I still like it!

[Indy's Fist]

Tomorrow's Father's Day. I think I'll celebrate by watching KOTKS & TOD!

 

[deckard24]

I think it will be. For years I heard people say TOD was a horrible film, and then KOTCS came out and those same people are saying that "the original 3 films were classic and KOTCS sucks". In another 10 years it may be seen differently. Shia will be a bigger star and new fans will see the films for the first time.

People have issues with the alien thing, yet the same people will tell you that Close Encounters, ET and similar films are great. They probably watch shows like UFO Hunters & stuff too. I think they just have an idea of what they think an Indy film should be and don't see aliens as supernatural.

Even the new Transformers film has a plot similar to KOTCS with the Decepticons having assisted with the pyramids in Egypt & stuff. I wonder what people will say about that?

I think you might be right, as the years go by Skull will probably be looked at a bit more favorably. TOD and LC are perfect examples of this, as both were subpar compared to Raiders, but now are looked at as classics. The only problem is Skull seems to be considered even worse then both of them, so who knows where it will be ranked years from now.

 

[sandiegojones]

The only problem is Skull seems to be considered even worse then both of them, so who knows where it will be ranked years from now.

I think it'll gain acceptance over time. The gap between films and the sci-fi nature of the macguffin made it too strange for some to like a first I think. Quite a few people have warmed to it. It would have helped if certain elements had not been seen in other films recently too (like the artifacts and treasure in the temple that was a lot like the end of National Treasure).

KOTCS has the Indy formula, but the vibe is a lot different than the other films for a number of reasons (age, setting, cinematography, etc). It also lacks any real surprises. I guess it'll come down to whether people like that it's unique from the other 3 (or maybe 4) or not.

If I had to guess, a fifth Indy film would probably be more like Raiders or Last Crusade. Millions of people have been exposed to the old testament through sources even other than the bible even, so their interest in the macguffin is deeper and because many people are "believers" they do not have to suspend their disbelief as much as is required for aliens perhaps.

 

[Darth Vile]

I think it'll gain acceptance over time. The gap between films and the sci-fi nature of the macguffin made it too strange for some to like a first I think. Quite a few people have warmed to it. It would have helped if certain elements had not been seen in other films recently too (like the artifacts and treasure in the temple that was a lot like the end of National Treasure).

KOTCS has the Indy formula, but the vibe is a lot different than the other films for a number of reasons (age, setting, cinematography, etc). It also lacks any real surprises. I guess it'll come down to whether people like that it's unique from the other 3 (or maybe 4) or not.

If I had to guess, a fifth Indy film would probably be more like Raiders or Last Crusade. Millions of people have been exposed to the old testament through sources even other than the bible even, so their interest in the macguffin is deeper and because many people are "believers" they do not have to suspend their disbelief as much as is required for aliens perhaps.

Firstly, just for the record... I quite like the movie. It scores a "solid to good" action/adventure rating on my Indy scale (but I DON'T love it). Saying that, I think the movie has quite a few issues, some self inflicted within production, some as a result/natural consequence of working within Indy mythology (and trying to capture a period movie with a 1980's style vibe).

Being uber critical, I actually think that the alien Macguffin is the least of KOTCS problems (although it did give some an excuse to have a downer on the movie before it opened). Ultimately (IMHO), it was the application of the alien element (particularly in the dénouement) that went awry, and not necessarily the concept itself.

 

[StoneTriple]

After a year I have watched KOTCS several times, about ten. I have read may of the posts here and elsewhere. I have tried to understand the perspective of those who don't like it. That said, I still can't not like KOTCS. I still see a fun IJ adventure. I have tried but just can't find the flaws that so many others claim to have seen, or at the very least let the flaws bring the whole movie down as other have. If that were the case I'd have to break down the other IJ films and maybe they wouldn't seem as good as I like to remember.

Well done. As has been discussed (as well as demonstrated with screen caps & examples) ad nauseum the past year, Kingdom fits just fine with the other two sequels. If anything, Raiders is the odd man out. It is less comical and less over the top than Temple, Crusade, & Kingdom. And as Darth mentions just after you, the same forgiving eye can be applied to all of them and (to me, at least) it should.

I also agree with Avid - Kingdom was a breath of fresh air.

 

[StoneTriple]

Tomorrow's Father's Day. I think I'll celebrate by watching KOTKS & TOD!

You, sir, are on to something. I may do the same thing myself.
While wearing my Kingdom T-shirt. <--- Yeah, that's what I said.

 

[sandiegojones]

Firstly, just for the record... I quite like the movie. It scores a "solid to good" action/adventure rating on my Indy scale (but I DON'T love it). Saying that, I think the movie has quite a few issues, some self inflicted within production, some as a result/natural consequence of working within Indy mythology (and trying to capture a period movie with a 1980's style vibe).

Being uber critical, I actually think that the alien Macguffin is the least of KOTCS problems (although it did give some an excuse to have a downer on the movie before it opened). Ultimately (IMHO), it was the application of the alien element (particularly in the dénouement) that went awry, and not necessarily the concept itself.

Hey, I love it too, but every criticism I have heard from my peers has to do with the alien plot. They think the action and stuff is fine. Online all I mostly hear is "Shia sucks and the monkeys are lame". I think in the future Shia may be accepted more as a star and perhaps people will stop letting a few seconds of a movie ruin the whole thing for them.

 

[featofstrength]

it was fun, and it like it better than the Last Crusade

 

[KarmicCurse]

This thread is such a breath of fresh air! I've liked this movie from the start, accepting its flaws and all. After another recent viewing I find that I like it just as much, if not more, than before.

While I can understand, and accept, the fact that many and even most may not like it, I can't understand the intensity of the vitriol against it. I think it's just one of those things where it's cool in the zeitgeist to pretend to hate it.

It's rare that an action movie leaves me satisfied these days. Maybe I'm just getting older. But KOTCS had a great sense of awe to it. While I was initially jarred by the aliens, I now find the weaving of the aliens into the history, art, and architecture of the natives to be absolutely awe-inspiring and truly Indy-worthy. Perhaps if we had never seen their faces and had just seen the spectacular scene with the temple crumbling and the saucer lifting off it would have been less jarring.

I think perhaps the whole red-scare, flying saucers, and psychic warfare (yes there is some truth to that) which was part of the time went over many people's heads.

The movie also had some of the most beautiful/creepy sets ever made for film and was well shot. I think by far what makes it work is its breezy pacing. I've rarely seen an action movie that knows how to slow down for exposition and pump the adrenaline for action as masterfully as this one.

I think the much berated atom bomb scene was actually a very clever concept. I just wish the escape had been handled a bit more plausibly. The only truly cringe-worthy moment was the Tarzan bit.

I didn't want this to sound like yet another review but I think I needed to vent a little with other fans. Bring on 5!

 

[Wilhelm]

I think KOTCS is the perfect final of the saga.The hat scene in the wedding is a great way of closing the series. From Indy's very first adventure in Utah 1912 with Fedora and the hat to the wedding.

 

[graz]

I watched it with the Wife again last night and it gets better every time I watch it. I can honestly say there is only one bit I really don't like, and that's the flying saucer at the end. It was a step too far IMO. However, since it was only a couple of minutes in a 2 hour film I can gloss over it.

Otherwise I still think its a blast and we laughed alot.

 

[Wilhelm]

I like the old fashioned flying saucer and the idea that the temple was constructed over the saucer. The idea of the lake erasing any trace of Akator is great, it's a story that only we, the audience, will know.

I also like that the whole adventure will be a secret, and not with Eisenhower's medals or papers talking about Indy (Darabont's draft). That gives a more realistic feel.

I don't like the extreme close up of the alien. I would prefer more light and not seeing the alien at all, only in silhouette.

 

[bennihana123]

I would prefer more light and not seeing the alien at all, only in silhouette.

Exactly. They could have handled the aliens differently so they remain a mystery by not showing the face or the complete alien.

 

[Indy's Fist]

I think one thing many people forget is that the alien is never really seen by Indy & his friends, this leaves it a mystery to them. Now Spalko got to see the dead alien in the tent scene & of course the alien at the end. But the alien at the end makes it's apperance after Indy & co. leave the chamber. The only thing Indy is left with is so shrowded alien images and the sighting of the UFO at the end. This stays close to the ending of Raiders, as Indy & Marion kept their eys shut during the Ark opening.

I will grant most that the "nuked fidge" was a bit much, but looking back at the other Indy films it's not THAT over the top. As far as Mutt swinging from vines, well if I can watch Indy swing on his whip then this is not a streach. In fact it's a fine homage to old Tarzan movies too.

 

[PoeticRocker]

Exactly. They could have handled the aliens differently so they remain a mystery by not showing the face or the complete alien.

Okay what about the "angels" appearing near the end of Raiders? Angels and aliens are both the same fiction to me. There is nothing mysterious about about either since they're based solely on human illustrations in my opinion.

 

[Darth Vile]

Okay what about the "angels" appearing near the end of Raiders? Angels and aliens are both the same fiction to me. There is nothing mysterious about about either since they're based solely on human illustrations in my opinion.

I think conceptually you can argue that they are similar. However, I'd say that Raiders is more successful in keeping an air of suspense and mystery in its dénouement (you are never really sure about what's happening). The reveal of the Ark's powers is somewhat more "classy" and imaginative, and even after all these years, is still a very clever piece of cinema (IMHO).

 

[The Stranger]

Well, don't get me wrong...

I think what bothers me most about fan reaction is they compare Mutt to Jar Jar Binks & hate the alien aspect. First, I'd rather see ten movies with Mutt Williams that ten minutes with Jar Jar! Second, I can't understand why so many people can consider the Ark ghosts, Sankara stones powers & Holy grail/False Holy Grail powers to be believable, yet aliens stupid.

It's not a matter of Jar Jar and the aliens.
It's just a matter of how the film was written.
Let me now bring you a simple example. It's called "Indiana Jones and the Infernal Machine".

Its plot is completely centered on aliens, and still it is probably one of the best and most intriguing Indiana Jones stories ever. I rate it even far better than the one about Atlantis (and I am a BIG, VERY BIG point-and-click-adventures fan, but anyway, it's just my personal opinion).
That videogame had a story that was simply perfect, and was even capable of dealing with massive amounts of supernatural elements, without ever feeling "too much" or "out of place". Not one single time.

That said, I still can't not like KOTCS. I still see a fun IJ adventure. I have tried but just can't find the flaws that so many others claim to have seen, or at the very least let the flaws bring the whole movie down as other have.

Well, mate, it's not that we claim to have seen some supposed flaws. It's just that THERE ARE dozens of flaws. And some of them are simply TOO EVIDENT to be ignored. In general, I think one can summarize the problems of the film with this (damned long) list:

Too many un-necessary scenes (the atomic bomb explosion, the quicksand scene, the Tarzan tribute, the waterfalls, probably some others that I can't remember at the moment). All of them contribute to slow down the pace of the film without a good reason, while at the same time providing some of the most absurd, ridiculous, trash moments in the entire film saga.

Definitely too many un-needed characters (Mutt, Mac, Oxley). The protagonists are just too many for a two hours long film. Undeniable. Then there is not enough time to develop their backgrounds convincingly, not enough time to make them at least appear interesting. As a result, they are all flat. They are all cartoonish. The one that was developed better was also the one that was needed the less (Mutt). Not to mention that his inclusion literally forced the film to sacrifice the most important and interesting aspect, the reintroduction of Marion.

A couple of simply bad choices they made. Why, I say why the Hell have they ever decided to show us an alien corpse and the freaking Area 51, all within the first ten minutes of the film??? Why??
I think to most of the fans who had at least heard about the "Saucer Men from Mars" script (presumably almost all), the film started to sink down in that exact moment.

Tons of poor and uninspired dialogues.

Some really big, embarassing errors and plot holes...

1) Gunpowder is NOT magnetic. Still one of the key scenes at the beginning of the film is totally driven by that assumption. It's the very first scene to introduce the plot, and it's all based on something WRONG. How could that be??

2) How could Indy and Mutt find the cemetery and the tomb of Orellana, given that the only clue they had at their disposal was an unclear glyph on a floor??

3) When Indy and the others finally arrive to the Inca temple, it is clearly shown that the only way to enter is to activate the mechanism that opens the four great pillars at the top of the pyramid. It is a rudimental mechanism, probably an alien antenna, that has been EVIDENTLY conceived to be used just once, since re-charging all that sand and re-positioning the pillars would be a completely impossible job for the Ugha guardians to do.
But, if Orellana and his conquistadores managed to enter the temple, this means that they already should have activated it, centuries ago.

4) How could Orellana actually ENTER the alien spaceship, when it is CLEARLY shown that the only way to do it is BEING an alien or at least ALREADY HAVING an alien skull?? How could Orellana ultimately enter and steal the skull, if he didn't have it already?? Does it make any sense??


No... just no...
"Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" was indeed one of the worse films of the last years. It was written so damn poorly, I think even a boy could have invented something much better. And that's why we can't like it, as opposed to the first three films, that were authentic jewels in comparison.

NOTE: if you read this post, than YOU are a freaking hardcore fan!! Yeah!!!

 

[bennihana123]

I think conceptually you can argue that they are similar. However, I'd say that Raiders is more successful in keeping an air of suspense and mystery in its dénouement (you are never really sure about what's happening). The reveal of the Ark's powers is somewhat more "classy" and imaginative, and even after all these years, is still a very clever piece of cinema (IMHO).

Exactly. IMO, aliens are the most realistic 'mysterious force' in the Indy movies. A knight that is hundreds of years old and magic rocks that spontaneously combust are complete fantasy while aliens may very well exist.

It's just that one shot where it looks at Spalko where the air of mystery surrounding the aliens is just destroyed. It's almost comical.

In Raiders, you're unsure of what is happening, and its a mysterious force that melts Toht's face. In KotCS, its all laid out for you. That's how I see it.

 

[Indy's Fist]

It's not a matter of Jar Jar and the aliens.
It's just a matter of how the film was written.
Let me now bring you a simple example. It's called "Indiana Jones and the Infernal Machine".

Its plot is completely centered on aliens, and still it is probably one of the best and most intriguing Indiana Jones stories ever. I rate it even far better than the one about Atlantis (and I am a BIG, VERY BIG point-and-click-adventures fan, but anyway, it's just my personal opinion).
That videogame had a story that was simply perfect, and was even capable of dealing with massive amounts of supernatural elements, without ever feeling "too much" or "out of place". Not one single time.
I refuse to let my possitive thread by spoiled by those who don't like KOTCS. This is a possitive KOTCS thread, let's keep it that way.



Well, mate, it's not that we claim to have seen some supposed flaws. It's just that THERE ARE dozens of flaws. And some of them are simply TOO EVIDENT to be ignored. In general, I think one can summarize the problems of the film with this (damned long) list:

Too many un-necessary scenes (the atomic bomb explosion, the quicksand scene, the Tarzan tribute, the waterfalls, probably some others that I can't remember at the moment). All of them contribute to slow down the pace of the film without a good reason, while at the same time providing some of the most absurd, ridiculous, trash moments in the entire film saga.

Definitely too many un-needed characters (Mutt, Mac, Oxley). The protagonists are just too many for a two hours long film. Undeniable. Then there is not enough time to develop their backgrounds convincingly, not enough time to make them at least appear interesting. As a result, they are all flat. They are all cartoonish. The one that was developed better was also the one that was needed the less (Mutt). Not to mention that his inclusion literally forced the film to sacrifice the most important and interesting aspect, the reintroduction of Marion.

A couple of simply bad choices they made. Why, I say why the Hell have they ever decided to show us an alien corpse and the freaking Area 51, all within the first ten minutes of the film??? Why??
I think to most of the fans who had at least heard about the "Saucer Men from Mars" script (presumably almost all), the film started to sink down in that exact moment.

Tons of poor and uninspired dialogues.

Some really big, embarassing errors and plot holes...

1) Gunpowder is NOT magnetic. Still one of the key scenes at the beginning of the film is totally driven by that assumption. It's the very first scene to introduce the plot, and it's all based on something WRONG. How could that be??

2) How could Indy and Mutt find the cemetery and the tomb of Orellana, given that the only clue they had at their disposal was an unclear glyph on a floor??

3) When Indy and the others finally arrive to the Inca temple, it is clearly shown that the only way to enter is to activate the mechanism that opens the four great pillars at the top of the pyramid. It is a rudimental mechanism, probably an alien antenna, that has been EVIDENTLY conceived to be used just once, since re-charging all that sand and re-positioning the pillars would be a completely impossible job for the Ugha guardians to do.
But, if Orellana and his conquistadores managed to enter the temple, this means that they already should have activated it, centuries ago.

4) How could Orellana actually ENTER the alien spaceship, when it is CLEARLY shown that the only way to do it is BEING an alien or at least ALREADY HAVING an alien skull?? How could Orellana ultimately enter and steal the skull, if he didn't have it already?? Does it make any sense??


No... just no...
"Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" was indeed one of the worse films of the last years. It was written so damn poorly, I think even a boy could have invented something much better. And that's why we can't like it, as opposed to the first three films, that were authentic jewels in comparison.

NOTE: if you read this post, than YOU are a freaking hardcore fan!! Yeah!!!

Do you really want me to point out every error in every Indy movie? I could make a list as long or longer for each movie.
My point is there are as many errors, contridictions, plot holes, bad acting, silly action scenes,etc,etc,etc in every Indy movie, yes even "Raiders".

Again, as I have said I considered all these things from previous threads and I still like KOTCS. If I looked at it as you have then I might not enjoy any Indy movies.

 

[Darth Vile]

Do you really want me to point out every error in every Indy movie? I could make a list as long or longer for each movie.
My point is there are as many errors, contridictions, plot holes, bad acting, silly action scenes,etc,etc,etc in every Indy movie, yes even "Raiders".

Again, as I have said I considered all these things from previous threads and I still like KOTCS. If I looked at it as you have then I might not enjoy any Indy movies.

I think 'The Stranger' likes to conveniently forget some of the similar issues in the other movies. If the retracting staircase defies belief, what about all the other booby traps that defy logic e.g. spring loaded spikes that work on light/refraction (Raiders). At least one could excuse the feasibility of Akator by stating "built by aliens"... but how the hell did the Hovitos (or their ancestors) manage to build a temple that has better security than The Bank of England???