially. The toothless script, the meandering plot, the bad photography and CG, and the underwritten characters all were much more at fault.
Just once, just once I'd love to watch a movie where the good and bad guys are in vehicles side by side dueling, and one of them just hits the brakes, flips a U, and goes the other direction.
I don’t think the aliens fit, but I also don’t think the mere concept hindered the movie substantially. The toothless script, the meandering plot, the bad photography and CG, and the underwritten characters all were much more at fault.
Exactly, the aliens are a symptom, not the disease. Even if it had, had a more traditional legendary item, it would have been a BETTER film, but still fundamentally flawed on every level.
+5
Options
AbsoluteZeroThe new film by Quentin KoopantinoRegistered Userregular
I don't think I've seen any of the Indy films all the way through except Crystal Skull and I thought it was pretty OK. I don't think it deserved the South Park style overreaction it got.
The Crystal Skull is a decent mcguffin, but the movie goes off kilter otherwise. It meanders, the Mac character is distracting and sort of useless. The Beef is pretty polarizing too I guess. I didn't know what the Ark was before Raiders, but I knew what the grail was and what the crystal skull was. The ark had the benefit of a really, really good explanation in Raiders. I absolutely remember them educating the g men about the ark, and the music that plays. I don't think the Skull ever gets that. There are other issues like Indy's age, but that doesn't bother me as much, he still can kick some ass for sure, just as Linda Hamilton does a pretty great job as a stone cold Terminator killer in the most recent one despite both of them qualifying for a senior's discount at Sizzler.
I know they want to do one more, and if they do, I hope they go balls out and go to Atlantis. Just ramp the epic up to 11 and end it, and get all the old fan favourite characters back.
I don't want them to kill him, I want to see a happy ending for Indy, he certainly deserves it. Find Atlantis. Save Atlantis. Stay in Atlantis with Marion.
Unless the reviews are ecstatic I doubt I’ll see a fifth one. I’m just not very curious any more how they’ll try and wring more blood out of the stone.
I don't think I've seen any of the Indy films all the way through except Crystal Skull and I thought it was pretty OK. I don't think it deserved the South Park style overreaction it got.
The beef gets far more hate than he deserves. He is a good actor that makes interesting movies and has no qualms about taking risks.
But the rest of the film really does deserve its criticism as a follow up the prior movies.
1. Cold War Russians don’t make good villains in the same way Nazis do
2. Over-reliance on CGI even in cases where practical effects would have been possible and likely cheaper
3. The Crystal Skulls are a stupid MacGuffin without the stakes of the Ark or the Grail
Crystal Skull is what it is because of the time period. Moving the timeline ahead for an older Indy into the 50s means Nazi Germany is no longer around. But the 50s did have the Russian "Red Scare" as the pop culture threat, concern over nukes, and saw the rise of UFO sightings. The crystal skulls are real artifacts whose folklore involves mystical properties, South American/Mayan rituals, impossible manufacturing, and aliens. So all the elements fit into the same old adventure serial mold that Indiana Jones has always been. It's just let down down by poor writing and some really dumb and unnecessary cgi sequences.
As for other movie's mcguffins, even Lucas thought the Grail wasn't good.
"The Holy Grail was sort of feeble," says Lucas. "But, at the same time, we put the father in there to cover for it. I mean, the whole reason it became a dad movie was because I was scared to hell that there wasn't enough power behind the Holy Grail to carry a movie."
I can't imagine that movie being nearly as good if they hadn't put his father in it. And that is an issue with Crystal Skull, the relationship and interactions with Mutt is not nearly as good or even as believable as it was with Henry.
Nah, you can easily do a "Indy races the Russians for some historical mcguffin" story. The inclusion of actual aliens is just weird and doesn't fit.
As opposed to believability of the actual power of god melting the faces off Nazis, the power to pull a man's still beating heart out of his chest without killing him, or a drinking cup that can turn a man to dust in an instant, instantly heal any wound, or grant eternal life?
I never said anything about believability, so what are you talking about?
That you're seemingly willing to accept the other films' premises that gods and their powers are real and provable but somehow the idea of aliens also being real in this fictional universe is a step too far. Aliens "fit" because Indy is a period pop culture serial, and aliens were pop culture in the 50s.
That is just your previous argument about "believability" stated in different words. And again, I never said it wasn't believable. I said it didn't fit. It's incongruous with the series.
Throwing in aliens isn't the worst thing the script does. But neither is it necessary in any way. There's nothing about the time period or the setting forcing them to pivot to alien stuff. It was a choice. It's just a bad one.
Unless the reviews are ecstatic I doubt I’ll see a fifth one. I’m just not very curious any more how they’ll try and wrong more blood out of the stone.
I'm curious what they'll try and do just because it seems like such a terrible idea I'm curious in what way they fuck it up.
I don’t think the aliens fit, but I also don’t think the mere concept hindered the movie substantially. The toothless script, the meandering plot, the bad photography and CG, and the underwritten characters all were much more at fault.
Yep.
I think Doom is kind of weird in that Ark and Crusade are both based on an element of Judeo-Christian mythology being real, while Doom is a completely different mythology, but it's just a minor issue because it's otherwise a really entertaining movie.
Crystal Skull could've been a really good movie that was just a little thematically incongruous. Instead it was a shit movie that was also thematically incongruous.
(Also, killing boatloads of nazis is fine in a way that killing boatloads of Russians isn't, because the latter aren't fundamentally evil in the way the former are. But again, this isn't the film's biggest weakness, and the same argument applies to Doom.)
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
+3
Options
AbsoluteZeroThe new film by Quentin KoopantinoRegistered Userregular
I don't think I've seen any of the Indy films all the way through except Crystal Skull and I thought it was pretty OK. I don't think it deserved the South Park style overreaction it got.
The beef gets far more hate than he deserves. He is a good actor that makes interesting movies and has no qualms about taking risks.
But the rest of the film really does deserve its criticism as a follow up the prior movies.
Maybe my lack of familiarity with the other Indy films is why I don't mind Crystal Skull? To me it's just a doofy adventure popcorn flick.
Criterion spine #737: Les Blank: Always For Pleasure
This one's a boxset of over a dozen short documentaries by Les Blank, from the 60's through the 90's. A lot of these I saw years ago, and I just finished up the couple I hadn't seen.
So Blank's documentaries are pretty sincere films about culture: musicians, artists, food, and other special interest topics. Films about American polka subculture, Afro-Cuban percussion, the allure of gap-toothed women, a film that's just about garlic, and more than one portrait of the Cajun and Creole communities. Defining Blank's approach is unexpectedly difficult: too idiosyncratic to be considered plain, but too matter of fact to be considered quaint. There's a quirky honesty to his style that meshes well with his eclectic, often regional choice of subject.
If I have a favourite in this box set, it's the film it's named after: Always For Pleasure, which captures late-70's New Orleans in all its liveliness.
Posts
The script and story are garbage, for one
To be fair, it was supposed to be like Short Round, or Sallah, in which they have a history that we haven't seen. It didn't work because the rest of the script was garbage, but I understand what they were going for.
That is absolutely what they were attempting. Personally, I don't think Labeuf is nearly as charming as Ford, but that may be a personal thing.
Am I misremembering or did Indy have no idea who the dude was until Marian told him?
So how could they have a shared history?
-Indiana Solo, runner of blades
The whole thing felt like a National Treasure knockoff, instead of an Indiana Jones movie.
1. Cold War Russians don’t make good villains in the same way Nazis do
2. Over-reliance on CGI even in cases where practical effects would have been possible and likely cheaper
3. The Crystal Skulls are a stupid MacGuffin without the stakes of the Ark or the Grail
-Indiana Solo, runner of blades
It's not fair to lay blame on cold war Russians.
They're totally effective villains, when not surrounded by bad writing and abysmal direction in a production that only trying to wring the last few bucks out of people's nostalgia.
Crystal Skull is what it is because of the time period. Moving the timeline ahead for an older Indy into the 50s means Nazi Germany is no longer around. But the 50s did have the Russian "Red Scare" as the pop culture threat, concern over nukes, and saw the rise of UFO sightings. The crystal skulls are real artifacts whose folklore involves mystical properties, South American/Mayan rituals, impossible manufacturing, and aliens. So all the elements fit into the same old adventure serial mold that Indiana Jones has always been. It's just let down down by poor writing and some really dumb and unnecessary cgi sequences.
As for other movie's mcguffins, even Lucas thought the Grail wasn't a good mcguffin. I can't imagine that movie being nearly as good if they hadn't put his father in it. And that is an issue with Crystal Skull, the relationship and interactions with Mutt is not nearly as good or even as believable as it was with Henry.
Nah, you can easily do a "Indy races the Russians for some historical mcguffin" story. The inclusion of actual aliens is just weird and doesn't fit.
I've always thought going back to Judeo-Christian mythology was a weakness of Last Crusade. I think switching over to alien magic-science is a weakness of Crystal Skull.
And aliens are not elements similar to two artifacts that allow the bearer to interact with God with a capital "G".
And Shia LaBeouf, even at the time, was an annoying jerkoff. Pinning your film on his relationship with a bored Harrison Ford was never going to end well.
AND! George Lucas has fluked his way into some incredible hits, but he's had far more failures than successes so when he says the best Indiana Jones film is not that good, I'm content to ignore his opinion.
As opposed to believability of the actual power of god melting the faces off Nazis, the power to pull a man's still beating heart out of his chest without killing him, or a drinking cup that can turn a man to dust in an instant, instantly heal any wound, or grant eternal life?
I never said anything about believability, so what are you talking about?
In my opinion: kinda, yes!
The previous films leaned heavily into the occult/supernatural. That's not the same as out-and-out sci fi which is what Crystal Skull seemed to be going for.
That doesn't really fit into the previous Indiana Jones "universe" so to speak.
That you're seemingly willing to accept the other films' premises that gods and their powers are real and provable but somehow the idea of aliens also being real in this fictional universe is a step too far. Aliens "fit" because Indy is a period pop culture serial, and aliens were pop culture in the 50s.
The original films are grounded in thousands of years of mysticism. If you did say Indiana Jones and the Magical Lamp (Better name not withstanding) you could buy into that because we have a long history of Djinn's, wishes, magical items, etc, and it's always bunk until Indy actually finds it. You don't know the Ark is real until its opened, or the Grail until the bad guy drinks from the wrong one. And at least two of them tie into an actual omniscient being and religious meanings which most people would have at least a cursory understanding of.
Like the Ark of the Covenant, if such an item is mentioned, isn't as common an item as the Holy Grail, but the general gist of "here is an evil army, and this thing can let them speak to God" is understandable even its grandeur.
But interdimensional or intergalactic beings are not. They're a relatively new creation for a start, but we have a billion alien films, so not only are you not covering any new ground, and not only is that mythology comparatively boring, they find the skull pretty early on and there's nothing left to find after that so it just becomes a bad film over all. It's not "aliens are so unrealistic", it's that there is absolutely no established lore for them in the Indy films. But catacombs built by Knights Templar? Yeah we've heard of Knights Templar. We know about the Nazis. X marks the spot.
If you can't understand why religious mythology and aliens don't mesh I don't know what to tell you except go watch Prometheus.
If it had gone all-in on late 50s atomic age sci-fi, had Mutt be a scientist/government agent trying to stop the Soviets with Indy relegated to a supporting role like his father had been, dropping cutting one-liners and coming through in the clutch, it would've worked. But that's not what they did.
They did an extended CG sword fight on moving vehicles through a jungle instead.
Crystal Skull, by comparison, felt pretty sterile to me.
Exactly, the aliens are a symptom, not the disease. Even if it had, had a more traditional legendary item, it would have been a BETTER film, but still fundamentally flawed on every level.
I know they want to do one more, and if they do, I hope they go balls out and go to Atlantis. Just ramp the epic up to 11 and end it, and get all the old fan favourite characters back.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
The beef gets far more hate than he deserves. He is a good actor that makes interesting movies and has no qualms about taking risks.
But the rest of the film really does deserve its criticism as a follow up the prior movies.
That is just your previous argument about "believability" stated in different words. And again, I never said it wasn't believable. I said it didn't fit. It's incongruous with the series.
Throwing in aliens isn't the worst thing the script does. But neither is it necessary in any way. There's nothing about the time period or the setting forcing them to pivot to alien stuff. It was a choice. It's just a bad one.
I'm curious what they'll try and do just because it seems like such a terrible idea I'm curious in what way they fuck it up.
Not gonna go pay to see it though, obviously.
I also want a Metal Slug movie
Yep.
I think Doom is kind of weird in that Ark and Crusade are both based on an element of Judeo-Christian mythology being real, while Doom is a completely different mythology, but it's just a minor issue because it's otherwise a really entertaining movie.
Crystal Skull could've been a really good movie that was just a little thematically incongruous. Instead it was a shit movie that was also thematically incongruous.
(Also, killing boatloads of nazis is fine in a way that killing boatloads of Russians isn't, because the latter aren't fundamentally evil in the way the former are. But again, this isn't the film's biggest weakness, and the same argument applies to Doom.)
Maybe my lack of familiarity with the other Indy films is why I don't mind Crystal Skull? To me it's just a doofy adventure popcorn flick.
This one's a boxset of over a dozen short documentaries by Les Blank, from the 60's through the 90's. A lot of these I saw years ago, and I just finished up the couple I hadn't seen.
So Blank's documentaries are pretty sincere films about culture: musicians, artists, food, and other special interest topics. Films about American polka subculture, Afro-Cuban percussion, the allure of gap-toothed women, a film that's just about garlic, and more than one portrait of the Cajun and Creole communities. Defining Blank's approach is unexpectedly difficult: too idiosyncratic to be considered plain, but too matter of fact to be considered quaint. There's a quirky honesty to his style that meshes well with his eclectic, often regional choice of subject.
If I have a favourite in this box set, it's the film it's named after: Always For Pleasure, which captures late-70's New Orleans in all its liveliness.
Nice glass of wine and a Harryhausen movie.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3