Yep - I never really liked the advent of sound and colour too, let alone computer generated imagery
Seriously though? Indiana Jones movies have always had a fair share of special/visual effects. It?s part of what they are. Sure, Raiders may have employed less visual effects due to technology/budget constraints, but if that fact makes the movie better, then surely it?s only better by default?
I expect my Indy movies to be packed with effects. Of course, the more practical effects the better e.g. exploding trucks etc?but, as I?ve mentioned in other threads, I?d sooner have more effects shots not less.
This really boils down to personal preference and interpretation. I know that many will prefer location footage in order to feel some sense of reality e.g. Tunisia standing in for Egypt. But I?d actually prefer backlot with CGI pyramidic vistas, and IMHO, KOTCS achieved a better sense (albeit "movie reality") of South America than Raiders did Egypt.
As far as KOTCS is concerned, I don?t particularly like the cutesy gopher shots (or the monkeys)? but I think it?s the idea and not the CGI that is a little weak. KOTCS, on the whole, employs its effects well? be it Doom Town, Ants or the Akator finale ? but it was a movie that was always going to have to employ some modicum of new effect techniques (as well as the traditional ones).