BY GRACE RANDOLPH
Oh the joy we could have had if Spielberg and Lucas had decided to make an actual movie. Instead, we get a greatest hits compilation rather than a new album. Not that there isn't a lot of joy up on the screen. Harrison Ford is absolutely thrilled to be back as Indy, and Karen Allen attacks her role with gusto. Of course, both actors are just glad to be working, especially in a guaranteed blockbuster. And Shia LaBeouf is excited to be there. because he might inherit the entire franchise.

Perhaps that's the problem - the film stinks of ulterior motives. There are moments when we catch glimpses of a genuine fourth Indiana Jones adventure, like the wonderful motorcycle chase sequence at the university where Indy teaches, but overall you feel like you're watching a theme park stunt show. Making the film seem less believable are obvious special effects plus Indy surviving incidents nobody could walk away from, even using movie-logic.

There isn't much of a story, so we can skip that discussion. However, it is worth mentioning that screenwriter David Koepp is using the Mad Libs version of Indiana Jones. Several times Indy says "this isn't a ----, it's a ---- !" He's said it in previous films, sure, but not so many times that it becomes a joke. With the action sequences, you've literally seen alternate versions in the previous three films.

So let's talk about our beloved cast of characters, shall we?

Overall, Harrison Ford does a superb job portraying a convincingly older yet still very cool Dr. Jones. There is one scene, though, that's completely out of character: when Indy is tempted to take a sword off a conquistador's corpse. Whatever happened to "That belongs in a museum!"? The scene gets a laugh, and comedy is fun, but not at the expense of a character's defining beliefs.

It's a great injustice that in film franchises the male characters get to move from one movie to the next while female characters get left behind. Seeing Marion and Indy together makes you wish Karen Allen had been in all the films - however it would have completely changed
the trilogy, giving it a "Nick & Nora Charles" vibe. Unfortunately older Marion has lost some of her edge, but this role is a step in the right direction for women in Hollywood so let's not harp on it.

At this point, everyone knows Shia LaBeouf's Mutt Williams is Indy and Marion's son. And the off-handed way Marion blurts out the news to Indy isn't exactly movie magic, making you wish they'd handled the situation differently. LaBeouf grows on you over the course of the
film but he's simply not Indiana Jones, even the next generation.

Rounding out the Jones family is John Hurt as their "uncle" Professor Oxley, a genius gone mad as a result of spending too much time with the crystal skull. Why Spielberg would hire such an incredibly talented actor to merely shout a few lines of gibberish is the greatest mystery of the entire film.

Cate Blanchett's villain Irina Spalko is right up there with the best on-screen villains, a rare accomplishment for an actress. She more than holds her own in action scenes and does so in a believable manner for a woman fighting a bunch of men. She's supposed to have psychic abilities, but she never uses them successfully. It seems Spielberg decided she was just delusional, perhaps a reference to the Russians being delusional with their dreams of psychic warfare.

But in a world where aliens can exist, why not psychic warfare? And yes, there are aliens in this movie. Indiana Jones is a pulp fiction character and the pulp fiction of the 1950s was indeed mostly sci-fi, but Indy and aliens just don't mix. This film almost turns Indy into a Forrest Gump-type character, someone who has witnessed and partook in the most famous moments of America's mid 20th century. Sorry - that's not Indiana Jones.

I walked out of the theater not wanting to see this movie again, but to instead go home and watch Raiders of the Lost Ark. In my opinion, that doesn't say much for this film, or the future of the franchise.

If Karen Allen had never been born there would have been absolutely no justification for this film's existence.

Matthew

Jeez I think this guys is completely wrong. I saw the first two the other day and then saw Crystal skull, None of the movies really had believable escapes.. thats what was fun about them. I loved the sword fight, and the action scenes and thought they were in style with the original. Also why wouldn't they use CGI.. why go ignore the tech when it's there. I agree the scene was out of character but how do we know he wouldn't have taken it to a musuem... sides wasn't indy making a buck off of that item in temple of doom? I don't think it was completely out of character, sides he put it back. I think this review is more of a knee jerk reaction to the final product not living up to movie pictured in his head. I could be wrong. I know I loved it, and as cheap as I am, and as expensive as tickets are, I want to see it again tomorrow.

Actually The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles turned Indy into someone who witnessed and partook of the most famous moments of the early 20th Century, so it shouldn't be surprising that Lucas and company would continue the trend.

PDS

Let me rephrase, I don't mean wrong. An opinion by definition can't be wrong, but I wholely disagree with the points made in the review.

No worries, saiyanspider! Everyone's entitled to their own opinion and you certainly make some good points.

I actually wrote this review after seeing the movie twice - I had a lot of friends who wanted to see it! - so I did have a lot of time to think over what I wanted to say.

And yeah Paul, the TV show did put Indy at a lot of famous events. I believe this film probably drew a lot from the Indy novels. But I bet that the most moviegoers - including myself - aren't familiar with that content so we just don't get it. Like in the movie when Mac said "just like in Berlin", we had no idea what he was talking about! I mean, Indy can miss the point, but as an audience we should be able to connect the dots or we're lost and therefore become detached.

Grace,

We didn't need to know more about the "just like in Berlin" thing. Everything we need to know about that is on the screen. But, from what I'm reading here, that little detail is a bonus for those familiar with the books. It's an inside joke that plays just fine on its own.

The issues with this movie are larger. I understand Lucas' desire to move away from the '40s chapter serial tone of the earlier Indy films (since we're not in that time-period any longer) , and I get the point of not having grim scenes of heads melting or hearts being pulled out of someone's chest. With that said, this movie suffered from a severe lack of originality which could've been balanced if Lucas, Spielberg, Koepp et. al. had really embraced the idea of doing a 1950s B-movie. Which this almost was.

More importantly, there was nothing at stake for Indiana Jones. In my own review of the movie , I discuss that Raiders had Indy's life, Marion's life, and the fate of the WORLD at stake. Temple of Doom had Indy's very beliefs challenged. And Crusade had, of course, the life of his dad.

This one? Nothing. And [SPOILER ALERT] that could've been solved if he had known Marion was the person he was going to save.

And I'm leaving out all the problems with character...and Karen Allen's acting (what on Earth happened there?).

Although I DO agree with your earlier sentiment about Kate Blanchett's portrayal of her character (in spite of the bizarre choices in the accent here and there -- realistic? I dunno). The character herself, however, was a Russian "Madame Rouge" and not terribly interesting overall.

I didn't expect it to be the past movies, I simply expected it stand on its own. But with clever movies like Pirates of the Caribbean or productions with powerful effects like Transformers, Indy's gotta step up his game.

Grace,

Check out the Lego Indiana Jones: The Original Adventures game.

It's a lot of fun and comes with a preview for the Lego Batman game which comes out in September.

Steve Chung

Gotta disagree with the review. This movie is a great, final addition (I assume final?) to the franchise. It was completely inline with the previous films, in regards to story and execution, and it was FUNNY! I forgot how much I miss actually rooting for the good guys, and being completely swept up in the over-the-top action sequences that Spielberg/Lucas crafted. I thought they did a very good job at not overusing the CGI, also. This movie retains a lot of the same texture and grit that the previous had. My only complaint is that Harrison looks older than dirt, but there's nothing anyone can do about it. Not surprisingly, he still delivers those great roundhouse punches that sound like a shotgun going off. That's hilarious but sooo right.

These movies aren't high art; they aren't supposed to be realistic, and we've come to expect and hope for a wild supernatural (or other) finale with Indiana Jones. I didn't get the impression AT ALL that they were contriving this story to hand the whip over to the kid. In fact, the final scene (with the hat)is clearly symbolic that there can be only one Indiana Jones. How could anyone miss that?

This was a suberb Indiana Jones movie, that adds another layer to the characters. I will definitely see this movie again in theatres.

Scott, I'm uncertain what movie you saw.

The execution was of this film was extraordinarily different from the others -- by design. The others, due to their time period were purposefully in the mode of "Saturday morning serials." In this go-round, all involved have said they were going more for '50s sci-fi. Personally, I feel they missed that boat too.

Also, as I've said above, the story is not in line with the previous: there was nothing at stake for Indy. Thus, there's no real peril (see my review for further explanation) as in previous movies.

Not to stomp all over your opinion, you're certainly allowed to enjoy the movie (no matter how bad it is ).

Also, I think the final scene was saying "not yet"...not "not ever." The plan is to do a trilogy (all 3 principals signed a 3-pic deal) and, my guess, is Lucas and Spielberg will relegate Indy to a supporting role the further we go.