Is Indy 4 that bad?

Discussion in 'Lucasfilm Ltd. In-Depth Discussion' started by skywalker_san, Mar 12, 2011.

  1. Cantina Bassist Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 5, 2012
    star 2
    It was better than I thought it would be, but that isn't saying a whole lot. It's little flat & I still can't figure out how that kid from Holes still gets work.
  2. yodasbum Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Nov 4, 2004
    star 2
    For me it really is that bad. It is one of a select few films that I will never willingly watch again. I didn't mind the alien angle and I thought that Harrison and Karen where fantastic.

    The gofer was a bad omen for me. I really hate the childish, forced humour that was also found in Star Wars from Jedi onwards. John Hurt is a good actor but he was terrible. The opening sequence in the storage area was good but the fridge took it beyond believability within the context of an Indy film.

    The tribe in the ruins wasn't believable for me and Ray's double no treble no quadruple agent was just way too convoluted. The monkeys was the wort cgi since the brontosaurus stampede in King Kong and I won't even bother talk about that as a plot development.

    I do hope Harrison gets to make another, only to make it better, and Indy was 90 odd in the Series. I'm glad that many people like/love but for me it was my worst cinematic experience.
  3. Homesick Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Nov 6, 2012
    I have always said to people who ask this, well, this: it was good for an action movie, but, as far as Indy movies go, I didn't care for it. When you think of Indy movies, you think of him going on adventures, recovering religious, and spiritually significant artifacts, etc. The whole supernatural, alien aspect, just didn't go over well for me. It didn't feel like an Indiana Jones movie. IMO
  4. xtinataguba Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Nov 13, 2012
    i dont think its a bad movie. it has a lot to do with george lucas.
  5. BigAl6ft6 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Nov 12, 2012
    star 5
    I love the movie, it has a sense of humor as most Indy flicks do and it has Indy in it and it has space aliens and I like Indy and I like space aliens so I really enjoy it overall.
  6. -NaTaLie- Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Nov 5, 2001
    star 4
    It was kind of in the same boat as TPM, i.e. a long awaited sequel to a legendary trilogy. Folks wanted a second coming of Christ and got a mixed bag instead. It was flawed but didn't deserve the hate it got.
  7. DarthMak Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 4, 2001
    star 5
    I can see why people hate it because of the actual story. I am obsessed with ufology and aliens so I just ate it up. There are some goofy parts(the fridge) but the other Indy films had ridiculous scenes like that(landing a raft from an airplane). People just went in with expectations way too high.
    Varactyl likes this.
  8. Sith Soup Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 30, 2012
    star 1
    When I saw the movie I enjoyed it very much and the time passed quickly as an enjoyable romp. However, I never quite felt as satisfied as I did with the original movies. I couldn't put my finger on it until I watch the picture again several times.

    Personally I have no problem with anchient aliens, Harrison's age, Shia LaBouef, the villians or the fridge business. What bothered me was the following:-

    1) Two of the new key characters felt empty. I found the Mac character tedious, with his constant switching between sides. I felt that since the character was new we never really felt any realisation of the prior friendship between him and Indy. Similarly, the Oxley character is frustrating for the same reason. He spends 90% of his screen time high on skull "juice". By the time we see the real chracater and get any chance to find out who he is the film ends.Oxley should've at least been Abner Ravenwood.

    2) It's clear that the combination of Karen Allen and Labouef are supposed to work as a foil for Indy in the same way Connery was in the third film or Willie in Temple. Unfortunately neither actor has the talent of Connery, and the difference in Karen Allen's more macho character from Kate Capshaw's screaming "anti-Indy" means there is no effective foil in terms of banter.

    3) By far the worst thing that bothered me was that Indy doesn't really carry the film in the third act. It's an ensemble effort and the only time Indiy really gets to be the hero is when he beats up the Russian chap in the ant scene. Otherwise it's a group effort right the way through until the end. It was made even worse by the fact that two of the group, the aforementioned Oxley and Mac were characters that we didn't really have any attachment to. The character of Marion just seemed to be there for the sake of being there so that really just left Indy and Mutt having to share screen time and the hero scenes with three space fillers. Not only did this reduce the chance to build on the father/son dynamic during the climax, but Indy just never really gets to save the day himself. After all, the movie is called "Indiana Jones" not "Indiana Jones Adventure Club Co".

    It's a shame, I think with better secondary characters and Indy being the ultimate hero of the third act it would have been up there with the other three pictures.
    Last edited by Sith Soup, Nov 18, 2012
    oierem likes this.
  9. MandalorianWrath Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Feb 17, 2005
    star 1
    I really like the film. I think Ancient Aliens belong to Indiana Jones' world just as much as the Holy Grail did.

    And KOTCS is the only film in which I can tolerate Shia LaBeouf. For that only, it deserves to be praised.

    It's a flawed movie, I don't love it, but I enjoyed it, and thought it felt very much like an Indiana Jones movie.
  10. darthbarracuda Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 4, 2012
    star 2
    It was a good movie IMO. Good special effects. I liked how they had the whole fatherly-son kind of thing in the movie.

    I didn't really like the ending. I wondered why a boulder from the spaceship didn't take out Jones and his team XD
  11. BigAl6ft6 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Nov 12, 2012
    star 5
    I think Mac constantly switching sides is meant to be a joke, and kinda the same deal with Oxley, him being crazy the whole time is meant to be a gag but also point out how potentially dangerous what they are walking into. I really enjoy the baddie because I think Cate Blanchett being an angry Russian general is a hoot to watch. And I also love how early on in the movie, everyone is scared about Commie infiltrators and Indy passes it off as silly but, ironically, the master plan for the commies with the Crystal Skull is to somehow secretly infiltrate, distort, and mind-control people which is EXACTLY what everyone is worried that the Reds would do. It really fits the 1950's communist / sci-fi vibe that the story is going for.

    Also, one of my favourite gags in the movie actually does involve LaBeouf: "Whoa! Whoa, whoa.Wait, wait, wait. Stop, stop, stop.*combs hair* I'm ready. Don't give these pigs a thing." "You heard him!"
    Last edited by BigAl6ft6, Nov 19, 2012
  12. Varactyl Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Nov 13, 2012
    star 1
    Eh, it was...okay. Really silly, but compared to Temple of Doom? Anything is better than screeching Willie. She ranks higher than Jar-Jar on my irritation meter. It wasn't near as good as Raiders or Last Crusade, but I'd rather watch Crystal Skull than Temple of Doom.
  13. DRush76 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 25, 2008
    star 4

    So . . . Indiana Jones, Marion Ravenwood and Elsa Schneider's screams and yelps didn't irritate you? How interesting.
  14. BigAl6ft6 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Nov 12, 2012
    star 5
    Also, if anything, the movie's closing minutes ends Indy on an even happier and more complete note than ridding off into the sunset ambiguity of "Crusade". Now he finally found love with Marrion Ravenwood (and, honestly, if you've watched all the movies she's the only gal that he was meant for anyway.) No "Mutt Jones" adventures because, like in the last time you see Indy, he walks off with the fedora in his hand. There's only one Indy and he's found happiness. Everyone say "Awwwww" now.
  15. fishtailsam Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 30, 2003
    star 4
    I would say yes it was that bad. I've only seen it once, and I left the theater thinking, 'that was not very good' ( at least with the PT I could make myself believe that the movies would get better, until they didn't. )

    I won't ever buy KotCS on DVD, jones is supposed to be about religious artifacts through the eyes of a cynic. The aliens plot doesn't jive.

    Also, I kept watching the characters not understand what the Skull was, and I couldn't suspend my disbelief that no one would aknowlage that this was an aliens head.
    KilroyMcFadden likes this.
  16. Varactyl Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Nov 13, 2012
    star 1
    There's no comparison there. Willie yowled through the whole movie. If she wasn't whining, she was screaming or screeching. If she wasn't, then Short Round was yelling every single one of his lines. They both annoy the crap out of me. YMMV, if you liked it, good for you.
  17. DarthRelaxus Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Apr 23, 2007
    star 5
    Amen!
  18. bmxtuffy Jedi Padawan

    Member Since:
    Nov 13, 2012
    The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull was terrible.
    - Way too much CGI, when Speilberg promised that there wouldn't be.
    - Total waste of Karen Allen.
    - Shia LaBeouf is completely unlikable.
    - The triple agent thing with Ray Winstone. Good Grief!
    - Nuke the fridge??
    - Why oh why the Aliens?
    - Monkey vine scene...Vomit.
    - Car bending the branch scene...What??
    - The stupid otters (or whatever they were) at the start.
    - They should have John Hurt playing Abner, which could have provided a nice twist/emotioinal linkage to Raiders.
    - Indy needed much more time on his own. It became a bit of a three ringed circus, with Dr Jones moved to the side.
    - The death by Ants was simply unbelievable.
    - The snake/quicksand was terribly corny.
    - The wedding. Crikey Moses, we're watching Indy not the Bold & the Beautiful.
    - etc etc etc....

    The only passable part of the movie were the scenes between Jim Broadbent & Harrison Ford. Everything else was simply dreadful.
  19. Narutakikun Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Nov 8, 2012
    star 4
    Well guys, here's the thing - if you've been reading my posts, you know I'm pretty harsh on the Star Wars prequels. So you might expect me to be harsh on Indy 4, too.

    Except I'm not. I'll totally defend Indy 4 as a great Indiana Jones movie. I've never had anyone explain to me in any way that I find remotely convincing why I shouldn't love this movie. Hell, it's not even at the bottom of my list of Indy movies (Temple of Doom has that distinction). And the only reason Crystal Skull is #3 is because Raiders and Last Crusade were just that damn good.

    Most especially, I'll tell you straight out that nothing that I've heard anyone complain about in Crystal Skull wasn't present, and worse, somewhere in the first three movies.

    Shia LaBoeuf annoys you? Guess what - Shia could have triplets with Jar-Jar Binks, and they wouldn't be a tenth as annoying as Willie and Short Round.

    Unrealistic/unbelievable action? Uhm, hello... it's an Indiana Jones movie, not Saving Private Ryan. It's supposed to be unrealistic and over-the-top. And there's been plenty worse in the original three. Let me get this straight - nuking the fridge was too much for you, but Indy jumping out of an airplane over mountains with no parachute in a half-inflated life raft and not even breaking a bone isn't? Pshaw.

    Why not the aliens? Again, let me get this straight - a big box where, if you open it, and you're evil, ghosts will melt your face is fine; but extraterrestrial life, which many, many respectable scientists believe in, isn't?

    And while we're at it - monkeys that swing on vines is too much for you, but evil Nazi monkeys that give the "Seig Heil" salute isn't?

    In reality, the Soviets never sent terrorists to America? Hey, news flash - Indiana Jones movies are not reality. If you're having so much trouble telling the difference between Indiana Jones movies and reality that you find yourself distraught by the degree to which they don't line up, I think you need the help of a board-certified psychiatrist, not a Star Wars message board.

    Also, in reality, the Nazis never went hunting through Arabia for the Ark of the Covenant, either - which is something that actually makes way less sense than either Soviet terrorists or aliens. Why exactly would the one group of people who hated Jews more than anyone else in the history of the planet go looking for a Jewish holy relic with the belief that it would somehow enhance their power? That's completely illogical - if the Ark actually does do something, that would prove that the Jews' religion is true, and thus that an all-powerful God really is on their side, which would be just about the last thing the Nazis would want. And if it doesn't do anything, then the whole expedition to find it would be a total waste of time and money. Either way, the idea that the Nazis would go looking for it is ludicrous.

    I don't point out any of this stuff about the original three movies (which I love) to bag on them, but to illustrate that the problem with people who loved the first three Indy movies and bitch about Crystal Skull is that the nostalgia goggles they're wearing for those first three films are so thick that they don't realize that no, Crystal Skull really is exactly like the first three movies. It's just that they watched the first three movies when they were little kids and didn't realize how over-the-top and often illogical they were, and that initial childhood impression has stayed with them so strongly that they can't watch the original three objectively. But then they watched Crystal Skull with undiluted thirtysomething or fortysomething eyes, and it seemed different.

    No, it's not different: you are.
    Last edited by Narutakikun, Nov 30, 2012
  20. Legacy Jedi Endordude Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Sep 9, 2012
    star 3
    and nostalgia
  21. DarthRelaxus Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Apr 23, 2007
    star 5
    All IJ movies are cheesy. They are not meant to be analyzed or picked apart or critiqued. It also doesn't matter what happens in the last 15-20 minutes of the movie (i.e. melting faces, aliens, whatever); they're just tying up loose ends before the credits roll. The whole point of all of the movies is to realize something ridiculous is happening, and to just sit back and enjoy the ride.
  22. Ferus Olin Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 2, 2012
    star 1
    I liked it. Not as good as the originals but it still was an Indiana Jones film. It got 77% on Rotten Tomatoes. That's way better then The Phantom Menace and Attack of the Clones. Don't get why so-called fans would want to try and criticize their own franchise every single time.
    DarthRelaxus likes this.
  23. oierem Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Mar 18, 2009
    star 3
    I agree as a whole: I enjoy the movie a lot, but I agree with your statements. I like Mutt and his relationship with Indy, and for me the best part of the movie begins with his entrance and goes all through the Peruvian sequence.
    But I never liked Mac and Oxley is a one-note character, and even though the whole Jungle Chase in enjoyable, there are way too many characters during the third act.
    I thought a good idea might be to combine Marion and Oxley: you merge two characters who don't add much. Marion can have important information about the Skull but can't remember it and she's in danger because of that...
  24. oierem Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Mar 18, 2009
    star 3
    I agree as a whole: I enjoy the movie a lot, but I agree with your statements. I like Mutt and his relationship with Indy, and for me the best part of the movie begins with his entrance and goes all through the Peruvian sequence.
    But I never liked Mac and Oxley is a one-note character, and even though the whole Jungle Chase in enjoyable, there are way too many characters during the third act.
    I thought a good idea might be to combine Marion and Oxley: you merge two characters who don't add much. Marion can have important information about the Skull but can't remember it and she's in danger because of that...
  25. boletus Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jun 2, 2008
    star 1
    There were a few scenes that I thought were cringe-worthy when I first saw the film. It seems like they used CGI elements just because they could, and that felt a little jarring to me.

    However, with each watching I find I enjoy it more and more. It does in fact feel like Indy to me. I could nitpick about things that wouldn't "actually" happen, but has anyone ever watched Temple of Doom? I like it just fine, but I still stand firm in my belief that it is by far the worst Indy film. Incredible action scenes and unbelievable stunts were always a part of Indiana Jones. Someone earlier said something about earlier Indy films being more grounded in religion and less supernatural? Seriously? I'm pretty sure the Arc of the Covenant melted a face or two--or pulling a still beating heart from someone's chest--"He choose... poorly." This stuff isn't some new addition to Indy.

    It's a good Indy film, and possibly brought the franchise to a new audience, and I'm for that. Is it the best? Of course not! Is it the worst? I sure as hell don't think so.

    I think there has been a very vocal minority on the internet that believes hating on Lucas is the thing to do now. A good litmus, I believe, is to put a child who didn't grow up devouring the franchise in front of the screen and see what they think. I work with kids and sometimes my students will talk Star Wars (and even Indy) with me. I'll never forget the time I was debating the best SW film with the class and I said something like, "Actually, I think the second one is the best film." To which a student said, "Yeah! I like how the clones--" Me: "No, no, no. Empire Strikes Back, Episode 5. The second one made. By far the best." Boy: "Oh. That's actually my least favorite one." Blasphemy. The point of the story is, our personal baggage as long time fans might just cloud our judgement with these movies that we hold dear.

    Crystal Skull had what makes Indiana Jones great. A type of story and format that we rarely get to see in today's entertainment and really well done. Sure, it's not Raiders (I actually like Last Crusade best), but I think it is far better than Temple of Doom. Of course all this is subjective opinion. I also like the PT, so to some that may invalidate anything I have to say. [face_dunno]
    DarthRelaxus and SlashMan like this.