ckybltz said: Yeah…I think it definitely holds up to several viewings, so Id say give it another shot.

That's exactly what I am going to hold out for. I mentioned the Mummy movies in my review and in this article and I actually hated those movies the first time I saw them. I actually hope I have the same reaction you had when I watch Indy 4 on DVD.

Consequently I was talking with Dre (the sarcastic bastard above) today and we also brought up Speed Racer, a film he liked and I didn't. That is another film I wonder if I will enjoy more on DVD.

Yeah…I think it definitely holds up to several viewings, so Id say give it another shot.

bradbrevet said: You bring up an interesting point David, wasn't Darabont's script really the source of all the alien stuff? I remember reading something like that, but in the opening credits Darabont isn't credited at all… not sure if there was a special thanks at the end or not, but I thought that was interesting.

I don't think it was the source–I think when Darabont worked on it was the first time word sprung in terms of what direction the 4th film was leaning towards so it appeared to be the source, when it probably wasn't. However, from what I've read lately, it seems like the alien idea has been around from some time (even since the TV show)–in fact apparently Lucas' originally idea regarding the alien storyline was really wild (I don't know the details), but Ford and Spielberg had it dialed back significantly. As for crediting, Moriarty's review on AICN mentions that Koepp's screenplay definitely had chunks from all the other writers' drafts he had read. But in the end Koepp's must have been different enough to be given sole credit…or who knows the WGA rules for crediting can be freaking wacky at times. All I know is that Lucas didn't write the film (as much as I like Star Wars, including the prequels, you can just tell Crystal skull doesn't thud with Lucas' clunky dialogue).

Thinking Skull said: Let me get this straight… George Lucas didn't throw out 18 years worth of other script attempts for Indy 4 to make his own "better" version? It wasn't the actors, and it wasn't the direction… that kinda leaves the writer, although I'm also thinking that there's some extra missing exposition that got edited out to cut the run time archived for a future special-edition DVD.

Seriously, if you can offer up any other heads to put on pikes, I'm all smiles.

Lucas ISN'T THE WRITER OF THE FILM!!!! He's credited with the story idea (as he was with the previous three films…as he would have no matter what story path this film took). David Koepp is the credited screenplay writer for Crystal Skull. And who says Lucas was the SOLE rejecter of previous scripts (with the exception of the Durabont script, which many interviews back up the fact it was Lucas who did deep-six it). However, it has been widely stated that both Ford and Spielberg had veto power and creative input on any script. All three had to be happy with it for the film to go forward. Therefore they were obviously happy with this script and if you feel the script is one of the reasons you didn't like the movie they deserve as much blame as Lucas for going with it (and no reason not blame David Koepp either).

I don't remotely understand how you can place all blame on Lucas when the most powerful filmmaker in the world–who did have final cut according to reports–is the director. Spielberg had say in all creative decisions (probably more say than Lucas). So I just find it silly to place all blame on Lucas (I mean you can for Star Wars since he was writer/director and all-around overlord for those films), but the Indiana Jones films have always been a collaboration between Lucas and Spielberg.

Seriously, if you can offer up any other heads to put on pikes, I'm all smiles.

Thinking Skull said: T
The credits identify one “George Lucas” as the writer here, so that’s where I’ll place the blame.

I might jump into this all later with a bigger post (but let me just say, I really have no problem with people not liking the movie. To each their own).

Yet, for those hating on the movie, quit it with piling ALL the ownership on Lucas (which some folks are doing more than likely b/c they feel he screwed up Star Wars). Lucas did not write the film. He came up with the initial story idea (as he did with all 3 previous films). David Koepp is the screenwriter (a guy who I'm admittedly not a big fan of) and he cobbled his screenplay from several different drafts including one by Frank Durabont.

Yes, if you don't like the film, Lucas deserves some blame–he had enormous creative input. But remember, both Spielberg and Ford signed off on the script too and had just as much input and veto power as Lucas–which is why the film didn't get made for 19 years since they couldn't get a script that made everyone happy. Spielberg is the most powerful director (if not person) in the film industry and if you have a problem with the film it's just as much his fault–if not more since he has final cut–as it is Lucas'.

Just wanted to get that off my chest.

In the first place, the villain is devoid of mystery. Cate Blanchett’s Spalko appears, takes charge, but doesn’t take orders. Her henchmen are barely Star Trek “red shirts,” written to die in horrible ways while the heroes move on. Second, the beginning of the film plays directly into the plot. No independent adventure here showing us that Indy’s still got it; all this is part of the complete story. Finally, only once does Indy actually look likes he’s in danger, but it’s too early in the film and that’s a bad thing.

The credits identify one “George Lucas” as the writer here, so that’s where I’ll place the blame. The entire principle cast, from Harrison Ford to Cate Blanchett to Shia LaBeouf to Karen Allen, all are playing their parts to the hilt. But just before the start of the third act and just as the characters are really starting to feel like part of an Indy film, each character in turn suddenly realizes that there’s nothing they can’t do. Mutt figures it out first, then John Hurt’s character (hey look… the crystal skull is a get-out-of-danger-free card!) It dawns on Marion a few moments later for her to save the day, followed by Indy himself who even has the brass to count off the certain dooms they’re surviving. The heroes then simply walk to the last set location, watch the bad guys punished, and wait out the special effects until the credits roll (hey, it worked in Raiders, didn’t it?)

Sadly, upon returning to their happy ending, there’s no exposition or explanation for it. You left the country on the suspected Communist list, then you return with honors and complete forgiveness (I guess the top government brass saw the movie’s ending, too). Maybe we all put too much pressure on Mr. Lucas and Steven Spielberg to deliver the Indiana Jones of yesteryear, or maybe too much emphasis was placed on maneuvering Shia LaBeouf into taking over for Harrison Ford (which he could do just fine). The people with the creativity, connections, and the cash could have made anything on screen happen, but what we got instead looks like someone ripped off Chris Carter. Indy and his fans everywhere deserved better than this.

DarkKnightFAN12 said: Unless they make an Indiana Jones film where he is sitting in a rocking chair with a colostemy bag and drool on his lips it will be untouchable.

Strangely enough that is how Crystal Skull begins! :)

Ford, despite being totally believable as Indy just seems to be going through the motions. The story limps along and fails to intrigue one in the slightest. Even temple of doom had an emotional impact factor, which gave it some heart, something that the orginal trilogy has alot of and something of which crystal skull has none.

I need to go watch the original three just to feel better. Crystal skull is an Indy film only because it falls under the same banner.

Your opinion alone makes me think that this is simply going to be a film where people will need to agree to disagree, but I will be interested as the years go by to see where it ends up in the grand scheme of things.

I think all 3 films had campy/cheesy moments, which in my opinion make them great. I think they just took it a bit farther in this. Yeah, Shia swinging with the monkeys definitely was too much, I couldve handled 2 or 3 swings, but they took it too far. Still, I laughed(and rolled my eyes a bit) the whole time. Yeah, they used CGI a lot more than I was hoping, but I thought it at least looked good, so…

I actually thought the 3 waterfall gag was great, and on par with TOD's ridiculous inflatable raft and mine cart scenes. I will point out that theyve been saying throughout the pre-release press on the movie that it would be the funniest, so I went into it expecting to laugh, and laugh I did.

I also really liked that they brought in stuff from the Young Indiana Jones series (Pancho Villa story, Indy's military record, etc.). As far as the storyline goes, granted, its no Holy Grail or Ark of the Covenant, but I think it really suited the paranoid, Roswell/UFO crazed- era that was the 50s, and they still had the archeology/ digging/ secret doors/ booby trap fun that the other films had. Yeah, it was a convoluted plot, but can anyone truly say that ToD was any more intelligible? Ill take"interdimensional beings" over gods making some stones light up and protecting villages any day… The cast was great, though I think the weakest was Cate Blanchett, her character was rather paper thin, but give me a break, Mola Ram and Walter Donovan werent exactly the deepest villians either. Harrison and Shia played off each other extremely well, and made for some great comedic moments, especially once Karen Allen showed up.

In the end, just like the first three, I was thoroughly entertained. The movie is certainly not perfect, nor is it nearly as good as Crusade or Raiders, but in my opinion it delivered the goods.