Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull

Indiana Jones is back after many years. Expectations were huge and it was practically impossible to please everyone, but the fourth installment of the famous series maintains its style and is not a disappointment. All the ingredients that made this film character famous, namely exaggeration, fast pace, gags, and casual style, are present. The typical musical motif and Indiana's essential hat are also there. In the exact style of American film productions, the hero's physique has not suffered any serious injuries over the years, so Indiana delivers precise blows to all sides and effortlessly jumps over obstacles with his necessary whip. The long hiatus is evident in his film partner, expertly played by Karen Allen. This change, where another partner of Indiana is not the usual sexy kitten, but a mature woman, is appealing. Although I am not familiar with how much she got paid, it was certainly a decent retirement guarantee. Hollywood is very ungrateful toward older actresses. The impressive setting of the Latin American jungle provided plenty of opportunities for action, and in some scenes, the film returns to the origins of the series, such as a wild chase along a rocky wall of a deep canyon resembling a similar scene in the first installment. The film loses a bit of momentum in the last ten minutes, where it seems to draw from a different genre and tries to imitate The X-Files, but I forgive it for that. Overall impression: 90%. Still a highly above-average adventure film within the genre. (06/25/2008)

The trio of Spielberg, Lucas, and Ford reminds me of a bunch of pensioners who will jokingly rebuke you if you want to let them take your seat on a tram. You will rarely meet them, but you will not forget them for a long time. Or... The original plan of having a worthy ending to the series that turned into a comedy-action hit that could be envied by folks generations younger than me, made me laugh like a little kid. This film features a full-blown two hours of stylish catchphrases, a great atmosphere, and a polished feeling that perfectly reflects two things: The mindfulness of aging gentlemen and the fame of Shia LaBeouf - the kid is incredible! (05/24/2008)

This isn’t the best Indy I’ve seen, nor the worst; at the beginning it’s the same Indy, toward the end a slightly different Indy but beyond all doubt this IS Indy; despite being disgustingly digital in places. My heart throb again dons his scruffy felt fedora and returns to the silver screen in an adventure spectacular that we had been sorely missing for an interminably long nineteen years. Over the years several movies tried to fill the void and every last one of them ended up falling into that void. Some did so honorably, others didn’t. The revamped Indy fills the void, although not throughout. Ford’s age doesn’t slow the movie down, but it is an undeniable snag. And Shia doesn’t do much to shoulder the burden of his role as initiator of action. But if you love Indy, you’ll forgive him anything. It has its shortcomings. But what movie doesn’t? But they’re just shortcomings. There’s more digital landscaping than desirable, and too many characters end up sidelined and almost forgotten. With the exception of the Tarzan scene, which is the lamest moment of the entire tetralogy, no serious shortcomings crop up. But those monkeys and especially their leader well deserve to meet the same fate as their colleagues from the Temple of Doom. But still, sixty-five year old Junior walks all over those fast-buck movies made for one season. Maybe it seems “just" darn good right now, but what about in five to ten years’ time when people get over the ending. And that applies to me too. I really enjoyed the finale (a lot), but if they could have done without those over-the-top Lucas-style literalness, I would have been much happier. But the magic that surrounded the original trilogy is back. It’s true that it’s not as evident as it used to be and you may have to perform some fiddly archeological digging to uncover it, but it’s there, no doubt about it. The it I’m talking about is the pure essence of “movieness" which turns adults back into kids, critics into fans and kids into movie enthusiasts. So even this less strong (but not weak) fourth Indy expedition into film in my eyes didn’t manage to topple him from his position as my favorite hero of world cinema. (05/21/2008)

In my opinion, Indy works perfectly well in the 1950s. However, the situation is much worse with the 21st century. Visually, the film seemed sterile, ironed-out and sometimes pandering. Harrison Ford still has huge balls, but unfortunately the same cannot be said about Cate Blanchett (and unfortunately not only for understandable reasons). Shia LaBeouf also played his Legolas role with honor, but this winking to a younger audience, for which an old man with a whip is no longer enough, bothers me. And so does Lucas’ infantility... So what did I like about it? Some spots have the atmosphere of the old films. Spielberg's conservatism, which is not boring and does not feel anachronistic. Nevertheless, the word I would use for this film is “disconcerted". I get the feeling that where the original trilogy didn’t require a lot of extra stuff, part four had go too far into megalomania and exaggeration... It's a well-crafted product and a clear hit in my opinion, but not a cult hit. (05/26/2008)

My god, so much hype! The discussion forum had several thousand posts before the premiere, half of the FilmBooster users experienced many sleepless nights playing the same trailer over and over again, and impatiently crossed off the days on the calendar until the midnight premiere, for which tickets had been lying on the table for quite a few days, of course. And all of this was totally shit, because as usual, the most anticipated blockbuster of the year, if not the decade, is utter crap, and nobody can believe what actually happened and what went wrong. Indy is the past. The feeling of the 1980s will never return, just like the time when these films were made. Spielberg tries to stick to the old ways (titles, references to age, sound of fights, filter-free camera), but brutally knocks himself down with a ton of visual effects and accumulating nonsense, which are a bit too much even for the playful Indy. Ford surprised me with his strength and vitality – he can still handle his fists and whip well – but otherwise it's just a plain and boring setup mashed up with today's trend of “action - plot, action - plot, action - plot...”. Boring and average, not even pretty. Even Temple of Doom entertained me more. (07/02/2008)