I'm one of those people who thinks Indy4 diminished the series a little, yet I hardly think it would be better if it never existed. Crunch the numbers and its existence is unquestionably a net gain. My reasons:

1) New original Drew Struzan and Hugh Fleming Indiana Jones artwork. This, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, and this don't exist without Indy4. That cannot be overstated.
2) A much-needed resurgence in Indy merchandising that I at least pretty greedily consumed. At the very least the fourth movie earns its existence for all the new LEGO sets that resulted, including the ones based off the original trilogy.
3) A new John Williams Indy score. The weakest, I'd say, but still.
4) The privilege of getting to take my little cousin, who I steered toward die-hard Indy fandom in preparation, to see an Indiana Jones movie in the theater.
5) The greatest Windows error sound of all time. (For the record, it's Ray Winstone saying, "Jonesy, I'm gonna be alright.")

Given the opportunity to prevent the movie's existence with a time machine, the above would give me serious pause.

Personally, I enjoyed watching Indiana Jones in the theatre, and the build-up we had for a year and a half easily exceeds any anticipation I've ever felt for a movie. Since that time, however, I've become more indifferent to the film, and view it as inferior to the classics. Nevertheless, overall, I'm glad we got to have something. We'd be disappointed that it never happened if we didn't get this film.

So, my vote is yes. While it was disappointing, and I presently am indifferent to the film, the journey leading up to its release was a good ride.

This is pretty much the exact question posed by this thread. My thoughts are the last post in it.

Right, thanks for pointing that out Udvarnoky. Mods, good call on the merge. Forgot about this thread. :hat:

Raiders112390, did you notice how AlivePoet didn't get upset when someone else provided a link to a pre-existing thread?:D
The only problem with the merge is that the poll question doesn't match with the new thread title.* At a casual glance, it appears that 76% feel that "Skull" should NOT have been made...but in actual fact, 76% are HAPPY that it happened!

*Kind of like Quebec in 1990, where the vote question was worded in a way that those who DIDN'T want to seperate from Canada had to vote, "Yes". (Remember those days, Poet?)

---
The 2nd vote was mine and I voted a BIG FAT, "Yes"!:p (As in: I was "glad the film was made.")

Although I think I only spent about a year actively here in anticipation to the film, I actually was loosely following it online since around 1998 or 1999. I used to frequent IndyFan.com and some other sites I forget the names to now for any news about a fourth Indiana Jones.

I continued to enjoy the trilogy like always and yes the ride was insanely exciting from around 2007 until release of KOTCS. But it certainly left me a little dissapointed.

I want to say I am mostly indifferent to it, as I have loved Indiana Jones since I first saw them at age 4 in 1988. However, since KOTCS came out my interest in the series has fallen to an all time low. Of course I still love the original trilogy, but I've seen it more times than ANY other series of movies (even Star Wars) to the point where it's lost a lot of it's impact over the past 20 years or so I've been watching them. I guess part of what kept me going was the question of what a fourth adventure would be like and then I let my imagination run wild. The end result didn't match it, or more accurately perhaps, it answered my question and ceased the imagining. And lately I haven't seen much in the way of new Indiana Jones material (books, games, anything really)... so there's been nothing to really talk about.

Somehow KOTCS closed out that chapter on my life, in a way. I honestly don't expect a fifth will actually get made (though even now I still hope, but not like the same kind of hope as #4 yielded). Even if it did get made, Harrison is realistically almost too old for real now, definitely too old to truly recapture the spirit of the originals. So maybe that's why I feel that way, as I have little interest in someone else playing the part.

All I know is, it makes me a little sad to really think about it like that. But at the same time, I am still here obviously, even if it's severely less frequently. :hat:

This. This is exactly how I feel. Well put.

There is A LOT to talk about. The material doesn't need to be "new" all the time. (Can ya dig it, No Ticket?:cool:)

If you have finally started to read the books, then Mazel Tov, because you were one of those who used to be only interested in the Harrison Ford movies!:p
So what? You can still talk about the Indy things you like!:whip:

No, I really don't think so.

I think everyone can get on board that the best thing Kingdom of the Crystal Skull did was that it introduced Indiana Jones to a new generation and made the original movies even more popular. It also brought in a wave of toys, video-games, novels, comic books etc. and it was quite fun to see Indy back in mainstream coverage and in everyday pop culture. I think its better to live in a world it exists (people who say the franchise is "dead"; imagine had they'd feel had Crystal Skull not come around).

While I'll admit the movie has its flaws, I have fun watching it and accept the the bad with the good. I also think its a better movie than others give it credit for and would place above something similar, say Tron: Legacy, but I guess we just expect the absolute best from Dr. Jones.

Crap! I voted 'No' when I meant to hit 'Yes'!

So 'Yes' has 14 votes and not!

I came very close to walking out on Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. It wasn't even The Fridge that did it. No, it was that stupid snake and quicksand incident that tempted me to cash in my chips and leave.

I, for one, was interested in an Indy 4, but am not glad that Kingdom of the Crystal Skull was made. Snow job, cash grab, phoning it in: these all come to mind when considering how it came into existence.

The reason I voted neutral was that while I'm glad the film was made and I liked it, there were some things from the movie I didn't like that IMO would've been better if they were either cut or changed.

I still consider it part of the Indy franchise.

I had to vote no. It's not that everything about it is bad, and I liked it better the 2nd time I saw it than the first time, but I have to say it kind of ruined the memories of the first three for me. I thought Last Crusade was a wonderful ending for the movies as a trilogy, and the fourth film just didn't feel right to me, mainly the marriage between Indy and Marion at the end and I wasn't crazy about the whole "she had a son with Indy and didn't tell him" thing.

I'd rather Mutt had been Marion's with her husband. And somebody Indy mentors, rather than having Marion keep that from him all those years.

I know what some of you are talking about when you say the script SUCKS, but one has to admit, this movie had some epic scenes. I really love when Indy is being chased by the natives down the pyramid, that was cool. the end really had some power. On the other hand the beginning is horrible-ish.

Weird how you gave this film a B+.
:p

Personally, the scripts for Indy III and IV were great. II is good.

Well, when the blu-ray set comes out, the first thing I'm doing is giving away KOTCS to anyone who wants it.

For me, Indy rides off into the sunset with his dad at the end of Last Crusade and that's all she wrote.

LOL...I'd rather watch Richard Chamberlain in the horrible Cannon production of "King Solomon's Mines" from here on out than KOTCS. At least KSM didn't insult my intelligence by trying to introduce plot elements best left to Fox Mulder and Dana Scully.

I would have totally been on board with Indy 4 if it was anything but a horrible attempt to graft sci-fi onto a series about archeology and mystical artifacts.

Do a simple treasure hunt for The Eye of the Fates, The Lost Treasure of Sheba, Atlantis....anything! Harrison could have elevated the level of the material if it was at least true to the genre.

What's wrong with exploring different areas of the adventure genre? Why does it have to be limited to ghosts and magic? Why the heck not sci-fi?

And jeeze, am I the only one who notes the irony of the fact that, in real life, there are some people willing to accept both magic (aka religion, folklore, mythology, etc.) and science (aka technology, quantum physics, evolution, gravity, etc.) co-existing in our own world, but in fiction? Nope, it's gotta be one or the other! Does anyone agree that this kind of thinking is phenomenally stupid, and restricting to genre fiction?

I don't think there's anything wrong with both magic and science fiction co-existing.

It would make sense for them to do so. If there's magic there's also science, and science fiction is merely science that man has not yet discovered or explained.

However, I don't think there has been any magic in the Indy movies. It was all science, since that was one of Lucas' original objectives.

The effects, however, are all subject to personal interpretation, both from the audience and the characters themselves. The first three films were left unexplained. The fourth broke with tradition and showed the wizard behind the curtain.

If KOTCS was worth suffering, then it was worth suffering to see Lucas finally present the world of Indiana Jones as initially conceived. Thankfully there are no gods in the sense that men imagined them, but only mischievous aliens, who have toyed with men in the manner of the Greek gods down the ages.