MBoyd

I just thought it was because they wanted as many skulls as possible to control the world.

chris_sc77

I will say I rolled my eyes in disbelief & sarcasm during Indy 4 more than during National Treasure 1 & 2 combined. Thats not good.

Giantrobo

Yep.

And as far as the Crystal Skull thing...believe it or not, there are people in this world right now who believe that Indy 4 pretty much follows what they believe about the real Crystal Skulls and aliens being great teachers.

Crystal Skull Gateway

Ms. M

I saw the film last night with a group of 15 people and we all enjoyed it, though some more than others. I enjoyed most of it, but the ending bothered me. Not so much because of the aliens and the effects, but because Indy is kind of passive. He really does nothing that changes the outcome once they enter the temple and the villains would have come to exactly the same fate if he had been there or not.

Upon further thinking, I realize that Indy doesn't really do much at the end of Raiders or Last Crusade either in terms of thwarting the villains, so perhaps this won't bother me in future viewings. And being a romantic, I did like the very end of the film.

PopcornTreeCt

There was no mention of the end of the world 2012 date.

Giantrobo

Good post.

I just saw it and liked it. I didn't love it... but I didn't love the previous films either. Also, I wasn't bothered at all by the Alien angle. In fact, it was very interesting.

It's funny but if you just look at this forum alone it seems as if it's the worst film ever, but everyone I know who's seen it in the real world has so far LOOOOVED it.

I wonder if this will be a Star Trek thing but opposite? You know, every other film is great? In this case it would be the Odd numbered films that get praise as opposed to ST's even numbered films.

Giantrobo

That would be over the top and too far fetched. Come on, get a grip man.

2012...hurumpph...as if...

MBoyd

Yep! The average audience doesn't see a difference between Aliens and Ghosts flying out of the Ark at the end. Only we geeks categorize these things as different.

I saw it a 3rd time today and I still like it. But they are still ranked in release order for me. Don't think that will change.

Fine way to end the series. But I'd love to see one more.

TomOpus

Gotta keep the door open for another sequel

Ranger

just got back. Theater was packed.

I didn't really like the opening, weakest of the four.

But it was all uphill after the nuclear explosion. The audio system was incredible, totally head-thudding.

The alien was not scary at all. People who found it so need to adjust their meds. I thought of Taun We from AOTC.

Overall, lots of good action, I liked it but didn't love it and won't buy the dvd. This movie just made the trilogy look more flawless.

MBoyd

I have a question. Even after the third viewing I still don't get it.

Mutt tosses Indy the knife. It lands on his shoulder. It falls down behind him. There's a noise like it opens and I thought I heard something rip. Reaction shot of Mutt and he says "oh shit" I think or something. And then Indy cuts the rope off his hands.

What happened? Did Mutt think Indy cut himself? I was half expecting to see Indy's pants ripped or something dumb.

Did this confuse anyone else?

wm lopez

That date doesn't apply to christains and since the majority of America is christain. Well, you get it.

Supermallet

The only thing I can think of is that Mutt thought the knife ripped through the canvas of the truck and fell out. Otherwise why say "Oh shit"? But I agree that it's an odd little bit of business to throw in, with pretty much no payoff.

Patman

I thought the knife popped a hole in Indy's pants, but they never bothered to show it, letting the sound do the talking.

JIF

That lost me too.

Spielberg typically doesn't add swearing in his films -- so I was surprised he chose that moment to use it.

treszoks

I could have done without the cgi groundhogs and monkeys. Also I didn't really like the sci-fi alien aspect of it. It just wasn't as believable as the others and I love sci-fi. It was okay but not as good as any of the originals.

Dan1boy

Count me as another who was completely underwhelmed. A solid C effort.

Koepp's script was average at best. Way too much CGI (thanks a lot Lucas...) and no real chemistry between any of the actors. Sad way to end such an iconic franchise with Harrison as lead.

It didn't help of course that the Spanish speaking family's little kids behind us were blabbering throughout the entire film - despite the evil looks I kept throwing over my shoulder. Unbelievable.

slop101

Nope - Last Crusade was plenty dull, and very boring. I liked Skull a little better than Crusade, but not by much.

Bacon

same here

4.9/5 almost as good as Raiders, best of the sequels
Raiders 5/5
KOTCS- 4.9/5
Last Crusade- 4.5/5
Temple of Doom 4.25/5
great end to the series

TheAllPurposeNothing

I gotta say...I'm really, really, REALLY tired of every flick getting the "bad CGI" argument. Sure, its not photorealistic but very few special effects films are perfect.

I grew up watching the matte cubes flying with the X-wing fighters in Star wars. Superman looks like he flies against a green screen. Hell, King Kong (the original) is a thing of beauty but Kong still looks like a stop motion creation. As does the whole canon of Harryhausen flicks. And don't get me started on the steady dose of 1950's sci-fi I grew up on.

If all you can see are the quality of the effects and not the imagination around them, you're better off sticking to a steady diet of Dogme 95

mdc3000

But the other skulls don't have the same power as the one from the graveyard - which is why they pursue it so heavily - they think returning it will give them the power to control the world, turn everyone to their way of thinking without them knowing... the skulls on their own don't do much... they went to great length mentioning how one previous alien didn't have a crystal skull and that the one from area 51 did but was a distant cousin of the one from the graveyard...I'm not making this shit up

boo-ga

I loved it, too; I've been an Indy fan since the mid-80s, and I enjoyed this one better than TOD or LC. In fact, your rankings above are spot-on!

Brack

I saw it a 2nd time today, and found it flowed much better, and plot details were made clearer (I must've been a little tired or something). I don't get all the hate for the movie either. I think it stacks up well against the other films (I've rewatched them this weekend).

RichC2

This was actually a pretty well made, entertaining movie. The ending is weak and unimaginative (the Cate scene and following lift off) but I thought most of the movie was really well executed. It did feel more like an homage to Indy than an Indy movie itself, but it's a genre thats pretty heavily neglected these days so it was still refreshing.

I liked the integration of the scifi up until that Blanchett "I want to know everything!" scene and what followed, but the city crumbling was cool. The Shia scene (swinging from vines) was lame, but I only really noticed because I remember how much people played that up.

The soda shop fight was great.

It may not measure up to the other Indy flicks, but honestly I didn't care. It was fun, even with my reservations about the ending.

utopianz14

I wouldn't go so far as to say I hated this Indy film (because hating any movie seems to be a waste of emotional energy) but I did not like it. I think I would rate it even worse if it weren't an Indiana Jones film.

The easiest way to compare the films in the series, I think, would be on the number of eye-rolling moments in each film. Try as I may, I had a lot of difficulty coming up with scenes or moments in the previous films that rivaled the silliness in Skull. To be fair, though, I do plan on re-watching the first three films later this week.

But still, was there anything in the original trilogy as bad as Mutt swinging through the jungle or as silly as the giant ant invasion? I was enjoying the movie until the graveyard scene (yes, I even liked the refrigerator bit). But the graveyard scene was the turning point for me when Indy and Mutt were attacked by the native-whoever-they-are's. It's simply illogical for the natives to be camping out at the cemetery, waiting for someone to come. There was no point in that scene other than the fact that script pacing dictated a need for a fight sequence.

And that's really the problem I have with the film as a whole. It just feels too by-the-numbers, with the emphasis on formula and spectacle over heart and soul. I understand that that's a general trend in Hollywood blockbusters (and the reason why I watch so few of them) - I guess I'm just disappointed that an Indy film has to succumb to such outside economic pressures (although I guess I shouldn't be).

Was there anything in the final third of Skull (let alone the rest of the film) that made it particularly Indiana-Jones-ish, anything that would distinguish itself from the Tomb Raiders and National Treasures of the world? I mean, as safe as Last Crusade played it, it was still full of heart, especially with the interactions between father and son. And maybe it's just me, but the threat of the Nazis obtaining the Holy Grail felt much more grave than the Soviets reaching the "Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" or whatever it was they were after...

I loved the scenes between Indy and Marion in Skull, but there really wasn't much else going for it. And again, I'm pretty sure I would just dismiss the film as awful and never think of it again had it not been an Indiana Jones film.