Come in and demo ANY Harley of your dreams and we'll give you $20 bucks!
Houston, TX 77014
Here's your hat, Indy, but, really, what's your hurry? Because 19 years after the Last Crusade that clearly wasn't, and 15 years after the old man joined Young Indiana Jones on the small screen to recount his glory days blowing horns with Sidney Bechet, it's almost unfathomable that this hoary mishmash is the best that George Lucas and Steven Spielberg could cough up.
Have we learned nothing about disturbing dusty relics and mussing with primordial remains? These only lead to trouble — melted faces, some crazy dude sticking his fist in your chest and, well, more melting faces. This time, though, an even worse fate lies ahead for trampling trespassers: National Treasure by way of The X-Files, only not as pleasurable as so dreadful a coupling would suggest. Bury thyself, Dr. Jones, and pray no one disturbs the corpse in this or any other millennium.
From humdrum start to shrugging finish, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull bears almost no resemblance to its three predecessors: It's absent the spark and spirit of Raiders of the Lost Ark, the grown-up menace and slapdash comedy of Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom and the loose-limbed effervescence and emotional jolts of Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade. It's hard to tell whether Spielberg and Lucas are trying too hard or not trying at all — the thing's such a mess, such an unmitigated disaster, that damned is the scholar stuck with the unfortunate task of deciphering this cynical, clinical gibberish in decades to come.
Much has been made of Lucas and Spielberg, and a cadre of screenwriters (including the solely credited David Koepp), pushing the franchise into the late 1950s — away from the Nazis and biblical collectors' items and toward the Russians and ETs. Early word suggested a film verging on summer camp, as creaky ol' Indy (Harrison Ford, looking not a day over 62) donned fedora and whip and Cate Blanchett slipped into dominatrix bob-cut bangs and borscht-scented accent for some outer-space trip flavored with the era's grade-Z conventions, just as the first films proffered yellowed pulp cliffhangers and widescreen smirks. But Crystal Skull is no fun at all — not for a single second, not even accidentally. Not even with Shia LaBeouf terribly miscast as Marlon Brando as the Wild One. (The Mild One? Sure, fine.)
The dialogue's drab when not absolutely dumb; the actors seem lost if not outright listless; the scant action sequences appear to have been filmed entirely in front of green screens, suggesting a movie shot during breaks from lunch catered in a studio boss's office. (Is anyone sure producer Lucas didn't actually direct?) And the storyline's a bunch of convoluted mumbo and pointless jumbo having to do with Russians and mind control and the mythical golden South American city of El Dorado, which, according to The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, may have been constructed by "visitors" who taught the locals how to, um, farm. Twenty years between offerings, and this is all that the A-team could come up with? Close Encounters of the Turd Kind?
"I'm making this up as I go," said Indiana Jones 27 long years ago, and Raiders possessed the kineticism of the improvised sprawled across myriad continents. Temple of Doom was more precise, from its beautifully choreographed opening sequence to its roller-coaster ride through a mine shaft — best sequence in the series, hands (and heads!) down. And for all its flaws as a Raiders rehash, at least Last Crusade allowed plenty of room in which Ford and Sean Connery could play a rousing game of comedic tag.
Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is as joyless as its predecessors were blissful: Its sole intention seems to be the launching of a new franchise with LaBeouf's Mutt as heir to his father's fedora. And no, it spoils nothing to give away that LaBeouf is the son of Indiana Jones and Karen Allen's Marion Ravenwood, who appears late in the film and serves little function other than to grin like a schoolgirl at the professor who got away.
There is one rather brilliant sequence, set in a model suburbia that serves as an Army testing ground for nuclear bombs. We're reminded, in a blinding flash, that the Indiana Jones who bested the Nazis is no match for the atomic age. But random asides aside (including a few mentions of government witch hunts), the movie has no interest in exploring the morality of 1950s America or the mortality of Indiana Jones. It's just an exercise in creating instant nostalgia for boxed sets on sale at a Big Box near you. There are even references to episodes of Young Indiana Jones, about as close as the film gets to clever. (One sight gag, involving a familiar relic, didn't even elicit a chuckle amongst an amped-up preview audience last weekend.)
Still, Indy lumbers forward, surviving not only the copious attacks on his age — "What're you, like, 80?" asks a sneering Mutt upon introduction — but also one more chase in a hijacked truck carrying the key to global domination. This being a George Lucas movie, the dangers are almost entirely computer-generated now; the climactic pursuit through a South American jungle looks like it was shot on the forest moon of Endor, complete with ferocious CG monkeys. The monkeys, however, fare better than Blanchett, who has absolutely no idea what to do with her role: She's equal parts evil and incompetent, and she's the least dangerous villain Indiana Jones has ever faced. Turns out that George Lucas and Steven Spielberg are far more threatening foes.
I find it fascinating that less than 1% of the movie going population, including the oh so self important critics, didn't like the new Indie film. The ticket sales are now up 300 million. Millions of people can't be too wrong. I actually liked it quite a bit. It was very fun. Mr. Wilonsky must be a dead fish if he didn't have any fun, "But Crystal Skull is no fun at all � not for a single second, not even accidentally." Whatever. Does he just have a stick up his ass or what? And Shia was perfectly cast for his part. Though I will agree that Cate Blanchett was kind of odd. "I'm British! No, I'm Russian! No wait, I'm British!" LOL!!
Oh looky looky, the numbers are in. We have more proof that the word of the reviewers don't mean squat. 'Indiana Jones' earns $56 million in first 2 days Sunday, May 25, 2008 12:54:16 AM He may be older, but Indiana Jones is still finding box office treasure. Paramount's "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull," the fourth film in the action-adventure series starring Harrison Ford, earned $56 million in its first two days, Media By Numbers president Paul Dergarabedian said. After earning $25 million in its Thursday debut, the Steven Spielberg-directed movie brought in another $31 million Friday. "These are very solid numbers, no question about it. The fact that earnings went up on the second day is a good sign," Dergarabedian said. "Whether it's on pace to beat "Pirates'" numbers from last Memorial Other Entertainment Photos 'Indiana Jones' earns $56 million in first 2 days 165 Day remains to be seen." Last year, "Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End" set the record for a Memorial Day weekend opening, earning $153 million including Thursday night preview grosses. "Indiana Jones" will need a strong weekend finish to top the year's biggest hit so far, "Iron Man," which pulled in $98.6 million domestically in its first weekend. The film opened early Thursday in 4,260 theaters, according to Media By Numbers. "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull," the first film in 19 years about the archaeologist-adventurer, premiered at the Cannes Film Festival this month to tepid reviews. ------ On the Net: http://www.mediabynumbers.com
See better review for the people who matter, without all the pointless fluff this guy like to ramble about: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ShadowMoonClan/message/692
Once again we have glaring proof why people should never listen to the critiques. Reviewers like this obvious moron don't have to pay for their tickets. They just go to all the movies for free depending on whatever free passes they have for that month. Half the time its not even a movie that they're interested in. This guy, just like the others who review for the Houston Press, likes to ramble on about a bunch of crap that has nothing to do with the movie they've seen. No Cate Blanchett was not perfect in her part, but the worst thing about her performance was that she couldn't decide which accent she wanted to use. No she wasn't a great villain, but also I hardly consider her character as the primary villain even though that may have been the intention. The villain(s) was the skull and also you could say the Russians in general. This reviewer makes way too many references to the past movies, and they're not even correct. First of all the "Last Crusade" refers to the Last Crusade of the Knights who searched for the Grail. Second, everyone knows that The Temple of Doom was a terrible movie. Only the last 30 minutes of the film are worth watching and the stunts weren't even real. He complains so much about CGI and green screen effects, half of that movie was shot using miniatures and BLUE screen. Raiders and Last Crusade were equally fantastic movies, anyone who couldn't see that just shouldn't be watching movies. Then this reviewer claims that the story was just a "mishmash" "cynical, clinical gibberish" (none of those comments actually make any kind of conscious sense), when he apparently has never heard about the legends around the Crystal Skulls. In fact I would say that more than half of his comments in this review are completely uneducated. He has no background knowledge or even the slightest desire to understand the concepts that this movie bring up. The funniest part about his review that just sends me into bursts of laughter is that he mentions the "preview audience". I've been to several preview screenings of movies and unless the audience is made up of more of your common movie goers than the press jackoffs, it doesn't qualify as a real audience. The so called "One sight gag, involving a familiar relic" was so quick that most audience members likely didn't see it or had a delayed reaction because they didn't know what they had seen until moments later. This reviewer complains about CGI special effects, if you don't want to see special effects, go see a drama, romance or comedy, action is not for you. Or just stop going to the movies altogether, and please stop writing these piss poor excuses for reviews. This is the age of special effects. In fact there are very few movies you are going to see in the next few years that will not have special effects in them. So maybe you send all those free passes to someone who will actually make good meaningful use of them and stead of wasting space in the Houston Press with your pointless crap. Once again, I could (and I do) write better reviews than the bunch of yahoos that write for this paper.
Um, I have a hard time reading the criticisms of a critic that actually thought Temple of the Doom was the best of the Indiana movies and had the best sequence. Honestly, this makes me believe that the movie will actually work.
Discover restaurants, nightlife, travel, shopping...
Get 50 to 90% off every day on restaurants, movies, massages...
More than 10,000 of the BEST things to eat, drink, and experience
Join the Village Voice community and get exclusive deals and info
Your local Happy Hour guide at your fingertips
Log in or Sign up
Social Connect:Use your favorite account to access My Voice Nation.
Use your My Voice Nation account to log in:
Sign Up or Log in
Social Connect:Sign up for My Voice Nation with your preferred network.
Sign up for a My Voice Nation account:
