“Where are moose and squirrel, Jones?”
You’ve already seen it, so this entreaty will fall on deaf ears. But I will tell you anyway: Save your $8.50 and use it to see Iron Man instead.
There was about half an hour where I wasn’t sure I hated Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull and then…it all just kind of clicked and I realized that I really missed the Nazis. No, seriously.
The film is missing a key element: stakes. In the first film of what was–and should have remained–a fine trilogy, Indiana Jones has a clear objective: find the Ark of the Covenant and keep it out of the hands of the Nazis, who want to use it as a radio to God. The audience understands that: Nazis + the Ark = Uh-Oh. We now have a rooting interest in Indy to get there first. In the third film, simply substitute the Holy Grail for the Ark of the Covenant (sticking with power-hungry Nazis who want to live forever) and you get: Nazis + Holy Grail = a Third Reich that lasts even longer than 1000 years. Let’s go Indy and dad!
But the George Lucas and David Koepp script for the latest film neglects to inform audiences why they should root for Indiana Jones. Instead, we are given a lame storyline about a crystal skull that has some type of powers…of what kind we’re not certain…and the Soviets want it because…something about mind control…and if someone takes it to its resting place he gets its power…which is…what? I watched the movie and I don’t understand what the hell the crystal skull is.
Lucas wants me to disregard the hazy plotting, and just remember that Commies are bad and that we like Indy. And, while I think that for some people that’s good enough, it just wasn’t for me for two reasons: 1. This isn’t the 1950s–the Reds don’t scare me, Pops. 2. Indiana Jones is likeable because the first three movies were good–how many times do you hear someone say, “Man, the movie may have been crap, but Val Kilmer sure was likeable as Batman!”?
Thus, all the action sequences–and there are many, including a motorcycle chase, a car chase and a tank chase–feel lifeless because the audience does not know what’s at stake if Indy loses. Apparently, the Commies are going to…do…something…with this…Crystal Skull…which is…what exactly? With a simple, comprehensible story I might actually get on the edge of my seat as Indy tumbles over that waterfall because I know that the fate of the free world rests on his shoulders. I might jump when “the living dead” (is that what they were?) pop out of the temple’s walls because only Indy can deliver the skull to its resting place. But I didn’t. I just wondered why Indy decided to go traipsing off to Peru at 65 instead of retiring to his den to write a book about how he saved the world from Nazi domination…twice.
4 Comments
May 29, 2008 at 8:42 pm
That settles it. I’m going to just buy the book written by James Rollins (for the tie-in).
May 30, 2008 at 1:10 am
So I’m going to have to push back on you a bit, Jeff. Sure the film feels like a good piece of fan fiction and not the stellar comeback tour that we might have hoped for, but if my experience in waiting for each new Weezer album has taught me anything, it’s that you can’t expect too much from a resurrected act, no matter how good they were before. I think Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull succeeds much more than the last two Weezer records, though.
How can you love No Country For Old Men but dislike Indy 4? Thematically, they’re identical: heroes who have outlived their age of prominence, forced to try to adapt to the new rules around them.
When the film begins with Spielberg’s mountains-out-of-molehills visual joke, we find ourselves in the 50s, at least 15 yrs after Raiders of the Lost Ark. In the first 3 movies, Indiana Jones investigates the mythology of other, ancient cultures. By the 50s, America has progressed enough as a culture that it has created its own myths for Jones to explore. Like it or not, space aliens are a part of our cultural mythology, and this is why I didn’t bristle at the “sci-fi” nature of the story. Just because the myth isn’t about face-melting or heart-eating doesn’t make it any less legit for Jones.
Indy is forced to adapt to fighting Russians instead of Nazis, but his most difficult adjustment to the new America is when he finds himself being investigated by the CIA. In the clearest portrayal of this sense of dislocation, Indiana is thrust into a parallel world where nothing quite makes sense–and then realizes that this different world (actually a nuclear bomb testing site) is more deadly than a whole pile of snakes ,or Nazis, or Nazi snakes, or Nazis shooting snakes out of their mouths.
Shortly after this, Jones realizes that he must escape this new world and retreat to what he knows best: other cultures’ mythologies. And after the puzzle of the skull is solved, further escape to his probable retirement. I imagine that after the credits roll Indiana meets up with Ed Tom Bell, maybe reminiscing about the good ol days of cowboys and Indians, or maybe Nazis and snakes.
May 31, 2008 at 8:59 pm
Thematically a lot of things are identical: “Ed” and “Glory” are both about judging people by their talents and character, in spite of physical differences, but one is about black Civil War soldiers and the other stars Matt LeBlanc and a chimp. Thematically similar yes, but similarly plotted? No. I don’t have any problem with the theme of the latest Indiana Jones and I think you’ve identified that theme well (“heroes who have outlived their age of prominence, forced to try to adapt to the new rules around them”). I just don’t think that the plot did justice to it. After all, there seemed to be little at stake if he decided not to adopt to the new rules. What were the Russians going to do with that crystal skull that required Indy to take part in the adventure?
June 1, 2008 at 10:36 am
MIND CONTROL!
Look, just bringing up “Ed” in polite conversation to try to tie it to the Crystal Skull in my mind is an underhanded, dirty trick, and something I could see myself doing, so shame on you.
I think I give Spielberg more credit than you do, and I overlook the slackness in parts of the plot, its resemblance to National Treasure 2, and some of the wonkier action sequences (the Tarzan bit was especially hard to take), because the rest of it was a pleasure to watch. I saw a master director at work in the little details, and I got to see one of my favorite characters from childhood in a new adventure, so that’s always fun. Everything else, well, what did you expect, really?