Radagaster
Trolling the Woods
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2005
- Messages
- 1,669
- Reaction score
- 0
In light of IJ publishing his KOTCS review, I thought a review by another Indy aficionado like Adam Hughes would most likely garner interest in reading. This was sent as an email by Adam, and I'm reprinting it here for us to enjoy. Hopefully Adam himself wouldn't mind my publishing it, because he hits home a lot of things I felt were true for the movie. So, without further ado, here's Adam's take on the movie
Some folks asked what I thought of Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of
the Crystal Skull, knowing what a big Indy fan I am. Some others
requested my review, but possibly spoiler-free. I'll do both, so
that no one has to have the magic ruined.
First off, you guys should know a few things about my stance, before
I proceed.
I think Raiders of the Lost Ark is a 5-star film. It's almost
flawless, and it's the prototypical action-adventure film. I feel
that Temple of Doom and Last Crusade are 3-star sequels to a 5-star
film. I like both equally, but for different reasons.
I love TOD because it dares to different than Raiders, and it has a
fabulous break-neck pace. I love how creepy and over-the-top it
is. I think that of all the Indy films, it is the most like the old
adventure serials it pays homage to, which were lurid and (as I said)
over-the-top. I love Short Round. Willie's constant screaming
doesn't bother; she's not meant to be `just like Marion'. Mola Ram
is the coolest looking bad guy Indy's ever met. He rips people's
hearts out of their chest and sets them on fire with his mind.
LC is a fun film, but a safe film. It's a mad-lib of Raiders; it
goes back to a formula to ensure positive fan reaction and good box
office. I think the film is TOO funny, because often the humor is
at the expense of the characters. The saving grace of the film is
Sean Connery and Harrison Ford's blazing onscreen chemistry, and the
resolution of their characters' relationships. I think this film
has more character development than any of the others, which is
great. I dislike the fact that I cannot figure out what exactly
Ilsa's character motivation is, even to this day.
And finally, I found ways to enjoy the STAR WARS prequels. Meaning?
If I like something enough, I will find ways to enjoy it, even if it
is not the greatest. If my favorite team loses the World Series, I
don't suddenly turn on them, hating them, and denouncing all their
previous successes.
My short, spoiler-free review:
Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. It was not as
bad as I'd feared it would be, but it wasn't as good as I'd hoped it
would be. It's great see to Ford back as Indy, and in most cases,
that's good enough. If you can let go of the Bad, you can have fun
with this film.
************ ******SPOILER
WARNING***** ********* *****
My big, spoilery review. Read on at your own risk.
I liked parts of this film, I disliked other parts. It was a big
schizophrenic smorgasbord of a film. I've done some reading, because
I like to figure out the "why" in "why didn't this work".
The reason this film took over 15 years to get made is because the
script had to satisfy three people: Lucas, Spielberg, and Ford.
Lucas has wanted to do an "Indiana Jones and the Saucermen" 1950s
film, which both Spielberg and Ford resoundly refused to do. In
VANITY FAIR this spring, Lucas stated that he was adamant about the
Macguffin (now known to be crystals skulls, aliens, and flying
saucers), and wouldn't budge. Finally, Spielberg and Ford relented,
in return for concessions of their own. Sometimes this type of
creative synergy results in fabulosity, but I feel this time it
resulted in mush.
I personally was not enthralled with the idea of Indy meeting
aliens. I feel it's "jumping genres" as Lucas himself counseled
Spielberg against in 1980 when Spielberg thought a Nazi with a robot
gun arm would be cool for Raiders. I think that it's more X-Files
than Indiana Jones, and not the kind of natural environment for the
character.
For MOST of the film, which I was enjoying, I thought they weren't
going to go all the way. I felt that if you left the true nature of
the Crystal Skull a mystery ("Is it an ancient mineral with strange
properties sculpted into the shape of a mysterious visitor… is it
actually the skull of an ancient astronaut who came to earth to give
knowledge to primitive man…. We may never know…"), then you have an
Indy film with a cool Chariot of the Gods twist. It would still be
in the realm of an Indiana Jones film.
But in the end, they went ALL THE WAY. An alien spaceman, a flying
saucer, and Indy stands around watching some of ILM's best work (the
Amazon river crashing into the valley was very TEN COMMANDMENTS, very
cool) with this WTF?!? Look on his face… ironically the exact same
expression on most of the audience's faces. It's almost as if Indy
himself knows he's wandered into the end of the wrong film, and just
kinda watches the ending unfold. All the characters seem relieved
that it's over; because they seem unfazed by anything they've seen.
WHAT I LIKED
The whole Area 51 opening, except the gophers. Once is funny, twice
is unnecessary, three times is overkill. Loved the line: "You don't
know him! YOU DON'T KNOW HIM! YOU DON'T KNOW HIIIIIIIM!!! !!" Also
loved "The way you're sinking your teeth into your `wubble-yoos' , I'd
say `eastern Ukraine'…"
The atomic test/Doom Town sequence. The only time in the whole film
I felt Indy was in REAL PERIL. I loved the refrigerator.
Colonel Doctor Irina Spalko. Right out of Terry and the Pirates, she
felt like. Cate Blanchett just ate it up, but in a good way. She
might be my favorite Indy villain, if she didn't have a crummy ending.
The Marshall College stuff. GREAT chase, great action. LOVED the
rumble in the soda shop. "Get that greaser!!!"
Indy. Sounds dumb to say, but Ford as Indy is a cinema icon. Seeing
him in action again was pretty darn amazing.
The ants. I liked `em. I just wish the scene had been gorier.
Remember how Saturday matinee thrilling the grue & gore in Raiders
and TOD was? I miss that.
The Cold War paranoia/ Red Scare stuff.
WHAT I DIDN'T LIKE
The actual plot of the film. Once Indy gets to South America, I felt
like the story slowly went south with him. I was never given a
clear understanding of what the film was about, beyond rescuing
Harold Oxley. Returning the Crystal Skull to Akator only seemed
important because the film needed it to be. The Ark, the Sankara
Stones, the Grail…there was always a clear narrative based around WHY
they were important.
Mac. A completely useless character by the time his `triple agent'
status was revealed. I didn't care about him after the opening, even
though the film seemed to want me to. Why did Indy want to save this
unlikable bastard's life at the end?
The comedy. Like Last Crusade, almost everything hinged on a joke,
when I felt I wanted some genuine human sentiment. Marion Ravenwood
returns… and it's a joke. Indy finds out he has a son… and the scene
pivots on a joke. I like humor just fine, but I longed for a genuine
reunion moment between Indy and Marion. I wanted some kind of
genuine moment between Indy and his new son. Not much, just one.
Raiders had such a perfect blend of humor, drama, and melodrama.
The Mutt/Tarzan scene. Too much. It could've worked if Mutt gets
snagged in the trees, and sees the chase wind back around towards him
from his vantage point. Seeing how the monkeys brachiate, he
could've slashed the vine, and made one big heroic swing into
Spalko's vehicle. That would've been cool, heroic, and as believable
as Indy's swing to Jock's plane in Raiders. But they went too big,
too far for my tastes.
As I stated before, actually having an alien and his flying saucer
show up. Imagine if, in Raiders' climax, when the Ark is opened, and
an old man with a beard and a robe stepped out, and zapped all the
Nazis with lasers from his eyes. THAT'S how intrusive I found the
alien.
But add to that, Harold Oxley is suddenly & miraculously cured of
his insanity, and commits the most heinous of cinema sins: he spouts
exposition. "They're extra-dimensional beings, actually…" Out of
nowhere, he's right as rain, and free to spout off all the info the
film itself was incapable of showing us.
Marion. Did anyone else feel she was wasted here? She shows up and
quips wih Indy, and then proceeds to drive everyone around like a
good soccer mom. I wanted Marion to be honest with Indy about having
moved on with her life; instead she exchanges quips, then proceeds to
get all gooey over Indy. That seemed out of character for the Marion
of Raiders.
Mutt. Great idea for a character, but never really utilized;
especially if they all want us to care enough about him to follow his
adventures in future films. Indy & Mutt get along almost instantly,
so when they realize they are related, there's…. nothing. I felt
they should've been at loggerheads from the beginning, the
respectable man of letter & science vs. the dropout juvenile
delinquent. The film might've crackled for two acts with their
abusive interaction, and then they are forced to deal with each other
when they realize they are related, and can't just walk away.
Actually, it would've solved a lot of my problems. Since the
crystal skull isn't really interesting to be the main plot, the whole
issue of Indy and his son could've been the fire that fueled the
plot. Imagine if, at the end, Indy & Mutt are ready to say "Screw
you!" and go their separate ways, and Marion turns to Indy and
says "Don't make the same mistake your father did, Jones." Indy
realizes Mutt is walking away the same way he did when he was that
age, and he's doing exactly what Henry did: letting him go. That
might've given the film some resonance, if it felt like Last Crusade
was part of the set-up for this film.
Ultimately, the film was a let-down, but a glorious one. It rests on
the nostalgia of seeing Ford as Indy, and as Spielberg's mastery of
his craft as a visual storyteller to overcome the fact that the film
is very light in the plot & story department.
Just one cat's opinion.
-AH!
) and for another it just showed real guts.
