What is the one factor that most DETRACTS from the success of this film?

mac character just was so superficial, you remember who he is because he switch sides every 30 secs, cuz really he didn't add anything valuable to the film or to the franchise, i dont think we going to remember him like we remember belloq, or that crazy nazi thot, even the read bold head guy from TOD, elsa whatever....

davejames said:

While it [the crystal skull macguffin] had potential, it just did not work in this film as written. From the minute you see it, you know the movie is going to end with them activating some device in a temple that either brings aliens down to earth or sends them up into space or something. As a result, there was no mystery or suspense to the movie whatsoever and you're just waiting for Indy and company to figure out what the audience already figured out ages ago.

Click to expand...

Hmmm, well, that's not true for everyone. I went to see the flick with 18 of my friends, 10 of which lived a completely "spoiler-free" life up until the movie came out and they LOVED the MacGuffin and the idea behind the MacGuffin.

Granted, while some of them didn't completely agree with the Ancient Astronaut plotline the movie brilliantly pursued, they told me afterwards that they did not expect that a spaceship was going to be activated or encountered. They simply expected the skull to be returned to its rightful owner or place. Nothing more, nothing less.

Ah, the advantage of having watched the movie without an inkling of any plot points! I actually envied them a bit....but just a bit!

I honestly feel the family element was kind of lame, but it could have been better if written correctly. Same goes for the pacing of the film/plot development. The motivations behind returning the skull back, etc. The real problem was the script.

I think they never TRULY got the script the way they wanted it after all these years... they just settled for what they had.

Aliens. I don't think people are ready to see aliens in Indiana Jones. But we'll see.

I felt the action was just too subpar. No booby traps really. No real sense of dramatic tension, esp in the 2nd half of the movie.

Kinda a downer. If falling over and over again in the waterfalls is what is considered action...well....

Watched the movie yesterday and enjoyed it to see another Indy movie after years of waiting, but in my opinion the script is a little bit too flat for an Indy movie. It isn´t deep enough just like the first movies.

Wat I was expecting, was a continuation of the first three movies, with something unique and new scenes and ideas. I also expected a new score from John Williams with unique melodies. It sucks to say for an Indy fan like me, that KOTCS doesn´t contain that, and after 19 years... it is somewhat a missed chance...

In my opinion, the KOTCS contains too much temple-scenes and skeletons (which I normally very like in Indy films, but this was overkill). The temple scenes aren't scary enough. There are almost no temple-trap and escape scenes. Everything stays normal and safe (except for the end part). Indy and Mutt seems to be too much a superman (I didn't like the tarzan-part and the waterfall part). Films like The Last Crusade contains more scenes on different locations and countries (from example why doesn't KOTCS contain a scene for example "escape from Russia"?). The russians looks too friendly, Indy is helping them too much. The nazies from the Last Crusade are far played better.

It looks like Spielberg and Lucas made this film to enjoy the fans with another set of typical Indy-scenes, but it lacks a good deep script. It is just another adventure film in the 21st century. Where is the quality of the '80's?

I enjoyed the movie yesterday. It is not a bad movie and I enjoyed it, but I did not have the feeling that I have seen a real Indy movie. Raiders and Crusade still remains the best.

I was very pleasured to see that this board exists (this is my first post ) and most Indy fans share the same thoughts as I do about KOTCS.

If they start making an Indy 5 movie (I doubt), I hope that Spielberg and Lucas first read the opinions and suggestions on this board! (which I also doubt...)

Yeah, I wonder why they made Indy such a total wet blanket when it came to helping the Russians, leaving it up to Mutt to try and save the day. Are they trying to show that even bad-arse heroes mellow out and become a bit lame as they age? If so, I wish they'd not bothered. You might as well show Indy on the toilet; it's simply not what the character represents.

woah, this board is swamped! as expected. I don't think I can face wading through every thread. but anyway...

none of those options really summed it up for me. It was an exciting and entertaining sci-fi film but not an action/adventure type that weve come to expect from Indy. I did thoroughly enjoy it though.

I d say that there are no artistic breaks in the movie. No moments to relax and suck in the moments. It s all go go, where there should have been some no no. The puzzlesolving is to quick. Harrison keeps his passion but there are to many charachters involved from to many angles. Just making a copy of fate of atlantis would have been better.

Overall, I really enjoyed the film, especially from the beginning to about the middle of the jungle chase.

I thought the dialogue was mostly very good, and that there was ample exposition about the Macguffin.

It started losing steam in the finale. No booby traps, waaaaaaay too many sidekicks following him around, no explanation as to the aliens' motives, etc.

I really liked the movie and want to see it again, but its main inhibition was that the writing dropped off near the end of the film.

Mac could have been so cool! Winstone did a good job with what he was given, but his part could've been written so much better and he could've stolen the show.

I hated the Ox and Mac

also near the start, dusting off the ground in the cave, Indiana walks into the next room to conveniently find a broom to brush off the sand. A broom. In the middle of a dusted up deserted ****hole. In the middle of nowhere. An actual broom. The same type you have in your garage. LOL.

Supporting Characters, BUT THE INTRO WAS MUCH OF A SUBMISSION!!!

swarbs said:

I hated the Ox and Mac

also near the start, dusting off the ground in the cave, Indiana walks into the next room to conveniently find a broom to brush off the sand. A broom. In the middle of a dusted up deserted ****hole. In the middle of nowhere. An actual broom. The same type you have in your garage. LOL.

Click to expand...

I think you'll find the sweeping scene is set in the sanatarium.

swarbs said:

I hated the Ox and Mac

also near the start, dusting off the ground in the cave, Indiana walks into the next room to conveniently find a broom to brush off the sand. A broom. In the middle of a dusted up deserted ****hole. In the middle of nowhere. An actual broom. The same type you have in your garage. LOL.

Click to expand...

Did you fall asleep somewhere? They were in a church sanitarium!

They lack a lot of development in the finding - resolving puzzles

my bad


still the film was garbage

For me it was the family aspect of the film. That was the major thing that kinda bugged me. I don't hate the way Indy's been domesticated I just think it was unnecessary. It didn't detract from my enjoyment of the movie though (for the most part).

No time was taken to get to know the characters. Where were the intimate scenes with Marion and Indy chatting by the campfire? Mac was revealed much too early to be a traitor. We'd only just met him. Where's the shock value? Poor old John Hurt. I was cringing for him. Appalling lack of screen time for such a big star. No wonder he seemed disinterested in the movie before it's release. He couldn't remember filming it!

herr gruber said:

No time was taken to get to know the characters. Where were the intimate scenes with Marion and Indy chatting by the campfire? Mac was revealed much too early to be a traitor. We'd only just met him. Where's the shock value? Poor old John Hurt. I was cringing for him. Appalling lack of screen time for such a big star. No wonder he seemed disinterested in the movie before it's release. He couldn't remember filming it!

Click to expand...

For the second time in... well ever, I agree with Grubs! This can't be good.

Forrestal1972 said:

For the second time in... well ever, I agree with Grubs! This can't be good.

Click to expand...

The Gruber way is the only way!