The Indiana Jones & The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull Review (ALL Spoilers)
This is a SPOILER review page… or rather, SPOILER notes.
I’m not even going to post anything on this side of the fold. If you are ready to be SPOILER, proceed… if not, not.
You Have Been Warned!
I hardly know where to start…
THINGS THAT REALLY WORK – The motorcycle chase around the University of Chicago. It’s one of the few pieces in the movie that really fits the aesthetic of the series.
When Indy and Marion are back together, it’s great.
There’s nothing funnier than John Hurt dancing in front of a campfire.
I really like the many varieties of fast-moving dangerous natives and how they hide and emerge… though they all go away way too quickly.
I kinda love Spielberg doing a nuclear bomb for, probably, the first and last time of his career. The town being destroyed is funny and creepy (though in the back of my head, I kept expecting Indy to get hit with gamma rays). The only downside, really, is that it was so out of step with the rest of the film. (The refrigerator escape is another mixed bag… the kind of absurd joke that could work once in a film like this… but it is the first of many, unfortunately.)
THE FAMILY – Shia Le Beouf kinda makes sense on the surface. He is charismatic and funny.
But while he looks kind of like he could be the son of Indy and Marion, it becomes more and more apparent that he is too runt-y to be from that litter. And the film, surprisingly, reinforces this notion repeatedly by subtly making him the wimp.
For starters, he turns up on his motorcycle looking for all the world like a drag queen doing Marlon Brando. Then, he throws one punch in the diner fight scene… after being told to by Indy… then they run. He whines about his bike. He’s obsessed with his stupid hair. The only villain he gets to fight, really, is Irina Spalko, who he fights with a sword and who then punches him in the gut to some effect.
He’s a boy trying to act like a man.
It’s great to see Karen Allen and Marion Ravenswood again. They dressed her carefully and she looks good. The problem I have is that we don’t really have enough of Marion being her tough self before she succumbs to the excitement of being back in love with Indy… and once they are, the moments of recognition of that all shine, but the filmmakers didn’t make enough of it.
THE ON-AGAIN, OFF-AGAIN SIDEKICK – There is no bigger fan of Ray Winstone than myself. But besides not being given much to do here but scream out “Indy!” in a big, blustery barroom way, his character, Mac, is a screenplay disaster.
He’s the sidekick who we’ve just met… he’s the double agent… he gets one of the best laughs in the film by getting his nose punched (there is no indication of a break, though the idea is offered), but shortly after that, we are back to him being Indy’s pal and part of the gang… and just as fast, he is a villain once again.
I suppose that we could have someone who keeps changing sides and have it be funny or charming or threatening. But Mac is not. Mac is just lazy writing. Worse, there is no real reason for him to be in the movie at all. He is used as a device by which Indy, Mut, Marion, and John Hurt’s Professor Oxley are followed. But there must have been an alternative. After all, a genius like Blanchett’s Irina Spalko would probably have been able to come up with something to draw her to the highly magnetized crystal skull, right?
As they were going along as a group in the last run to the spaceship-in-waiting, I kept thinking… why is he in this movie? Never got a good answer.
IRINA SPALKO – Great opportunity… wasted.
Here you have a woman who desperately wants to acquire information. She works for the Communists… why? Does she put her desires ahead of her role? Does she enjoy hurting people? Who is this woman? They very intentionally made “the bad guy” one character here and hired The Great Cate, but besides dressing her in a very unattractive overalls and belt, they also kept her from being a really great character. It wouldn’t require a lot of dialogue.
The movie kinds of sets up a camaraderie with Indy and Irina. They are both archeologists of a kind. They are both a bit self-righteous. They both leave a wake. The conflict comes from what is different about them, but what is the same about them is what makes the conflict more interesting.
The scene that should have gone into the classics file of Indiana Jones movies, the sword fight between vehicles, loses much of its impact because it is so clearly a CG-supported sequence, giving up the excitement of real live stunts. On top of that, the schtick of Shia stretched between the cars and being pummeled in the crotch with trees is so lame!
I was no more thrilled when we get the crotch-eye view of Irina trying to stay away from the ants and crushing one between her knees. It was just so… not very clever. It gets a laugh… but it’s exactly the kind of thing that the older films in the series would have found a brilliant answer for.
I don’t want to quibble about little items like Dr. Jones not knowing Irina Spalko’s name after he learned it in Area 51. He’s generally a sponge for info, no?
JANUSZ – I think Kaminski is one of the most underrated cinematographers in the world… but here, it too often felt like him and not like Doug Slocombe. Some of the stuff Kaminski added was really great… but it’s often not of this series.
THE ALIENS – I am really cool with the idea of aliens. What really struck me is that the authors of the piece must have intended for the 12 aliens and the 13th, whose resurrection we are awaiting with the return of his skull, are stand-ins for Jesus and The Disciples. Interesting stuff. They were advanced and generous. They were brought down by man’s greed. And when “reactivated,” they become a collective conscious, which is probably someone’s philosophy (George?) ahead of organized religion. Of course, they can’t say that. The Ark of the Covenant and The Grail are okay… but Jesus as alien, not so much.
The thing for me is that when they finally get around to The Spaceship, it really feels like something right out of an old time serial. But they don’t really have that much fun with it. It’s almost as though the spaceship is self-evident and none of what it means has to be discussed ever again. This is funny material… and it just goes away.
Where is – and this is just one of those obnoxious outsider suggestions – the conversation between father and son about how replacing the head of a crystal alien who them merges with 12 other aliens and flies away in a flying saucer is just “one of those things” you see in that gig?
You have to do this stuff well, but you need to do it… you need to embrace what you set up.
THE FUCKING MONKEYS – A classic example of how CG corrodes a filmmaker’s discipline. How do you make Shia Le Beouf swinging through trees like Tarzan – a horrible idea on its own – even worse? Add a parade of CG monkeys.
The scary thing is that there is a moment when the monkeys almost work… when the monkey being smacked away is used as a coda to the scene. But no… real monkeys good… CG monkeys suck.
THE ANTS – This is another one of those examples of something that would be just fine if it was one of a kind in this film. It’s a completely CGed version of ideas that have been done in this series before. Nasty insects, eviscerated human flesh, a danger turning into a savior.
But like so much of the CG, it is different than the other films in that it is, by its nature, too much… too unreal. It’s one of those rare sequences in the series that really feels just like someone had a big idea and they rationalized doing it. It’s not organic.
Of course, it’s only a little less organic than a jeep running over a jeep (in CG) seconds before with the folks in the jeep being run over barely noticing that one of the most dangerous events of the film just happened.
THE WATERFALLS – Ironically, not a particularly CG event… but one that feels like the laziness of the CG filmmaker. Going down three waterfalls in a jeep with five people (four of whom are over 50), twice the same exact way and the third, not showing the landing… is a mess.
Either do it or don’t do it! This is exactly the kind of thing that was done brilliantly in the first three films and feels like a throwaway here.
THE PERIOD – I love the idea of taking the series into the late 50s. But too often, we lose any real sense of the period. All it takes is a line here or there. It’s not like we don’t have nuclear testing and Russians. It’s just that it never seems to be a part of Indy’s perception… outside of a very subtle “you don’t know who your friends are” from Jim Broadbent’s Dean Stanforth.
The Nazis make great villains. Maybe there was some sensitivity about calling out “Commie!” But that was the period. Again, I go back to the mirror between Indy and Irina. Perhaps ideologies don’t matter. That would actually be interesting and progressive. But it needs to be said to be said.
EPILOGUE
I’m sure I will come up with more stuff – and I know you all will – as days go by…. but it’s late and I’m tired of thinking about the film that I liked, but didn’t love. Out.
I loved the BDAs (Big Damn Ants). CG? Sure. But they weren’t nearly as bad as those monkeys. That’s the only CG thing that really stuck out to me.
Excellent, EXCELLENT analysis, DP. While your issues didn’t really *ruin* the film for me (and I don’t think they did for you either) you’re totally right on here. Except I did like the ants.
The CG monkeys are the Jar-Jar Binks of the film…and what the hell was the deal with those prarie dogs? But overall, a GREAT time at the movies.
I don’t know who was more responsible for the script — David Koepp (credited screenwriter) or George Lucas. If it was the former, Lucas and/or Spielberg should never hire him again; if the latter, someone needs to snatch George’s pen away before he does any more damage to his epic franchises.
Missed opportunities, a rushed and lazily-constructed plot, weak and sometimes incoherent character development (your on-again off-again sidekick assessment is right on), almost no charm (not Ford’s fault, by the way — no one could’ve delivered those lines with grace), poor attempts at humor (mediocre, at best), too absurd and over-the-top even for an Indiana Jones film (yeah, I’m thinking of the fridge at the beginning and those cute little gophers a la Caddyshack — what the hell were they thinking? I mean, it was good for an easy laugh, but at what expense? For a second it felt like I was watching a Pixar flick.
LaBeouf’s natural charm is underutilized (if used at all)… the kind of performances he gave in Transformers and Disturbia — that shifty, nervous, insecure thing he does so well — is absent, and I’m not finding a good reason why, in a formula film, they didn’t tap into it, let him shape the role himself. Instead of making him an awkward, period-personifying tough-guy (who I didn’t dislike, necessarily, but never really liked, either) they could’ve let his personality shine, add some 3rd-generation Henry Jones charm. Not sure why they went the greaser route with him, other than the whole greaser/socia scene, which I honestly could’ve done without (or seen played out through another side character).
I also wasn’t all that thrilled about the spy background they gave Indy. It made him official, somehow… a government man. Which is contrary to the whole image of Indiana Jones — a reluctant hero, the archaeology professor who gets wrangled into his adventures by sinister forces coupled with an insatiable curiousity for ancient artifacts. In fact, that whole interrogation scene felt forced, unnatural… disappointing.
Which was, in the end, sort of how I walked away. Disappointed. Yeah, I had high expectations going in. But I thought: it’s Spielberg… even his worst movies (ex: War of the Worlds) are still pretty solid and entertaining. It pains me to say it, but this is the worst film I’ve seen of his to date. And the only explanation I can fathom is that Lucas held him back — wouldn’t make some much-needed concessions on the script.
That said, the nostalgia factor made the experience bearable. My heart raced when I saw the hat fall out of the trunk in the opening scene, and I got a good laugh out of the snake/sand pit sequence. But yeah, despite the fun of having another Indy movie to watch, I almost wish he would’ve left it at three. It was like seeing Jordan come out of retirement for the second time, like watching The Phantom Menace all over again. Whatever magic Lucas used to have, he’s lost.
(Sorry, didn’t mean to post a whole article on your blog — went into it with the intention of writing a paragraph at most, then it sort of, yeah, turned out longer.)
I really, really enjoyed the first forty minutes or so of the film. Everything leading up to Indy and Mutt traveling was just wonderful. I gave the middle portion a pass because I felt the film was switching gears. But yeah, the whole car chase in the jungle sequence with the reversals (including the sadly realized Mac) is a complete mess. And when I say complete mess I don’t mean that with anger but with a dazed, “What the fuck?” grin. One minute you’re watching something cool, the next you’re groaning at Mutt swinging from the vines.
And what the fuck was with the construction of that portion of the chase? Cate gets the skull back and she speeds ahead of them. Mutt turns to Indy and says “She’s getting away.” Mutt gets caught in a vine, meets monkeys, swings from vines, then the film returns to the car chase…where Cate is CHASING Indy’s car toward the edge of a cliff. How did this come about? Why all of a sudden is she doing that? If it was her intention to finish them off regardless why the fuck would she speed away in the first place after snagging the skull? What the changed her mind? There’s something missing here.
I enjoyed the film though, even if I found it less wondrous the more it went along. Why not make the alien itself a little more original and awesome than just creating a scene that seemed to smell of self-reference (Cate’s dialog about the aliens collective consciousness seems cribbed from “Minority Report”).
“Raiders” was amazing because the filmmakers were paying homage to the serials of their childhood, and was relevant and fresh because it was a style and perspective unseen. It was like catching lightning in a bottle. It seemed to succeed so greatly because the filmmakers gave themselves over to the film. The first act of “Crystal Skull” has that same approach, and was wonderful because it gave the filmmakers something satirical to chew on, and through that perspective something relevant to build a story upon. It’s a disappointment that by the time the film arrives at the ending the filmmakers are paying homage more to themselves and not the serials they loved or the satire and themes they uncovered in the first act. It’s a fine action film that promised to be something far more unique and exhilarating than where it ends up.
I’m surprised after all that time in screenplay development they finally went with something as undercooked as this. None of the characters have unique relationships with each other. Everybody is just pretty much in the same boat at all times. Even giant character conflicts like seeing your love for the first time in 20 years or finding out you had a son, are just accepted with whipcrack speed. Winstone treats Jones the same when he’s bad and good. Lazy.
The movie also suffers greatly from not being on location. Apparently, the old farts wanted to stay near their families so they shot the whole thing in USA. The film, and filmmaking, really suffers from this decision. An Indiana Jones film should not have that airless quality that so many CG blockbusters have these days. Save for the opening shot, and the motorcycle chase, not once did I feel like they were actually outdoors. What works for Speed Racer (a far superior experiment) does not work for Indy.
This movie reeks of old people reliving former glories. Spielberg, Lucas, and Ford just had their Big Chill. Now can Steven finally kick George to the curb and continue where he left off with Munich?
I’m a huge Spielberg apologist and the work I’ve put in trying to convince snobs that he’s a director worth taking seriously evaporates in the face of sloppiness like this. Even Spielberg’s big blockbusters of late, (Minority Report, War of the Worlds) as flawed in the third act as they are, were mature and about something. This movie wasn’t just regression, it was suppression of everything he’s learned this decade. Easily his worst since The Lost World.
Also, Dave, one of the most beautiful sequences in Empire of the Sun, (Spielberg’s most underrated movie) involves Jim witnessing the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima, describing it as “God taking a photograph.” So, yeah, Indy is not Spielberg’s first atomic display.
What a pile of crap. Only marginally better than “Hook”. I don’t know if I’m more angry at Spielberg for enabling Lucas in another of his ridiculous story ideas or Lucas for letting his “other” classic franchise be ruined.
The nuclear test town was clever (the fridge was not), the jungle chase was marginally exciting (I enjoyed the swordplay, though was expecting Marion’s head to get lopped off at any moment).
But, the aliens! The aliens!!
It was a packed theatre, I sat next to a 10 or 11 year old kid who chuckled twice and groaned out loud at the gophers and I thought, man when I saw Raiders, I was sixteen years old and in total awe from start to finish.
I wanted to give the kid ten bucks and tell him to go see Iron Man.
Really, honestly, sadly, I think this was one of the worst films I’ve seen in years.
And can you believe it’s getting 79% at Rotten Tomatoes? Way, way too high. Looking back, Phantom Menace got 64% (also far too high, in my opinion). It’s sort of like watching the refs give no-calls to LeBron (or Jordan, back in the day).
The only possible explanation I can come up with: these reviewers are a bunch of Lucas fanboys hoping for an invite to dinner at Skywalker Ranch.
I absolutely agree with your assessment. There were terrific things in the movie but they were consistently overshadowed by the negatives that you expounded upon. Didn’t you also feel that the whole thing was paced slowly? Almost like they were inspired by Ford’s slower and more laconic take on Indy this round? That’s fine for the character but a disaster for the energy of this film. I saw it with a packed crowd this weekend and there was precious little excitement stirring in the audience. I’m thinking of certain scenes in particular, like the waterfalls. As you pointed out, in previous Indy films, a scene like that would have done something amazingly big or at least witty with the concept, and gone beyond just the surface of the narrative. I kept waiting for at least one character to just catch his/her breath and then say something pithy as they realize they have to go through the same damn thing again. And then again! Imagine what John Rhys-Davies would have done with a good line in that scene. But instead, there is virtually no wit. Just plotting. And bad characterization, like having John Hurt’s character being out-of-it throughout most of the movie, but somehow in the waterfalls scene, he manages to stay strong, not get hurt AND hold onto the Skull?! It is those kind of mistakes that indeed sink so much of this picture. All your points are spot on. I cannot help but wonder if Lucas, Spielberg and Ford are all just too old for this kind of thing. Or has modern, hyper-energized adventure storytelling rendered this kind of thing even more of a relic than the 40’s serials it’s spoofing? (Compare it with “Iron Man” a movie that has SO much exposition to get across and yet does it with an assured and swift pace!) Or perhaps it is just that Lucas has the same narrative problems he had with all the “Star Wars” sequels. He is no longer a great writer. He needed some help from Lawrence Kasdan here. Anyway, it was refreshing to read your honest piece. So many reviewers have held back because of warm feelings for the previous movies and thus have been unwilling to truly characterize this entry as a dog that won’t hunt. I love the Indiana Jones movies and wanted this one to be great like the others. Unfortunately, I am not sure it is even good.
Another review somewhere called this movie “…a film with a Frankenstein script,” and it shows. Clearly there are bits and pieces of ideas strung loosely together when a handful of ideas could have been dumped. The worst part of the film is from the quicksand to the final waterfall — twenty minutes of such lame over-the-top jokes and gags that completely take you out of the film.
Yet some portions of the movie, like the graveyard with the “living dead” are fantastic. For once it seemed as if Indy was doing some archaeology (if not a little rough around the edges).
All that being said, I still seemed to enjoy the film. It reminded me of “The Mummy” franchise, which is like saying The Beatles reminded me of the The Monkeys. But we had a great time at the theater despite vine-swinging and jeep-on-a-tree crap and Indy surviving a nuclear blast. 🙂