Do you think the reaction to KOTCS was exaggerated?

M

Montana Smith

Active member
I also had zero expectations, as I didn't even know it was coming out until the adverts were on television. And, like those for The Hobbit, I didn't feel the need to see it.

Curiosity got the better of me, and on first viewing I thought KOTCS was better than the adverts suggested. However, it does get worse with subsequent viewings.
 
M

Mickiana

Well-known member
Stoo said:
Personally, my expectations for "Skull" were very, very low so it turned out better than I thought it would be!:D
Click to expand...

Why were your expectations so low, Stoo and Montana and HWJ? Not saying they shouldn't have been. But you do say "very, very low" (Stoo). Was there a specific reason for this? It's so in contrast to the great expectations and rose coloured visions that I had. Even after the first viewing, I wouldn't let myself see the negatives. This was after all Indiana Jones: there could be no wrong, or so I thought.
 
M

Montana Smith

Active member
Mickiana said:
Why were your expectations so low, Stoo and Montana and HWJ?
Click to expand...

I wasn't an Indiana Jones fanatic. As far as I was concerned it was a 1980s trilogy that was done and dusted, and an associated TV series that I didn't consider to be really Indiana Jones.

When the adverts came on TV and I realized there was a fourth movie my initial reaction was, why? It seemed irrelevant, too long after the event, and stank of cash-in. (Just like the Expendables when I saw that on DVD).
 
R

replican't

Guest
Raiders112390 said:
As I've gotten older (now 22, was 17 turning 18 when it came out) I am growing to appreciate it more and more.
Click to expand...

Oh do me a favour, son. Now you're older? At 22? Thanks for the biggest laugh I've had in a while.

Come back to me when your balls have dropped and your brain has switched on and we'll talk about just how utterly dismal Crystal Skullf*ck really is.
 
R

Raiders90

Well-known member
replican't said:
Oh do me a favour, son. Now you're older? At 22? Thanks for the biggest laugh I've had in a while.

Come back to me when your balls have dropped and your brain has switched on and we'll talk about just how utterly dismal Crystal Skullf*ck really is.
Click to expand...

I was 18 in 2008, now I am 22. I have had more than four years to come to where I stand on the film. I enjoy it. I don't feel it's a bad film. It's a film that was the victim of unrealistic levels of hype, fevered rumors, and expectations built up over a near 20 year period. People demanded, wanted and expected to basically get Raiders of the Lost Ark II, and when they got a film that was more like Temple of Doom II, they went nuts.

I am sure that if TOD came out nowadays--In an era in which realism and grit are demanded in action films, where flights of fancy, goofiness, and the impossible are considered taboo, in the internet era--People would be calling TOD the worst movie ever. The only thing which stops KOTCS haters from also hating TOD is nostalgia. They were kids when the series came out, it was a part of their childhood and nostalgia is a powerful, and sometimes blinding thing.

I really don't like ageists, but two can play this game:

I'm guessing you're a bitter, jaded, cynical Gen Xer--probably somewhere between 33 and 42. You're one of those who feels George Lucas raped your childhood, and you're angry about it. You're angry at Uncle George and have been angry since 1999. You're probably a huge fan of The Dark Knight (a pretentious art house wanna be film) and idolize Chris Nolan. Light hearted films, or films that aren't ultra dark, gritty and realistic, aren't your kind of films. I know your type all too well. The '90s, '00s and '10s have really burned the ass of a lot of Gen Xers. Turned you into such a bitter, odd bunch.

The '80s is, Thank God in Heaven, gone.
 
Last edited:
The Drifter

The Drifter

New member
replican't said:
Come back to me when your balls have dropped and your brain has switched on and we'll talk about just how utterly dismal Crystal Skullf*ck really is.
Click to expand...

Are you seriously saying this? Are you seriously trying to point out how young someone else is when you post childish things like this? If you are above the age of 16, then you must have some mental issues that you need sorted out. How the mods let pure and utter garbage like this fly amazes me.

This is pure trolling. It's a movie! Some will love it, some will hate it. But, to go on an Indiana Jones fan board just to bash anyone (and that's all I've ever seen replican't do) who enjoys it seems like such a waste.
 
Henry W Jones

Henry W Jones

New member
Raiders112390 said:
I am sure that if TOD came out nowadays--In an era in which realism and grit are demanded in action films, where flights of fancy, goofiness, and the impossible are considered taboo, in the internet era--People would be calling TOD the worst movie ever. The only thing which stops KOTCS haters from also hating TOD is nostalgia. They were kids when the series came out, it was a part of their childhood and nostalgia is a powerful, and sometimes blinding thing.
Click to expand...

I don't agree. Where was the realism in G.I. Joe? The A-Team? The Expendables? Transformers 3 bent buildings way beyond possible levels. So, lots of movies are not in the realm of realistic these days either. TOD is a movie either you love or hate just like KOTCS. It is no more unrealistic as some of the stuff I see in films now days. I do not hate either film. I don't just like TOD out of nostalgia, I actually enjoy it more than LC.
 
M

Montana Smith

Active member
Henry W Jones said:
I don't agree. Where was the realism in G.I. Joe? The A-Team? The Expendables? Transformers 3 bent buildings way beyond possible levels. So, lots of movies are not in the realm of realistic these days either. TOD is a movie either you love or hate just like KOTCS. It is no more unrealistic as some of the stuff I see in films now days. I do not hate either film. I don't just like TOD out of nostalgia, I actually enjoy it more than LC.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

I don't see any greater demand for "ultra dark, gritty and realistic" films.

The problem with the analogy of "...if TOD came out nowadays...People would be calling TOD the worst movie ever", is that TOD starred Harrison in his prime. Any Indy film released 27 years after ROTLA is going to have a hard time finding the right note to please a disparate audience.

For many fans KOTCS just didn't match nineteen years of expectation. Even so, it's far from "the worst movie ever made".
 
M

Mike Dowswell

New member
I think many of the criticisms that are coming from the film-making community and also film viewing community....are that KOTCS is simply not in the same style as the other three.....the look of the images aren't in keeping with the Douglas Slocombe and Spielberg look of the previous ones....and also the feel of threat was missing too....when the US soldiers are shot at the start of the movie we don't get to see it....whereas we would have in the previous three movies...

However the David Lean long takes are in here and that's great....

...but with the violence gone its a completely different style....and also the humor was much better in the previous three....in this one the humor is sometimes embarrassingly bad.

Janusz Kaminski, George Lucas and Steven Spielberg must have all agreed to go for the look that Janusz Kaminski wanted.....its a look thats very much his style.

..this movie as a result with its look and no violence is very different to the other movies.
 
M

Mike Dowswell

New member
A closer inspection and dissection of it all though brings out some interesting discussion points.

1) the USA men (the Russians shoot) are wearing fairly light khaki colored uniforms......but I mean you don't have to show blood or close ups....though whatever you do for a shooting of four men by surprise attack in broad sunny daylight is going to be violent.

2) There is a scene with men getting set on fire that is quite intense and that's more like the originals in tone.

3) The opening sequence with the hot rod was very well shot and much like the originals in tone.
 
O

ofacarpenter

New member
Udvarnoky said:
People are deliberately forgetting that this is a film with a 78% Rotten Tomatoes score that pulled in $800 million
Click to expand...

Something worth noting is that rotten tomatoes' percentage ratings are not based on the specific score out of 100 that each reviewer gives the film, and instead are based on the percentage of reviewers who gave the film a more positive than negative review. In other words, the 78% rating indicates that 78% of reviewers thought the film was more good than bad, not that they all thought it was "78% good."

In my opinion, part of what makes the film so infuriating (and so, basically unenjoyable) to watch is that it IS more good than bad. There are so many cool proposals not followed through with, and so many cool moments badly acted, and (weirdest of all) badly directed, that we spend the whole mediocre movie a glass wall away from a so much better one!
 
I

Indyfan82

Member
As the old saying goes, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I thought "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" was great!!! It was probably my top movie of 2008- top of my "must-see" movies that really left me thrilled and excited at the end! (It could also be because it was my first Indiana Jones movie I was able to see in theaters. I recently got to see "Raiders of the Lost Ark" in theaters though when it was rereleased to IMAX and that was awesome!!!!!!!!!!!!!)
Anyway, I know a lot of people, including Indy fans, didn't really like this movie. Though there are some who would say the same about the other three movies or TV show as well, etc. Perhaps I'm just easy to please, but the way I look at it is this: I try to look for the good in things that I can enjoy and just reject the rest. I try to follow 1 Thessalonians 5:21-22 "Test everything. Hold on to the good. Avoid every appearance of evil."
And while there is still some language I wish the Indiana Jones movies didn't have amongst other things, overall they are generally pretty clean action and adventure movies that usually have some good themes too.
And I would love to see a 5th. Indiana Jones movie if it actually is made- I just hope it's done sooner rather than later while Harrison Ford is still able to make such movies.
 
Temple Raider

Temple Raider

Active member
I think it probably was to a good degree and wouldn't have been so harsh if it hadn't come out so long after TLC. Had it been released maybe four or five years later, it probably would've still been regarded as disappointing, but the backlash I don't think would've been as bad.
 
U

Udvarnoky

Well-known member
You could argue that audience expectations would have been different if the movie had come out five years after Last Crusade, but certainly the movie itself would have been different as well.
 
R

Randy_Flagg

Well-known member
Mike Dowswell said:
3) The opening sequence with the hot rod was very well shot and much like the originals in tone.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, it had no relevance to the plot, and could have been omitted entirely.
I know it was done to set the time period, but did we need that? We already saw "1957" on the screen. Raiders didn't go out of its way to scream: "Hey!! Look!!! It's the 1930s!!!!! Cool, huh?!" But, for some reason, KOTCS felt the need to point out that it was the 1950s quite frequently in the first half of the film.
 
Vance

Vance

New member
In one sense, today?s topic is a bit like beating a dead horse. The fourth installment in the Indiana Jones movie series is a well-known disappointment. Millions of fans have echoed their disappointment in the film, enough so that it?s been cited as one reason why George Lucas is giving up film-making and seeking retirement. While it?s unfair to say that Crystal Skull was a terrible movie, it may be one of the most disappointing movies ever released. The real question is: ?How did the movie fail so spectacularly??

While much has been made of the ?nuke the fridge? meme, and it certainly did the movie no favors, I?m going to skirt that this time out and focus instead on what is really the weakest part of the film: the overall narrative. The real plot of the film can be summed up as ?Mutt Williams must recruit Indiana Jones to save his mother from Soviet Agents who are looking for the secret of the Crystal Skulls?. And that, honestly, becomes the main problem.

The plot of the movie is technically resolved about a third of the way in, where the Jones Boys meet up with Marion and have their reunion. The personal tension and character drama that the audience should be hooked with, as well as the primary motivation for the main characters, just completely disappear. Instead of throwing in a solid twist in that relationship and hooking the audience in deeper with Marion, the movie simply throws everything out there and calls it ?done?.

What?s left after that point is a hodge-podge of unfulfilled characters (particularly Mac and Irina), a poorly-explained threat (the Skull), poorly thought-out gags (the Tarzan yell), and a very long chase sequence which movies absolutely nothing along.

Worst yet, much of the dangling plot threads are just left hanging. The audience has so little invested in the characters of the movie by the end that when Mac makes his big sacrifice no one really cared. Even Indiana Jones himself seems utterly disinterested in what happens during the film?s climax. Like the audience, he?s more interested in figuring out his new family and the whole ?Soviet Chick versus the Alien? bit is dismissed with him simply walking away.

The failing of the overall narrative is really what kills the impression of the movie. There were bad gags in the previous three films, of course. There were bad character moments and some very iffy scenes and plot threads as well. But each movie also had great and motivated characters, emotional sequences, and clear tension throughout. By relying too much on empty actions sequences, gags and sub-par CGI to pad the movie, Crystal Skull let itself and its audiences down.
 
HenryJunior

HenryJunior

New member
Wow...

Possibly the best explanation of KOTCS, Vance, thank you.

I've always had trouble pinning down why KOTCS is the most lukewarm (IMO) of the series (other than the obvious pointed out before), because there were several things that should have worked well, but fell apart on screen. The cast was good (depending on which side of the Shia debate you are on) and we thought surely that Spielberg and George would be the perfect Yin and Yang like they were on the First 3 movies.

Too much hype :p
 
R

Raiders90

Well-known member
Vance said:
In one sense, today?s topic is a bit like beating a dead horse. The fourth installment in the Indiana Jones movie series is a well-known disappointment. Millions of fans have echoed their disappointment in the film, enough so that it?s been cited as one reason why George Lucas is giving up film-making and seeking retirement. While it?s unfair to say that Crystal Skull was a terrible movie, it may be one of the most disappointing movies ever released. The real question is: ?How did the movie fail so spectacularly??

While much has been made of the ?nuke the fridge? meme, and it certainly did the movie no favors, I?m going to skirt that this time out and focus instead on what is really the weakest part of the film: the overall narrative. The real plot of the film can be summed up as ?Mutt Williams must recruit Indiana Jones to save his mother from Soviet Agents who are looking for the secret of the Crystal Skulls?. And that, honestly, becomes the main problem.

The plot of the movie is technically resolved about a third of the way in, where the Jones Boys meet up with Marion and have their reunion. The personal tension and character drama that the audience should be hooked with, as well as the primary motivation for the main characters, just completely disappear. Instead of throwing in a solid twist in that relationship and hooking the audience in deeper with Marion, the movie simply throws everything out there and calls it ?done?.

What?s left after that point is a hodge-podge of unfulfilled characters (particularly Mac and Irina), a poorly-explained threat (the Skull), poorly thought-out gags (the Tarzan yell), and a very long chase sequence which movies absolutely nothing along.

Worst yet, much of the dangling plot threads are just left hanging. The audience has so little invested in the characters of the movie by the end that when Mac makes his big sacrifice no one really cared. Even Indiana Jones himself seems utterly disinterested in what happens during the film?s climax. Like the audience, he?s more interested in figuring out his new family and the whole ?Soviet Chick versus the Alien? bit is dismissed with him simply walking away.

The failing of the overall narrative is really what kills the impression of the movie. There were bad gags in the previous three films, of course. There were bad character moments and some very iffy scenes and plot threads as well. But each movie also had great and motivated characters, emotional sequences, and clear tension throughout. By relying too much on empty actions sequences, gags and sub-par CGI to pad the movie, Crystal Skull let itself and its audiences down.
Click to expand...

Hmm....I wouldn't agree with it being "one of the most disappointing movies ever."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top