Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull

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)

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)

I’m reading other reviews and what the not very satisfied viewers are complaining about the most is that the new Indie is science fiction. Personally, that doesn’t bother me it all, on the contrary, I welcome and praise this shift in Jones’s adventures. What I can’t praise, however, is that it has lost all the humour, or at least the humour that I liked – I don’t consider childish jokes like a ground squirrel (curious monkey) turning around behind me to be good enough for a legend like Indie. Indiana Jones was never about realism, so I don’t mind the innumerable WTF moments in the plot, but the triple slide on huge waterfalls in a Jeep and covering from an atomic explosion in a fridge were almost too much, even for me. 65% (10/01/2008)

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)

Fourth instalment of Indiana Jones franchise gets off to a great start and the rest of the film is decent – except for the last 10 minutes, which entirely undermine the whole thing. “We seem to have reached the age where life stops giving us things and starts taking them away.” The Indiana Jones universe has never taken itself too seriously and its possibilities are great, but they are not boundless and there are certain things I simply don’t want to see there. Who will we meet next? Mulder and Scully are knocking at the door... who is going to open it? Black-haired, flat-chested she-wolf Irina from the Soviet Union? The fourth Indiana Jones is a crazy cross-over with way too many pop-cultural references and a mediocre villain (Cate Blanchett’s only memorable moment is the line “You fight like a young man” :). May it be that the visionaries that used to show others the way have taken leave of their senses? This time, Spielberg has made me about as “happy” as Jackson with his recent King Kong. These blockbusters achieve equally amazing epicness, but they can never become true film classics. (05/20/2008)