Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull

Indy at the movie theater is an unforgettable experience. I readily admit immediately and without torture that I didn’t like a lot of things about The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (I think the Tarzan-like Shia and the monkeys bothered me the most), but Spielberg is simply too good a director to spoil the return of the legend. The 50s stylization absorbed me totally without problem and I was expecting to see the Indy senior, so there was no reason to be disappointed. Plus, Shia LaBeouf brings a breath of fresh air into the Jones universe and his character easily won me over. And the spectacular finale in the room with..., you know what I mean, really got to me. The fourth Indiana Jones is no better or worse than the original trilogy, it’s just a lot different. A slightly low 5. (23/05/2008)

The trio of Spielberg, Lucas, and Ford reminds me of a bunch of pensioners who will jokingly rebuke you if you want to let them take your seat on a tram. You will rarely meet them, but you will not forget them for a long time. Or... The original plan of having a worthy ending to the series that turned into a comedy-action hit that could be envied by folks generations younger than me, made me laugh like a little kid. This film features a full-blown two hours of stylish catchphrases, a great atmosphere, and a polished feeling that perfectly reflects two things: The mindfulness of aging gentlemen and the fame of Shia LaBeouf - the kid is incredible! (24/05/2008)

I’m reading other reviews and what the not very satisfied viewers are complaining about the most is that the new Indie is science fiction. Personally, that doesn’t bother me it all, on the contrary, I welcome and praise this shift in Jones’s adventures. What I can’t praise, however, is that it has lost all the humour, or at least the humour that I liked – I don’t consider childish jokes like a ground squirrel (curious monkey) turning around behind me to be good enough for a legend like Indie. Indiana Jones was never about realism, so I don’t mind the innumerable WTF moments in the plot, but the triple slide on huge waterfalls in a Jeep and covering from an atomic explosion in a fridge were almost too much, even for me. 65% (01/10/2008)

The third sequel of the best adventure franchise set itself a difficult task: not to thematically continue, but to further develop the character of the individual stories, which always unfolded according to which genre and cultural corners of cinema the episode was referring to, while at the same time paying a nostalgic tribute to its own predecessors in a time of prevailing attractions. Both were successful. From the first scene, Spielberg both sets the story in a new phase full of new potential formulas for an adventure film (the 1950s marked by Western and Eastern hostility, the nuclear threat and a culture brimming with science fiction), and humorously winks at the viewer with an amusing iconisation of the beloved main character and formal devices that directly reference the original trilogy. And from this point of view, far from falling apart under the filmmakers' hands, as many have mentioned, the story brilliantly and systematically capitalises on all the suggested "50s" motifs, right up to the final alien interlude (similar to the way the second film, for example, played beautifully with Bollywood mythology, or Indian stories in general), while constantly entertaining with the tried and tested, but again inventively delivered "Indy" form (almost nothing is missing of the main attractions of the previous films), and the interaction of the old characters (Ford kind of moves into Connery's position). The only thing that bothered me a lot this time is the exaggeration of otherwise entertaining action scenes (the mine carts in the second one were also out of reality, but they still look like a viable tourist attraction compared to being kicked by a nuke and triple-dropping down a giant waterfall), the less elaborate villains and sometimes rather ugly sets. But it’s still highly entertaining and superbly acted (Ford pulls it off like in his youth, but he is well supported by LaBeouf and Ray Winstone, whose character of a "triple" agent is another great reference to the fifties) and packed with so many funny details (e.g. ants carrying away a stray hat after the most extensive action scene) that it is impossible not to love this Indy. When the greats like Spielberg and Lucas are no longer walking the earth, it will be difficult for our generation to be so perfectly returned to our childhood. (18/07/2018)

My god, so much hype! The discussion forum had several thousand posts before the premiere, half of the FilmBooster users experienced many sleepless nights playing the same trailer over and over again, and impatiently crossed off the days on the calendar until the midnight premiere, for which tickets had been lying on the table for quite a few days, of course. And all of this was totally shit, because as usual, the most anticipated blockbuster of the year, if not the decade, is utter crap, and nobody can believe what actually happened and what went wrong. Indy is the past. The feeling of the 1980s will never return, just like the time when these films were made. Spielberg tries to stick to the old ways (titles, references to age, sound of fights, filter-free camera), but brutally knocks himself down with a ton of visual effects and accumulating nonsense, which are a bit too much even for the playful Indy. Ford surprised me with his strength and vitality – he can still handle his fists and whip well – but otherwise it's just a plain and boring setup mashed up with today's trend of “action - plot, action - plot, action - plot...”. Boring and average, not even pretty. Even Temple of Doom entertained me more. (02/07/2008)