Thoughts about the new title

Kingdom of the Crystal Skull seems to get a pretty strong negative reaction from folks. Is there anybody out there who loves it?

For me, it just doesn't work very well. Each previous title conveyed a certain ambiance or feeling. For example, Temple of Doom sounds like it was going to be frightening. Scary stuff that Indy might not be able to handle. The Last Crusade sounded like a noble adventure. Epic in scope and a great way to finish off the series. Kingdom of the Crystal Skull seems to be all over the map. It's not very adventurous, it's not particularly scary, or even epic. At least to me.

The previous sequels referenced the scope of the picture, rather than the object of interest. Kindom of the Crystal Skull tries to do too much by referencing both the scope and the item, as if it's desperate to appeal to as many people as possible. In the end, it just seems clunky to me - like changing the title of Raiders of the Lost Ark to Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the Lost Ark.

I would expect there will be other skulls in the film, with perhaps one true skull artifact as part of Indy's quest. They could certainly make skulls a reoccuring design element of this "kingdom," whatever it is. In that case, the title could be something like Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of Skulls, which sounds nice to my ear, carries the same rhythm as the other sequels and conveys a sense of adventure without getting too specific re: the artifact. It retains some mystery by not telling the viewer exactly what it's about.

Also, I'm expecting that the crystal skull is a key to finding the kingdom in question, so the real focus of the movie will be the kingdom, not the skull. And if you know your skull lore, that kingdom would be Atlantis. Referring to such an old chestnut as the "Kingdom of Skulls" is unexpected and kind of fun. That's my two cents anyway.

walker

If any of the old titles were to be used now, they'd get exactly the same reaction as 'Kingdom of the Crystal Skull' is getting from some people.

You'll get used to it, and obviously it will make more sense once we've all seen the movie.

There are far more serious things threatening the quality of this film than the title. I'm far more concerned about Shia's character irritating the *** out of me, and just what Lucas has been doing to the script.

Relax - people will only refer to it as Indy 4 anyway, so its nothing to worry about.

replican't said:

Relax - people will only refer to it as Indy 4 anyway, so its nothing to worry about.

Click to expand...

Right,Like how most people refer to The Phantom Menace as Episode 1 or Rocky Balboa as Rocky 6....

Yeah,The title doesn't roll off the tounge as say the previous three films,. Would just 'Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skull' have been better?For me no.Like Walker stated above,The words Raiders,Doom,Crusade all project these epic adventures.The word Kingdom is certainly an epic word.Would we have Indy any other way?

walker said:

Also, I'm expecting that the crystal skull is a key to finding the kingdom in question, so the real focus of the movie will be the kingdom, not the skull. And if you know your skull lore, that kingdom would be Atlantis. Referring to such an old chestnut as the "Kingdom of Skulls" is unexpected and kind of fun. That's my two cents anyway.

Click to expand...

Spot on, Walker. Kingdom of the Skulls not only has more of a ring to it, it's a bit more mysterious. Still, Kingdom of the Crystal Skull isn't that bad. It's definitely grown on me in the past few weeks. It hasn't dampened my enthusiasm, anyway.

At first I didn't like the title because it just seemed like a mouthfull. But after a couple days, it grew on me, and now I love it. Besides, the Indy movies are usually referenced by the "subtitle" anyway; TEMPLE OF DOOM, THE LAST CRUSADE, and some I know people (myself included) often refer to the first film as just RAIDERS.

I don't mind it -- I don't think it's the best but it certainly isn't the worst. I guess some people are right about it not rolling off the tongue too smoothly, but neither does "Raiders Of The Lost Ark" and we all love that title, right? That said, something about it does slightly bother me. There is the "k" sound at the beginning of two words; one in "kingdom" and the other in "crystal." This sounds too unexpanded, you know? I'm not a big fan of that alliteration.

7/10.

Does anyone remember or even care what the titles of the Harry Potter, Pirates of the Caribbean, or Star Wars, etc., were? Didn't affect the sales.

I think it fits the Indy style perfectly. It's just a little long in my opinion. And even though crystal skulls don't bear the same significance as, say, the Holy Grail, I think the idea of him discovering an entire kingdom easily trumps what he chased after in the other films, so it definitely has that epic feel for me. Let's just hope that's how it turns out.

Well, I feel better about the film if I think of the MacGuffin in terms of the Kingdom being the MacGuffin rather than the Crystal Skull. That way, the Skull plays more of a Headpiece to the Staff of Ra type role.

I think that we've been looking at it the wrong way to see the Skull as the main artifact. Maybe we should be thinking about and asking ourselves, what is The Kingdom that the Crystal Skull leads to? Atlantis would be awesome, but you'd have to forget about FoA. I recall Lucas saying that he always wanted to have a movie with an underground city. Perhaps this is how he fitted that in.

Violet Indy said:

I think that we've been looking at it the wrong way to see the Skull as the main artifact. Maybe we should be thinking about and asking ourselves, what is The Kingdom that the Crystal Skull leads to? Atlantis would be awesome, but you'd have to forget about FoA. I recall Lucas saying that he always wanted to have a movie with an underground city. Perhaps this is how he fitted that in.

Click to expand...

I agree. My guess is the "Kingdom" is a bit like the Kali cult in ToD. I don't know how authentic the storyboard sketches there used to be in the net were (probably shouldn't base a lot of speculations on those) but wasn't there something like an underground location?

Violet Indy said:

Well, I feel better about the film if I think of the MacGuffin in terms of the Kingdom being the MacGuffin rather than the Crystal Skull. That way, the Skull plays more of a Headpiece to the Staff of Ra type role.

I think that we've been looking at it the wrong way to see the Skull as the main artifact. Maybe we should be thinking about and asking ourselves, what is The Kingdom that the Crystal Skull leads to? Atlantis would be awesome, but you'd have to forget about FoA. I recall Lucas saying that he always wanted to have a movie with an underground city. Perhaps this is how he fitted that in.

Click to expand...

I too hope the Crystal Skulls would play such a roll as this in the plotline - I.e. ultimately of lesser importance - but as regards the title your argument weakens.

Raiders wasn't called Raiders of the Lost Headpiece was it??

So I not only dislike how clunky the title is, but also its lack of gravitas and/or adventure compared with the others.

I wouldn't mind long-windedness if it still flowed and was trully epic in the quest it implied.

Indiana Jones and the Seekers of the City of the Gods or
Indiana Jones and the Seekers of the Kingdom of the Gods would have been better by far to my mind, though they're hardly less wordy!

well actually...

you'll notice that I was referring the titles of the sequels, not the original.

"The previous sequels referenced the scope of the picture..." is what I said, so I was fully aware the the original movie referenced an acutal artifact. All I was saying is that I prefer the sequel titles that aren't so straightforward and/or lengthy.

It's just an opinion of course - I'm not trying to win a court case....

I still say that "Quest for the Covenant" sounds better! Kingdom of the Crystal Skull sounds pretty unusual for an Indy movie.

plz change the title.. it's not too late!

It has grown on me somewhat. I said somewhat.

Berg

bergstrom said:

It has grown on me somewhat. I said somewhat.

Berg

Click to expand...

Same here.
I think we'll just have to slowly get used to it...
In fact, I'm still in the process of getting used to 'The Phantom Menace', 'Attack of the Clones' and 'Revenge of the Sith'

fixer79 said:

In fact, I'm still in the process of getting used to 'The Phantom Menace', 'Attack of the Clones' and 'Revenge of the Sith'

Click to expand...

I find it's easier just to forget they exist at all...

ResidentAlien said:

I find it's easier just to forget they exist at all...

Click to expand...

LOL... oh, come on... they weren't that bad...

fixer79 said:

Same here.
I think we'll just have to slowly get used to it...
In fact, I'm still in the process of getting used to 'The Phantom Menace', 'Attack of the Clones' and 'Revenge of the Sith'

Click to expand...

AotC and RotS fit really nice with the original titles. C'mon, "The Empire Strikes Back" isn't a bad title? Get over yourselves, it's terrible and meant to be, and for that reason it's a great name!!! TPM is out of place, but I usually just refer to that as Episode I.

I wasn't pumped for this Indy title when I first heard it, but I got over it after the first 5 seconds of skepticism I had for it. It's exciting to have a title for this movie at all since it's been dubbed Indy 4 for so long. And it is just a title...