Comments on: 10 Lessons ‘Indiana Jones 5’ Can Learn From ‘Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull’

By: Mal

Mal — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:53:15 +0000

I agree with everything you said 100%. In all honesty I personally think that we should\’ve kept Indy at 3 films and the novels. Back in the 90\’s they released all these amazing Indiana Jones novels for adults (some were not so good lol) that took place during the 20\’s before the events of Raiders. They kept the Indy flair and style and were fun but also well written. I think it should\’ve stayed with the 3 films and the novels rather than doing 4. I don\’t really consider Kingdom canon because it\’s really not an Indy film at all. Another thing that I think they should do is go back to the believeability (I made a new word I think lol) of Indiana Jones. Even though Indy had a lot of supernatural stuff that happened it was still somewhat believable. I could believe that the Ark had that power or the Thuggee cult and the Holy Grail. The combat was also somewhat believable since Indy was not indestructable and frequently got his butt handed to him (remember Raiders and Temple Of Doom with the big dudes?). With Kingdom they just threw all that out the window with the whole "alien" thing. It also felt really forced seeing as how in the 50\’s America was obsessed with "little green men". I just thought the alien card was really forced and it didn\’t feel real to me. The Ark felt real and so did the Grail and the Shankara stones. Even though they had that supernatural feel with them it still felt believeable but the aliens were too much. The novels are also believeable even though they have supernatural things. The Peril At Delphi (the first novel) deals with some supernatural happenings but it\’s done in a way that makes it almost realistic. I believe that this stuff could happen. Kingdom made Indy too silly for me.

By: Conroe Rance

Conroe Rance — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:53:15 +0000

Was this writer on drugs??? An article about "what didn\’t work" in Indy 4, and he left out the #1 reason fans didn\’t like it – because it was filled with stupid stuff! Shia swinging with the monkeys, the gopher from Caddyshack, (at least he mentioned the nuke fridge), Olympic fencing with one leg each on a different car, falling down a 500-foot waterfall without even a paper cut, any scene with John Hurt\’s character, etc.

The movie sucked because it was filled with stupid stuff. Stupid scenes. Stupid lines. Stupid effects. I loved Indy 1-3, and about now I\’m thinking Indiewire should hire me instead of this joker because clearly he doesn\’t have the first clue as to why Indy 4 has such a bad reputation.

By: Stephen

Stephen — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:53:15 +0000

Yes. Douglas Slocombe was a legend.

By: Dirk

Dirk — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:53:15 +0000

Agreed on all points in article except nooo waaaay is Skull better than any of the first three! It gave me great ire: all over the place, and that bloody skull looked like a fancy novelty bong. Temple of Doom was my fave as a kid, though Raiders is the best: a near perfect film; if there are flaws, I don\’t know what they are.

By: ANDREW

ANDREW — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:53:15 +0000

Greig Fraser would be a good choice for DoP. His \’Huntsman\’ work was perfectly suited to the fantasy and adventure genre of old.

By: Dany

Dany — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:53:15 +0000

For me any many other people Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom is the greatest movie ever made.

By: Jim

Jim — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:53:15 +0000

I would add one more: "Shoot more of the film on location". It was painfully evident that very little of "Grystal Skull" was shot outside the backlot. Peru, especially, was so cheaply realized that it felt like something out of an episode of an 80s TV show.

By: Perry

Perry — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:53:15 +0000

The relationship between Indy and Short Round in TOD was more compelling than anything in Crystal Skull. There\’s a ton of problems with Crystal Skull (amply cited by Mike Hobbs) but Ford really wasn\’t one of them. He made the most out of a terrible script.

By: Steven

Steven — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:53:15 +0000

@Charles-Agreed. I would get someone else to do it who understands the work of the previous films as well as go for something that is simple and to the point. Plus, use practical effects.

By: Charles

Charles — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:53:15 +0000

DON\’T USE JANUSZ KAMINSKI. His look is all wrong for the Indy movies. Unfortunately, Spielberg and Kaminski are attached at the hip at this point.

By: Mike Hobbs

Mike Hobbs — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:53:15 +0000

Raiders is truly an epic adventure film. As simple as its formula was the ingredients that went into it were magical. I personally love Temple of Doom though it does have its flaws. However it\’s strength resounds in its daring willingness to be try something different even if it must take on the title of less liked. Last Crusade did a lot of things right, of course, adding a whole new dimension to Indiana Jones by exploring his upbringing and his relationship with his father. Such exploration is what makes a series thrive. Again personally, I don\’t think the third film is really any better than the second though fans as a whole would certainly disagree with me. I believe they both have their own strengths–I\’m left with a different feeling after watching each one but this isn\’t bad. As for The Crystal Skull, well I don\’t want to sound too critical. I really liked nuking the fridge (that\’s right) but nothing else in the movie worked for me. Once the crystal skull narrative took over I found almost every component to be frustrating and disappointing…I found Marion awkward and unlikeable, Mac uninteresting and convoluted…the plot beats were uninspired and without any real excitement or suspense, no sense of involvement for the audience (like the scene involving Indy dangerously staring into the crystal skull while the Soviets monitor the effects on his mind. Harrison Ford played it well but it just didn\’t translate as anything of any consequence) …not to mention the very unimpressive alien at the end. I\’ll go one more and criticize the recycling of Holy Grail music used throughout.

By: Miguel

Miguel — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:53:15 +0000

Nice article. Pretty much with you on everything.

Although, Temple of Doom was quite fun, though.