Darth Waller
Are you on the square?
Check with JJJ.
"Kingdom of The Crystal Skull" 5 Years Later.
- Thread starter IrishJedi
- Start date
Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:
Check with JJJ.
You're absolutely right. And I can't believe I wrote a 2,600 word review of this movie and completely failed to even mention the wonderful score.
But, yes, it's great. And there are even some sublime moments as well, such as how the Skull theme "Call of The Skull" sounds literally right out of a 50s Sci-Fi flick, even during its quiet moments.
Deckard
Super Freak
It's funny just this morning I was thinking about this and how it's been five years now, and how people were saying it would age well and become more like Temple of Doom, but it hasn't at all. I still hate it just as much. The South Park making fun of Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is also running right now. 
I love the South Park episode. Both because it's damn funny, and because I also get that it's absolutely satirizing the "Lucas/Spielberg ***** my childhood" hysterics, which is as ridiculous as any movie. Those guys are genius.
It's funny just this morning I was thinking about this and how it's been five years now, and how people were saying it would age well and become more like Temple of Doom, but it hasn't at all. I still hate it just as much. The South Park making fun of Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is also running right now.
People that said it would somehow age well and morph into being as good as Temple of Doom through some sort of warping of the time/space continuum were just suffering from PTSD.
Dude,....are you trying to convince us its an ok movie or yourself.
As a matter of fact, your point about the pistol only being pulled once and how he handled the native situation somewhat alluded me to something that makes me dislike the film even more.
Another thing,...i think the general cinematography style of the late Douglas Slocombe was severly missing here.
As a matter of fact, your point about the pistol only being pulled once and how he handled the native situation somewhat alluded me to something that makes me dislike the film even more.
Another thing,...i think the general cinematography style of the late Douglas Slocombe was severly missing here.
I'm not trying to "convince" anyone of anything. This is genuinely how I feel about the movie, scene-by-scene. Bad stuff, good stuff, and all. I'd think that's pretty clear. If you have an issue with a fair, rational, and level-headed review of the movie then that's your problem.
I do agree with you on Douglas Slocombe, though. I missed his cinematography and it's worth noting that though KOTCS was shot entirely on film and features a lot of real world locations and practical sets, it still looks & feels very digital, at times. That's on the DP (Janusz K.) as much as anyone. For example, the opening scene outside the hangar really looks like it was shot on a stage in front of a blue screen. But that location (including the sunset) is actually real. Yet the lighting and photography makes it seem synthetic. Slocombe would never have gone for that. He always went with the David Lean organic & natural approach. That's indeed missed here. Good point.
I do agree with you on Douglas Slocombe, though. I missed his cinematography and it's worth noting that though KOTCS was shot entirely on film and features a lot of real world locations and practical sets, it still looks & feels very digital, at times. That's on the DP (Janusz K.) as much as anyone. For example, the opening scene outside the hangar really looks like it was shot on a stage in front of a blue screen. But that location (including the sunset) is actually real. Yet the lighting and photography makes it seem synthetic. Slocombe would never have gone for that. He always went with the David Lean organic & natural approach. That's indeed missed here. Good point.
You know, you bring up something that is often overlooked and that's that all 4 movies are quite different from the others. Yes, they're all Action-Adventure films in the pulp serial mold and each has its chase scenes, set pieces, some humorous moments, etc. The templates are the same, but the movies themselves are actually quite different.
RAIDERS is clearly the most competently made. And that's partly because it has a great foundation in a perfect script. It's fun as hell, but also great on all other merits. It never takes itself too seriously, yet never falls even close to parody or camp. It's a genre masterpiece. None of the other 3 movies ever comes close to feeling like RAIDERS.
TEMPLE OF DOOM has its lovers and detractors. And I think that's incidentally for the same reason: It is most like an actual pulp 30's serial, complete with the requisite annoyingly shrill damsel and a bad guy with zero redeeming values yet who is a joy to watch. It's goofy, zany, funnier and yet even darker than RAIDERS. An oddball of a film, with some great, iconic moments. I love it.
THE LAST CRUSADE tries to capture more of the RAIDERS vibe than DOOM did, but they went a bit further into the "thrill-ride" thing, and it has a lot more slapstick-style humor than the first two. It's a tad silly at times, including moments that are funny at the expense of characters. That said, it probably has the most heart of all of the INDY films, because of the relationship between Indy and Senior, which is great and drives the entire movie. I think that element is why this is a favorite of many, especially those who were younger (or not even born) when RAIDERS hit.
KOTCS... well, I pretty much said it all above. It has much more in common with TLC than the other two in tone, but went even further into slapstick and cheap thrill territory. And of course it also has a completely different aesthetic (Sci-Fi B-movies of the 50's).
It's quite interesting that they're all so different, especially considering they were pretty much made by the same folks. The biggest difference is that each one had completely separate writers, and maybe that's the key. But they all even feel different.
The relationship between Indy and Senior is one of the big reasons I love this film. That hits close to home for me and its the one film I did see as a kid (I was 7 at the time it came out in theaters).
Edit: The Indy marathon AMC did last summer was awesome! That goes down as one of my cooler cinema experiences.
Edit: The Indy marathon AMC did last summer was awesome! That goes down as one of my cooler cinema experiences.
Pretty insightful and yes for me I agree with most of it. Since I was in elementary school when Crusade came out I fall in that category (although I must have seen Raiders by the time I was in Kindergarten).
I was never allowed to see Temple of Doom when I was young due to it being "too dark" so by the time I saw it Raiders and Crusade were so ingrained in me that Doom seemed a little off from the Indy movies I was used to. Kind of the opposite of peopel who were used to Raiders and Doom and thought Crusade was off.
Now for Crystal Skull, your first post pretty much said it all for me. I still enjoyed it and loved the moments where Indy shinned through but just like the Star Wars prequels my kids will see the originals long before I let them see new stuff.
It's also interesting how the filmmaker's age affects tone, style and what they feel is important and what is not at various stages in their lives. For instance, in their early thirties, RAIDERS was pure pleasure, made with the obsessive care of youth, relishing in clever set-pieces and action; it was tongue-in-cheek but it felt real not silly. Later in life, family relations clearly became important (they had their own families by then) and we get TLC. Spielberg and Lucas couldn't make RAIDERS today if they tried, and that's not a bash. It was simply a sublime moment in time. The perfect contributors coming together at the perfect moment for a common cause. And the made a classic. More than a classic; a genre changing event. Like GOLDFINGER, DIE HARD, the first STAR WARS and others.
I found your review very interesting and yes I read the whole thing. I'm harsher on SKULL than you are. I find it tedious in many ways, well beyond its obvious "bad" moments. It definitely feels like a movie that no one truly wanted to do but the train was already moving.
I totally agree that, 1) the geek consensus on this is overblown; but 2) it still wasn't all that great. I didn't go in with high expectations. I realized everyone was older and things weren't going to be the same. The movie had its moments. Ford was good in general. There were also some bad decisions. Fortunately, it doesn't affect my feeling toward Raiders one iota.
Idk,...perhaps part of the issue is that we expect Lucas and Spielberg to make good film making decisions which we as an audience will marvel at upon viewing.
When a million people speak as if they might have made better or different choices with the film,...well, thats not thw feeling you want after watching a movie from your childhood hero filmakers.
Nobody came out of Raiders saying anything about what should have been cut or who shouldnt have been cast. It was just pure satisfaction.
I dont think its rocket science. They (as was cited with age changing progression) just arent really catering to the fan anymore. Their egos are so enormous that they made the film with personal indulgences that non of us wanted a part of.
There are billions of dollars left to make with this franchise.
Im now starting to really warm up to the idea of a reboot.
When a million people speak as if they might have made better or different choices with the film,...well, thats not thw feeling you want after watching a movie from your childhood hero filmakers.
Nobody came out of Raiders saying anything about what should have been cut or who shouldnt have been cast. It was just pure satisfaction.
I dont think its rocket science. They (as was cited with age changing progression) just arent really catering to the fan anymore. Their egos are so enormous that they made the film with personal indulgences that non of us wanted a part of.
There are billions of dollars left to make with this franchise.
Im now starting to really warm up to the idea of a reboot.
I don't hate KOTCS but I don't really watch it either. As another "Last Crusade" (in tone and humor) that doesn't add anything interesting action or storywise and does contain lots of stupid things I just don't see the point.
Its not like Return of the Jedi where for all its faults it still provides a satisfying conclusion to the saga. Or even the PT where there are still cool bits in each film found nowhere else in the saga (Darth Maul fight, Jango, Geonosis, "you were the Chosen One," etc.
EVERYTHING good in KOTCS exists better in previous Indy films. The only unique thing it has going for it are a couple of superficial trappings of 50's sci-fi. But not enough to make it feel like 50's sci-fi, just enough for old Indy to make an occasional comment here or there.
I don't need to see Indy get married to a lesser version of Marion. As far as I'm concerned they lived happily (or unhappily) ever after at the end of Raiders. Even if I want to allow for the silly TLC to say that he stayed single that movie still ended with a satisfying ride off into the sunset.
KOTCS has been unfairly maligned but now that I have the series on blu-ray I just find myself always reaching for Raiders and Temple. The second half of TLC is fun but I just don't find a reason to acknowledge KOTCS with my time anymore. What's the point? Two awesome Indy movies and one silly one is enough IMO.
Its not like Return of the Jedi where for all its faults it still provides a satisfying conclusion to the saga. Or even the PT where there are still cool bits in each film found nowhere else in the saga (Darth Maul fight, Jango, Geonosis, "you were the Chosen One," etc.
EVERYTHING good in KOTCS exists better in previous Indy films. The only unique thing it has going for it are a couple of superficial trappings of 50's sci-fi. But not enough to make it feel like 50's sci-fi, just enough for old Indy to make an occasional comment here or there.
I don't need to see Indy get married to a lesser version of Marion. As far as I'm concerned they lived happily (or unhappily) ever after at the end of Raiders. Even if I want to allow for the silly TLC to say that he stayed single that movie still ended with a satisfying ride off into the sunset.
KOTCS has been unfairly maligned but now that I have the series on blu-ray I just find myself always reaching for Raiders and Temple. The second half of TLC is fun but I just don't find a reason to acknowledge KOTCS with my time anymore. What's the point? Two awesome Indy movies and one silly one is enough IMO.
Have never sat through an entire Indy movie.
