I hadn’t seen it in the theater, despite the omnipresent media campaign that ranged from M&Ms to thinly-veiled archaeology shows on the History Channel.  Reaction from people who had seen it was definitely “meh”, and if I’ve learned anything from George Lucas in the last 9 years, its that he can’t make a decent film to save his life.

So I was prepared for disappointment.

As much as I’d like to say something like “but boy was I wrong”, I can’t.  Harrison Ford looks old.  Karen Allen looks as old as Harrison Ford, and she’s 9 years younger.  The absence of Denholm Elliot‘s character is noticeable even before the movie makes a half-assed homage to him (Elliot died in 1992).

This was a movie made 17 years too late.

If I hadn’t seen the original three movies earlier this year, I’d probably be feeling somewhat pissed right now; movies fare a lot better when viewed through nostalgic lenses.  While I had never been completely enamored with Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, I had forgotten about how bad some parts of Temple of Doom were.  Like I said, I was prepared for disappointment.  I’m not pissed off, I’m just kind of saddened by the wasted potential.

Spoilers follow.  Consider yourself warned.

I think the choice of the Soviets as the bad guys was a decent one; I’m just amazed that Steven Spielberg was talked into directing a movie without robots or World War II as a backdrop.  Then again, it does have aliens.

Ugh, aliens.  I don’t know if this particular stink can be pinned on George Lucas, but he’s my primary suspect.  Spielberg’s range of subject matter looks comprehensive in comparison: George just seems to need a chrome spaceship and some CGI these days, both of which were in attendance.

Would it really have killed them to do a story about Atlantis or the Spear of Destiny or Excalibur or the Fountain of Youth or Aztlán?  Bigfoot?  Even the Loch Ness Monster?

Maybe even better material wouldn’t have improved this movie, because Indiana Jones is tired.  Whether this was an intentional decision by Ford/Lucas/Spielberg or not, he’s a low-energy guy in what should be a high-energy movie.  It’s like he’s got mono, but worse: he didn’t take his Geritol.  All he’s missing is a walker and a chance to snap his whip at some kids on his lawn.

I thought Cate Blanchett was pretty much forgettable as a scenery-chewing Commie.  Ray Winstone was ok as Indy’s longtime-friend-whom-we’ve-never-met-but-are-convinced-of-such-due-to-exposition-desperately-trying-to-cover-19-years-of-backstory, though a better choice might have been Jonathan Ke Quan, reprising his role of Short Round from Temple of Doom.  Now that would have added a little more drama to the story, were he to also side with the Soviets and suffer Mac’s fate.

As for Shia LaBeouf?  I thought he did a fair job, nothing more.  I don’t think he has the screen presence to lead the franchise in the future, but he didn’t deserve a lot of the fanboy hate directed towards him.  He’s just lucky he wasn’t cast as an Ewok.

I don’t think Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull was a terrible movie — it was certainly no Ultraviolet — it just wasn’t very good.  It isn’t a movie people are going to remember 20 years from now in any context other than “oh yeah, they made a fourth Indiana Jones, didn’t they?”  It is Godfather III-ish in its setup and follow-through.

]]> http://blog.caljacobson.com/2008/11/27/indiana-jones-and-the-kingdom-of-the-strained-prunes/feed/ 1