Kingdom of the Crystal Skull - initial impressions and casual discussion
- Thread starter Finn
- Start date
On second viewing...........
I was hoping that sitting through it again would have granted me a more favorable impression of the film, as it has done for some others. Unfortunately, this wasn't the case. Instead, on second viewing I walked out of the cinema, with a more objective understanding as to why this film was so disappointing for me.
It wasn't the accumulation of minor flaws that did it: The overuse of CGI in a couple scenes, the fridge escape scene, the underdevelopment of Oxley and Mac. I know I have the capacity to push elementary errors aside, as I have done for the previous films in this franchise. Really, if one is to judge any other movie in the history of cimema, with enough resolution, they are bound to find such flaws. Rather, I have really come to believe that the culprits in the case of IJKOTCS were a A) poor plot/mcmuffin and the B) de-emphasis of Indy.
A)
In the real world, ET's are hardly considered unlikely, by mainstream science. This is in contrast to the idea of God, familiar from the first three movies, which is a question that science does not, and cannot approach. So it should be expected that the introduction of ET's in IJKOTCS, would give it a different flavor. And even though the two can co-exist, they are not mutually exclusive, as suggested with KOTCS, the problem is that it all just becomes superfluous (And it does not help to use depictions/puzzles that look like they came off of a kinder-gardener's classroom window).
B)
Indy really did not seem to be much of a hero in this movie. Oxley and Mutt were nearly just as necessary for the mission, as Indy was. Come to think of it, the movie could have been called "Mutt Williams and the KOTCS", or "Professor Oxley and the KOTCS", and it would have almost been buyable.
I was hoping that sitting through it again would have granted me a more favorable impression of the film, as it has done for some others. Unfortunately, this wasn't the case. Instead, on second viewing I walked out of the cinema, with a more objective understanding as to why this film was so disappointing for me.
It wasn't the accumulation of minor flaws that did it: The overuse of CGI in a couple scenes, the fridge escape scene, the underdevelopment of Oxley and Mac. I know I have the capacity to push elementary errors aside, as I have done for the previous films in this franchise. Really, if one is to judge any other movie in the history of cimema, with enough resolution, they are bound to find such flaws. Rather, I have really come to believe that the culprits in the case of IJKOTCS were a A) poor plot/mcmuffin and the B) de-emphasis of Indy.
A)
In the real world, ET's are hardly considered unlikely, by mainstream science. This is in contrast to the idea of God, familiar from the first three movies, which is a question that science does not, and cannot approach. So it should be expected that the introduction of ET's in IJKOTCS, would give it a different flavor. And even though the two can co-exist, they are not mutually exclusive, as suggested with KOTCS, the problem is that it all just becomes superfluous (And it does not help to use depictions/puzzles that look like they came off of a kinder-gardener's classroom window).
B)
Indy really did not seem to be much of a hero in this movie. Oxley and Mutt were nearly just as necessary for the mission, as Indy was. Come to think of it, the movie could have been called "Mutt Williams and the KOTCS", or "Professor Oxley and the KOTCS", and it would have almost been buyable.
Jim Tigernuts
New member
I sure hope they bring back Indy as the main hero in Indy V! Teenage idols be screwed.
MolaRam2
New member
JD2008 said:
There was way too much focus on the secondary characters, and except for Marion, they all sucked. Mutt was just the kid from Transformers as a greaser that goes on an adventure, nothing too interesting there. Mac was very annoying with his constant side-switching, and he rarely says anything other than 'Jones' or 'Jonesy.' Why were we suppose to care about Mac when he died? Elsa was a Nazi and her death was far more emotional than the death of Mac. Professor Oxley is the Jar Jar of the Indy franchise. He was very goofy and annoying. The villians were pretty sucky, Indy had no great evil to battle in KOTCS.
It's almost as if the filmakers said, we will bring Ford back as Indiana Jones, but not really worry about putting effort into the script, action, or supporting characters, audiences will go for anything now days.
I have a hard time believing this movie was made for the fans. Common sense should tell Spielberg and Lucas that the fans don't want annoying characters and idiotic scenes. Fans wanted an old-school Indy adventure, not National Treasure 3 starring Indiana Jones.
Nurhachi1991
Well-known member
what? 
tastethecourage
Active member
Like I said in the other topic...
I feel as though the ending would have been much more powerful had there been no alien come to life at the end, but instead having the room spin faster and faster until some other-worldly force ended Spalko.....
THEN cut to the saucer rising from the city as Indy and the gang look on after they have escaped. It would have been more mysterious and not so over-the-top.
But that's just me.
I feel as though the ending would have been much more powerful had there been no alien come to life at the end, but instead having the room spin faster and faster until some other-worldly force ended Spalko.....
THEN cut to the saucer rising from the city as Indy and the gang look on after they have escaped. It would have been more mysterious and not so over-the-top.
But that's just me.
Agent Spalko
Guest
Could someone please explain where the $185 million budget went? I just don't see it on screen. It's obvious which sets were filmed on sound stages and over half of the movie's locations are CGI. Raiders was made for $20 mil and they actually had to PAY for all of those thousands of snakes to be flown in from other countries, not pay some animation nerd to make them on a computer. From what I've heard Lucas/Spielberg and Ford waived upfront salaries for a cut off the backend but only after the film grosses $400 mil domestically because of their distribution deal with Paramount or something. So where'd it go? Were they catering Dom Perignon and swordfish on the set everyday or something?
Legendary Times
New member
Jim Tigernuts said:
Yes. I'm 13.
All kidding aside, yes, me.
Legendary Times
New member
Michael24 said:
Well, because he's an archaeologist and trained to "read" corpses.
Please, put on your thinking caps for just a moment for chrissakes.
Crusade>Raiders
New member
He never fired his gun.
Legendary Times
New member
WeAreGoingToDie said:Forum user Agent Spalko really lives up to their username. Brutal and mean. Perfect choice.
Classic! Dead-on! WeAreGoingToDie, you are awesome!
Nurhachi1991
Well-known member
oh lol................ Yeah your right
Michael24
New member
Legendary Times said:
No need to get snippy. It just seemed like if the government wanted to keep an alien crash under wraps they'd keep the investigation "in-house" or something. That's all. I was just curious.
IH8Snakes said:
I also liked the alien and thought the handling of it was well done.
Agent Spalko
Guest
MolaRam2 said:
<object width="464" height="388" classid="clsid:d27cdb6e-ae6d-11cf-96b8-444553540000"><param name="movie" value="http://www2.funnyordie.com/public/flash/fodplayer.swf?7228" /><param name="flashvars" value="key=17b2bcc88b" /><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true" /><embed width="464" height="388" flashvars="key=17b2bcc88b" allowfullscreen="true" quality="high" src="http://www2.funnyordie.com/public/flash/fodplayer.swf?7228" type="application/x-shockwave-flash"></embed></object><noscript><a href="http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/17b2bcc88b">Indiana Jones Trailer</a> on <a href="http://www.funnyordie.com/">FunnyOrDie.com</a></noscript>
Salacious
New member
Well, just got back from seeing it for the first time.
Its pretty much a "meh" for me. I did enjoy the first half of the movie. The second half of the movie really lost me...not in confusion, but in general lack of dramatic tension and excitement. I think its got a bit cartoonish in places, even moreso than the other films. I didnt like any of the side characters. I especially didnt like Ox or Mac....very very redundant characters...didnt need to see them at all.
Harrison Ford is still Indy! And thats what really makes me want to like this movie...but the villians are not the greatest, the last act of the movie is not the greatest, and the ending was a very big "meh".
I also thought the music was very very weak. I cant believe I am admitting this, but I thought John Williams didnt really do a very good job here. I am sure I am in the minority here about that though. I will have to hear the complete soundtrack, but these are just my initial impressions.
In the end...the first half was great. There were moments in the movie that felt Indy-ish...but they were far too few. The rest of the movie felt like the mummy movies.
Oh, but for those claiming that CGI ruined the movie for them...I really didnt notice it all that much. The animals/insects in the movie didnt look that great though....and were definately a weak spot in the movie in comparison to the other films.
But I did enjoy the Indy Star Wars reference...one of the few moments that I actually LOLed in the theatre.
Wasnt as slapstick as I feared, but was very corny. The Indy escape from the opening act was ridiculous...the very end of the escape. Aside from that, I did enjoy the opening act...liked it better than LC's opening act.
And yeah, I miss the Nazi's. These Ruskies were **** poor, and Cate Blanchett is the worst Indy villian out of the movies...which was unexpected.
Here is my rank and scores based on my initial viewing experience:
1. Raiders 10/10. A masterpiece of film in all areas. One of the best movies ever made on all levels. Period.
2. TOD 9/10. Great escapism. Great fun. Great adventure. Great action. Great humour. Great sets. Great villian. Great score. Great Indy. Its just great!
3. LC. 7.5/10. Fun movie. Sean Connery rules. His scenes with Ford are what makes this movie work. Most of the action is too lighthearted and slapstick. Decent last act though. Perfect ending to the trilogy. Fun and satisfying, but Connery stole the show IMO. Good score by John Willaims.
4. KOTC. 6/10. Ok movie. Fun in parts, slow in others. Harrison Ford makes this movie work. He can still play Indy convincingly. Very very weak side characters...all of them. Action was ok, but not exciting. Very corny moments in the movie. Good first half of the movie, bad last half of the movie. Ending was very very weak. Subpar score and the villians were **** poor. CGI wasnt too bad. Not sure if the 50's B movie feel works for Indy as a whole, but thats not the reason why this movie is last on my list. Shia didnt ruin the movie...he was ok, but was really not needed. Should have been Indy and the female love interest as his sidekick...thats all that was really needed IMO. The rest just really got in the way.
Well, not sure if I want Indy 5. I definately do NOT want Mutt Williams and the adventure of bore. Shia is not an action/adventure star. Sorry. Just not intersting enough.
But I still do hope Indy 5 with Harrison Ford as the lead can get made...because I really dont want it to end like this...just kinda unsatisfying as a whole.
Its pretty much a "meh" for me. I did enjoy the first half of the movie. The second half of the movie really lost me...not in confusion, but in general lack of dramatic tension and excitement. I think its got a bit cartoonish in places, even moreso than the other films. I didnt like any of the side characters. I especially didnt like Ox or Mac....very very redundant characters...didnt need to see them at all.
Harrison Ford is still Indy! And thats what really makes me want to like this movie...but the villians are not the greatest, the last act of the movie is not the greatest, and the ending was a very big "meh".
I also thought the music was very very weak. I cant believe I am admitting this, but I thought John Williams didnt really do a very good job here. I am sure I am in the minority here about that though. I will have to hear the complete soundtrack, but these are just my initial impressions.
In the end...the first half was great. There were moments in the movie that felt Indy-ish...but they were far too few. The rest of the movie felt like the mummy movies.
Oh, but for those claiming that CGI ruined the movie for them...I really didnt notice it all that much. The animals/insects in the movie didnt look that great though....and were definately a weak spot in the movie in comparison to the other films.
But I did enjoy the Indy Star Wars reference...one of the few moments that I actually LOLed in the theatre.
Wasnt as slapstick as I feared, but was very corny. The Indy escape from the opening act was ridiculous...the very end of the escape. Aside from that, I did enjoy the opening act...liked it better than LC's opening act.
And yeah, I miss the Nazi's. These Ruskies were **** poor, and Cate Blanchett is the worst Indy villian out of the movies...which was unexpected.
Here is my rank and scores based on my initial viewing experience:
1. Raiders 10/10. A masterpiece of film in all areas. One of the best movies ever made on all levels. Period.
2. TOD 9/10. Great escapism. Great fun. Great adventure. Great action. Great humour. Great sets. Great villian. Great score. Great Indy. Its just great!
3. LC. 7.5/10. Fun movie. Sean Connery rules. His scenes with Ford are what makes this movie work. Most of the action is too lighthearted and slapstick. Decent last act though. Perfect ending to the trilogy. Fun and satisfying, but Connery stole the show IMO. Good score by John Willaims.
4. KOTC. 6/10. Ok movie. Fun in parts, slow in others. Harrison Ford makes this movie work. He can still play Indy convincingly. Very very weak side characters...all of them. Action was ok, but not exciting. Very corny moments in the movie. Good first half of the movie, bad last half of the movie. Ending was very very weak. Subpar score and the villians were **** poor. CGI wasnt too bad. Not sure if the 50's B movie feel works for Indy as a whole, but thats not the reason why this movie is last on my list. Shia didnt ruin the movie...he was ok, but was really not needed. Should have been Indy and the female love interest as his sidekick...thats all that was really needed IMO. The rest just really got in the way.
Well, not sure if I want Indy 5. I definately do NOT want Mutt Williams and the adventure of bore. Shia is not an action/adventure star. Sorry. Just not intersting enough.
But I still do hope Indy 5 with Harrison Ford as the lead can get made...because I really dont want it to end like this...just kinda unsatisfying as a whole.