I honestly do not think it is. It was well recieved, better recieved than Episode I or II... Some say that Harrison Ford and the rest of the cast has no spark and no energy, yet I found Harrison Ford's performance charming and fitting to his age. I don't mind the alien angle, considering it's the logical step from where to go from previous installments and the time when it's set. I don't mind Shia LaBeouf, he's a good actor with the charisma of a young Tom Hanks, yet everyone seems to hates him by proxy. It has a GREAT villain in Irina Splako, played to awesomeness by Cate Blanchett. It has good set pieces and does a great work establishing the mood of the 50's and the Red sScare (Spielberg's hand is most notable in these scenes). There's some damn fine pieces of dialogue on the movie ("We seem to have reached the age where life stops giving us things and starts taking them away.") and some great humor and one-liners. I love the ant scene and it still creeps me out. So what gives? Is it the fridge scene? Funny, cause, some odd days before the movie was released, Raiders was shown on TV and some of my friends were commenting how BAD the movie was because there's no way that Indy would survive most of the stuff that he goes through on that. At the same time, I went to see the movie with my grandfather who cringes with impossible stuff in movies, and not only thought it was funny, he said "yeah, it's possible". Not to mention that the much lauded Darabont draft had the fridge scene, had five waterfalls instead of three, had Indy shooting an alien and saying "Welcome to Earth!" and other questionable stuff. No monkey scene though.