Discussions
Indiana Jones 4 Review
Posted by shagnast2100 • 5/22/08 • Subscribe to this Discussion [RSS] • Report This Topic
Topics: crystal skull, ford, indiana jones, labeouf, lucas, movie, paramount, shia, spielburg
I went to the midnight showing of Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. I know how I feel about it, now I would like to hear what you all think! I will save my review until the end of the first day so not to spoil it for anyone, but know this...I only gave it 3 Stars
User Comments
-
The main question is, 3 stars OUT OF HOW MANY?
In ratings, some people use 10 as the maximum while others use 4 and some even 5.
-
haha fair enough...3 out of 5!
-
-
That's about what I've been seeing from most reviewers. From reading the reviewers whose opinions I often share, I'm guessing that after seeing the latest Indiana Jones flick, I'll place it safely in the category I refer to as "worth watching."
-
I wrote this, it doesn't have any spoilers, but it's a pretty straight forward negative opinion.
retailhellish.blogspot.com/2008/05/indiana-jones-and-death-of-my-childhood....
And it's just an opinion folks
-
very well written stiles...I could not agree more. I was very very very disappointed. I don't think I could have said anymore, you hit it all in that review.
-
Thanks Shag! I used to write movie reviews for a living and I stopped because... well, anyone can write movie reviews, and the amount of hate mail I was getting was just not worth it. I'm a huge Harrison Ford fan, and that little 'review' piece was hard to write, because I really wanted to like it. Have a great weekend. - J
-
-
I have not seen the movie but just a few minutes ago read a review that was written about it.
The sentence that sticks in my mind is when the reviewer said, "There is not a single minute of this movie that was good."
Like I said I have not seen it but that is a pretty harsh thing to say about a movie. -
I didn't love the movie. I hated how they used CGI-it was gratuitous and really, really fake looking. I also really disliked Shia LaBouf's character, he was annoying. Lots of things were far-fetched and it was lacking in the rollercoaster adventure that the first movies had.
But I suppose everyone has to see it, just because it's Indy.-
It looked real to me, A kid not use to watching "Real" movies. They are playing to a younger generation and we have lower expectations. -
-
-
If you set aside the first movies and take it for the story, it was pretty good. I certainly didn't expect that sort of story. I think it got in the way of the characters. There also weren't enough puzzles and tricks to getting to the goal, just chase scene and bam. I wanted more swinging on the whip and giant stones closing on people. National Treasure two did a better job of that part, with much the same starting concept.
The movie is definitely worth watching, but not paying theater prices to see. -
A good matinee, take the grand kids (unless they're afraid of bugs) the movie was 2 hours long, but it didn't seem like it took that long. I did notice 2 1957 chevy's in the picture, and pondered are those too new? -
So, the short consensus so far seems to be, Netflix it, if at all.
-
Saw it yesterday.
In my opinion it is missing many of the key elements that made the previous movies so good:
- It is far too slow. The opening scene is underwhelming and it takes a full hour for Indy's quest to actually get properly underway. The only redeeming feature is a truly excellent chase scene in which Shia LaBeouf does most of the work.
- The characters don't work well together. There is too much sentimentality which feels forced. The dialogue lacks the snappiness of earlier instalments and the actors don't play off each other enough.
- Not enough creepy-crawlies, booby traps and action sequences. Aren't those the reasons we love Indiana Jones? [Spoilers] To make things worse it appears they were discarded to make room for some truly dubious plot devices, such as setting half the movie in the USA and using futuristic UFOs rather than ancient artefacts. [/Spoilers]
- Indy is too old. Sorry to say it, but that outfit doesn't fit Harrison Ford any more and much of the time he feels more like co-star than a hero. I understand there's not much they can do about his age, but the fact is that it does act as a detriment to the film.
I recently re-watched the old movies before going to see the new one. Perhaps I would have appreciated it more had the images of former greatness not been so fresh in my mind, but there's no doubt it is a nostalgic reunion tour rather than a worthy addition to the existing trilogy. -
i watched all three movies before going to this one.
gotta say, i loved it. i put it right up there with last crusade. i thought it was clever, well done - more than enough creepy crawlies, action scenes were good particularly considering harrison's age and how cognizant the writers were of Indy's age. i loved the fact that a movie actually showed a "man of action" who was getting too old for this stuff ... and he regularly admitted that (not to mention proved it) over the course of the film.
i thought all of the artifact plot fit the time period (1957) perfectly, as did the politics - though it was weird to see the janitor from Scrubs as an FBI agent.
the gags were great; i loved the chemistry of the actors.
the movie is a throwback to the old serial movies and to golden age comics - and i think with those things in mind (as i kept in mind with movies 1 and 3), it's a 5 out of 5. obviously, i'm in the minority on this.
frankly, i can't wait for the DVD to come out. i wanna watch it again when i can rewind or pause a few bits.
Add Your Comment
Login to leave a message.
