I just watched this.

By no means is this the best of the Indy films, but it's not like it ruins the series in any way.

If they just cut out some stupid shit nuclear test at the beginning, the snake as a rope gag, the monkeys, etc. while keeping the story the same this movie would be about 70% better.

But basically, it followed the same basic template of an Indiana Jones movie and while at times it was overdone it never seemed like I wasn't watching an Indiana Jones movie.

this movie is bad.

i just went and saw it after reading ebert's review of 3.5/4. so like i expected somethign quality like Raiders or Last Crusade. But it wasn't even remotely the same kind of storytelling. This was over-the-top, dumbed down, less stylized, more generic and stupidly simple. The characters are flat, other than one crazy guy and Indy himself. Shia is terrible. There is little chemistry between him and ford. Cate Blanchette's character isn't even hatable -- she's more of a running gag ("oh look, she's russian, thats funny, watch as she acts overly cartoonish and gets hit by a giant slingshotting branch).

I liked the stoy, well, the ideas behind it. I feel like it could have made a good Indy movie. But they went absolutely overboard on useless special effects (hmmm.. george lucas sure makes realistic gophers!!)

compare it to raiders, and it is dumbed the fuck down to be more accessible and re-creating the franchise as action tripe. i won't ruin it but some of the scenes are so ridiculous and stupid that you will want to scream. the "cameo" sean connery makes actually made me laugh out loud. there's one particular swordfight that basically sums up the bastardization of the movies.

anyway yeah i hated it. there were a couple cool fights, and an okay concept, but that was it

Hahahaha, this movie :-(

I tried to watch this twice, first time I fell asleep and my friend who managed to stay awake told me that I wouldn't benefit much from a second try. I ignored that because I'm a pretty big fan of the first and third old indiana jones films. God damn.


On the whole I hope they make ONE MORE because they seem to have an alternating GOOD/SHIT/GOOD/SHIT/GOOD thing going on now like the Star Trek movies

Yeah I didn't actually know Lucas had written this thing, I should have come at this with way lower expectations. Even so I feel like I've just watched The Mummy Returns.

This movie sucked!

Certain scenes were entirely pointless: FBI scene, nuclear test scene and on a whole the movie just fell flat. The characters sucked. Cate Blanchett is a great actress but her character was so devoid of any kind of personality other than the russian army woman stereotype - and frankly the rest of the characters were pretty bland. Shia... UGH.. the last scene of the movie made everyone in the theatre cringe when he reached for Indy's hat to put it on. I seriously hope that they don't try any spinoffs with him.

You know what else sucked about this film? There were no booby traps. Yeah, none whatsoever. As soon as the group got into the waterfall cave they just easily walked into the chamber full of the alien skeletons without any problems. Oh, wait - mayans attacked them for 20 seconds, but then, once again, the skull acting as deus ex machina was able to miraculously get them out of that situation. What a disappointment. I really expected some elaborate traps and problems to overcome in the temple - not simply disappearing stone steps. It's like the film built up the mysticism of this golden kingdom but once the film got there there was nothing to show. The destination was just so empty.

All in all, this film was way too CHEESY, even for previous Indiana Jones standards. What a bad way to go out for a franchise. ;(

Mummy Returns meets National Treasure 2... meets Close Encounters of the Third Kind

this is such a terrible movie. worse than i thought it'd be even. unfortunately i got dragged to it because my family was PUMPED UP HARD to see it. of course they ended up hating it too, even though they were REALLY TRYING HARD TO LIKE IT.

this movie misses the mark on so many damn fronts, even for what it is. the other indiana jones movies are truly not half as good as they're made out to be, but if anything the drama and presentation generally work. if you're ok with turning your brain off for two hours, the movies are pretty entertaining and are generally engaging. this one never gets to that point. they waste characters, feature absurd amount of senseless cgi, and never pick up any positive momentum.

i really don't like how much the movie screams SEQUEL with that boring fucker shia labeouf. man what a waste of goddamn time he is. it bothers me that people are so hungry for something to blindly stare to escape from their hollow, pathetic lives that an indiana jones movie with shia labeouf would probably QUENCH THE THIRST/SILENCE THE DEMONS and make billions of fucking dollars. GET READY 2009 FOR INDIANA JONES AND THE WASTED LIFE OF AMERICA


also i want to state for the record that cate blanchett is the most obnoxious, unconvincing actress i've ever fucking seen. i started laughing uncontrollably during her first scene, as did several other people in the theatre. unfortunately the HUMOR wore off after a while and it just got extremely taxing on my nerves. i guess it's nice to see someone that tries, but jesus christ does she actually think that humanity is just this cluster of annoying, bloated stereotypes? she's like this in every fucking movie i've ever seen her in. it's like she plays every damn movie as ABSURDIST COMEDY in her attempt to STAND OUT/BE VIVID.

I can't believe people didn't like this.
I thought it was absolutely brilliant and i actually raved about it to quite a lot of people i didnt know that well afterwards.

The main complaint seems to be "Fucking hell aliens. Bloody GOD was in 2 of them and nobody batted an eyelid. These are meant to be over the top adventure films.
I went into the cinema expecting to be dissapointed and i just wasnt.
Great film.

Yeah the Ark of the Covenant and that aren't... like, common knowledge. This one is slightly more obvious where people will go OH ALIENS because aliens are generic and EVERYONE knows about them. The design was generic and stereotypical, and blargh. I can see what you're getting at, man, but the difference lies in the obscurity of the material.

Jesus Christ I cannot say what I want to. I think headphonics actually said it, but this was my attempt!

Not that the movie was bad, I still enjoyed it. But yeah.

Not only were the aliens are terrible copout but the characters didn't even react at all to them! There was no questioning their existence and no one even had a surprised reaction. They were all like "ok, let's just get this skull back to where it's supposed to go"...

The more I think about this movie the more I hate it. Why was Indy even bringing it back in the first place? The skull was supposed to bring power to the person who restored it, but I didn't get the feeling that Indy wanted power by bringing it back. It didn't even feel like he was doing it for the sense of adventure. I just never sensed any sort of motivation from him... They could have went with the angle that by bringing the skull back his friend would regain his sanity but that never was explicitly mentioned or portrayed. I still am confused by the motivations from all these characters.

Also, why was he so quick to obey the enemy's commands? (At first I thought that he was hypnotized by staring into the skull and was now obeying the Russians... but nope, he was just being dumb.) The old Indy would never comply so easily. This whole Indiana Jones has aged and is beyond his prime angle was just a slap in the face to the viewers. We don't want to see our hero get old and stupid... we all wanted to see him kick ass. The many jokes of him doing things inadvertantly and sucking weren't funny.. they were just cringe-worthy to me. Also, he began to re-trust Mac way too quickly. Come on, when you shift one character's perception of another with a single line ("I'm a double agent") that's just lazy. There should have been some hesitation and questioning on Indy's part - he could have discovered one of those blinking LED lights and confronted him, or been watching him more closely. But no, more wasted character potential. (And don't even get me started on Cate Blanchett's character... that's a prime example of character wastage).

The whole movie felt like empty characters were being dragged across various action scenes. 

I am extremely surprised that people actually enjoyed this film (unless they are so into action sequences that they are blinded by them or are such huge Indiana Jones fans that they can't see things objectively but through rosy coloured glasses.)

I've tried not to read too much of this because I am seeing the film tomorrow. But for those of you who think that realism was never a huge factor in the Indy films, is something I disagree with.

The progression in each of the Indy flims is very much one from natural towards supernatural at the end. In the beginning you think, "Well the ark is just a box," or "Eternal life, no wai!?" or "Magic rocks don't kill a village, whatever." And in this respect Indy was always a character who in the films usually got by off the skin of his teeth. That being said, as the films continue through thier plotlines, the lines between the realism and the supernatural are blurred, until the climax at the end when they are altogether broken. An example of this was in Raiders, when you see that the swastika wsa burned off the box while its in cargo in the boat, or in Temple of Doom when he pulls the guy's heart out and its still beating. Part of the big suspense of the films revolves around the fact that it is not clear weather or not the McGuffin is actually magic, like how in Raiders the ark is opened to reveal nothing but sand inside.... that is, until the transition between the natural and supernatural is broken, and the superstitions are confirmed. And because Indy is an expert in the Occult, superstition is where he knows his stuff, and its usually at this moment that he resolves the main conflict of the story. (says the chant to set the stones on fire, picks the right Grail, keeps his eyes shut through the crazy nazi-death scene).

So yeah, the idea of realism actually plays a huge role in the Indy films. Indy is also not some kind of superhero and there is a moment in each film when Indy is vulnerable, helpless, and on the edge of death, and usually, literally, hanging on by a thread (Raiders: the truck scene, Temple: the voodoo scene, OR the bridge scene, Crusade: the tank chase). He usually gets shot, stabbed, poisoned, set on fire, thrown off a  cliff, or something like that. He's not meant to be some kind of Stephen Segal type action hero, because that doesn't fit in with the progression of the film. Indy is the realism, and the McGuffin is the supernatural, and as he gets closer to it the idea for the viewer of what is possible is supposed to diminish.

Now if this film doesn't at least hold to that established setup, I can see it being a total disappointment.

One thing people should know is to not go into this movie expecting Raiders of the Lost Ark quality material. You have to remember that Spielberg and Lucas have been senile for about a decade. So, if you go in expecting Temple of Doom quality you will enjoy this movie much more.

Not only were the aliens are terrible copout but the characters didn't even react at all to them! There was no questioning their existence and no one even had a surprised reaction. They were all like "ok, let's just get this skull back to where it's supposed to go"...

In all fairness, when you've first hand witnessed god's wrath, seen a man rip out people's still beating hearts, and stolen the holy fucking grail I don't think ALIENS and killer army ants is going to come as any sort of surprise.

I haven't really got much of a problem with the whole aliens thing. My problem is with the delivery, direction and craft of the film. It's all wrong and doesn't feel right. The pacing is awful and it suffers from a lack of scenes that bridge the gap between the action. The acting from Harrison Ford seemed like he was doing impressions of his own character rather than actually being him. So many useless characters. The whole love thing going on was really hard to swallow and unbelieveable since Marion's character was pretty much redudant. The snakes, the monkeys, the goafers. The list goes on....

I watched this film as an avid fan, but feel I have judged it objectively. I kind of get the impression that those defending the movie must be in denial or something if they think that this is anywhere near the standard of an Indiana Jones movie. 

Well, following that logic, once you've seen God's wrath, neither of those other two should come as much of a surprise either, and they clearly did in the second and third movies!

maybe so, but seeing men rip out hearts, melting nazis and the holy grail (in that order) would be increasingly surprising each time! aliens probably wouldn't (this is the 50s we're talking about - saucer-mania)

Well, following that logic, once you've seen God's wrath, neither of those other two should come as much of a surprise either, and they clearly did in the second and third movies!

... the second film takes place before the other ones though