The Man in the Hat
So this week marked the release of one of the most highly anticipated movies of the summer, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. I've now seen it twice -- once in a mostly-empty theatre on opening day with the guys from work, and once in a pretty crowded theatre on Sunday with Marc. I'm a big fan of pulp stories -- I am probably one of the few people that really enjoyed The Shadow movie, I guess -- and of course, the Indy movies are some my favorite movies of all time, so I was pretty excited about this. However, I was prepared for disappointment; let's face it, the Star Wars prequels definitely weren't up the hype, Harrison Ford is in his 60s, and there's no Nazis in the movie, even though it takes place in South America. The Boys from Brazil, anyone?
After the first viewing, I admit I was really disappointed. I felt really let down, and I had some gripes, but I couldn't really put them into anything solid. However, I have to admit I was in the minority of the people I saw it with (CK and Pat). Knowing I was going to be seeing it again with Marc, I decided to reserve judgement until I watched a second showing with a bigger crowd and reevaluate. I also got pointed by RPGnet to Todd Alcott's blog posts on the movie, which made me think a bit more about it thematically and I decided maybe I hadn't given it quite a fair shake (by the way, if you've never read Todd's dissections of the Bond movies or anything else, you owe it to yourself to take the time to do so, especially if you're interested in film).
So, after seeing it twice, the second time with a real crowd, I can say that I definitely feel I was too hard on the movie at first. It still isn't as good as the others, I think -- even the much maligned Temple of Doom was better, in my humble opinion (but I admit I have a weakness for Mola Ram as an iconic villian). However, it's still a serviceable movie, even if I'm not totally thrilled with every aspect of it. Do yourself a favor and either see it with a crowd or wait for DVD though -- there's a definite difference in seeing the movie with a big group and feeling the reaction of the audience, as is often the case with big spectacle movies like this. Unfortunately, coming immediately after the completely awesome Iron Man and right before what promises to be an amazing movie in The Dark Knight, the movie suffers from just being "good enough."
I have some more specific comments about what I did and didn't like behind the cut, since I don't want to spoil the movie for people who haven't seen it yet. For those of you who have, I'm very curious to hear what you guys think (especially the esteemed Mr. Chesnut).
After the first viewing, I admit I was really disappointed. I felt really let down, and I had some gripes, but I couldn't really put them into anything solid. However, I have to admit I was in the minority of the people I saw it with (CK and Pat). Knowing I was going to be seeing it again with Marc, I decided to reserve judgement until I watched a second showing with a bigger crowd and reevaluate. I also got pointed by RPGnet to Todd Alcott's blog posts on the movie, which made me think a bit more about it thematically and I decided maybe I hadn't given it quite a fair shake (by the way, if you've never read Todd's dissections of the Bond movies or anything else, you owe it to yourself to take the time to do so, especially if you're interested in film).
So, after seeing it twice, the second time with a real crowd, I can say that I definitely feel I was too hard on the movie at first. It still isn't as good as the others, I think -- even the much maligned Temple of Doom was better, in my humble opinion (but I admit I have a weakness for Mola Ram as an iconic villian). However, it's still a serviceable movie, even if I'm not totally thrilled with every aspect of it. Do yourself a favor and either see it with a crowd or wait for DVD though -- there's a definite difference in seeing the movie with a big group and feeling the reaction of the audience, as is often the case with big spectacle movies like this. Unfortunately, coming immediately after the completely awesome Iron Man and right before what promises to be an amazing movie in The Dark Knight, the movie suffers from just being "good enough."
I have some more specific comments about what I did and didn't like behind the cut, since I don't want to spoil the movie for people who haven't seen it yet. For those of you who have, I'm very curious to hear what you guys think (especially the esteemed Mr. Chesnut).
Okay, so now let's get down to brass tacks. I admit I was going into the movie knowing at least something about the plot (aliens) and that prejudiced me against it somewhat -- aliens seem out of place in the Indyverse, and I would much rather have seen something more like Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis, where the MacGuffin is mystical, not sci-fi, but it's not really fair to say that makes it a bad movie per se. I think, as far as the premise goes, it wasn't really a bad start. However, the movie does have plenty of other flaws, unfortunately.
So, overall, what's the verdict? A serviceable movie that no one can really claim "ruins the franchise," but nothing I'm going to rush out and buy on DVD as soon as it comes out either. Its biggest enemies, really, were some tough competition this summer for "best popcorn flick" and the franchise's own legacy.
- Let's start off with what is probably the most teeth-grindingly frustrating thing. Harrison Ford is a great actor. He is more than capable of pulling off almost any role he gets thrown at, and by now he should know Indy like the back of his hand. But he does some absolutely dreadful line readings at the beginning of the movie. Two in particular stick out in my mind -- first, when he and Spalko are having a tete-a-tete outside Hangar 51 and then later when he's talking to the dean of Marshall College at his home. In both scenes, it sounds like he's reading off a teleprompter (as Marc remarked) or just isn't really investing anything with emotion. I really wasn't expecting something like that and it threw me off the first time especially, and kind of ruined the whole scene for me.
- I'm really not sure I liked the action scene at the beginning of this movie; I think it took a bit longer to get started and go somewhere than the scenes in the first three movies, and the whole escaping the bomb in the fridge was a little too over the top. This isn't a horrible flaw, but it doesn't help that it's immediately followed by....
- ....a hamhanded Red Scare plot. While it was great to see Indy being interrogated by Jan Itor, FBI, this plot seems to come in logically enough, but then it gets dropped ten minutes later and doesn't go anywhere. Indy doesn't need more motivation to leave his professorial career behind for a while, after all. He's done it in all the other movies without anyone complaining, and Mutt arrives shortly thereafter to bring him the main plot anyway, so it seems to just be a weird post-9/11 hysteria reference or something that had a bigger role at one point, got cut down, and now doesn't seem to make sense.
- So....why are there guys just sitting around a Peruvian cemetery that no one knows holds some Spanish conquistador's tomb ready to attack anyone who prowls around? Now, angry natives are hardly totally out of left field for a pulp tale, but in all the other movies, there's always been at least some reason for them to be there. Belloq had recruited the Hovitos to help him out, the Thugees were based at Pankot palace, and those guys in Last Crusade were trying to protect the Grail. Do these guys just spend all their time at the cemetery waiting for someone to desecrate stuff? I had a similar problem with the natives that attack on the way to the temple in the later part of the movie, but at least they might live nearby and protect their holy sites. The guys in the cemetery just seemed to make no sense.
- John Hurt is painfully wasted, honestly. For an actor of his talent to spend 90% of his time on screen babbling nonsensically seems silly, but again, this is kind of a minor quibble.
- So....the four protagonists escape the clutches of the Soviets only to be recaptured ten minutes later, so the story makes no narrative progression. I know Todd Alcott points out that Indy's role changes drastically during the time they are away, but I think this could have been done in a better fashion -- there's no reason for an elaborate escape sequence (or, at least, for them to get recaptured). The Soviets still had the crystal skull, so there was still a reason for them to try to follow them, or head towards the same place.
- The monkeys. Oh those godawful monkeys. What was with that? The whole silly Mutt in the trees with the monkeys thing reeked of Lucas throwing crap in that didn't need to be there just to show off some CGI or cute animals. The prairie dogs in the beginning of the movie seemed to fall into the same trap.
- Spalko feels undeveloped to me, which is a shame, because Cate Blanchett does a good job with what she has. Pulp villains are usually not exactly anything too deep (hell, I love Mola Ram and he's not exactly freakin' Roy Batty), but aside from some vague psychic powers that are mentioned as an aside (and never really shown ever) and her rapier, there's not really much that's notable about her. Meanwhile, you have Belloq, who was at least a match for Indy, and Mola Ram (HE RIPS OUT FRIGGIN' HEARTS, MAN!). For some reason, even Donovan and the Nazi colonel in Last Crusade seem to get more to do than Spalko really gets to. Most of the time she is just ordering Indy around, it seems -- we needed to see her showing that she was good at what she does in her own right, I think.
- The payoff in the end is a bit of a letdown. Unlike the other three movies, where there's some sort of tangible reward that comes out of the whole adventure, in Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, the payoff is largely internal to the characters (Indy reconnects with his son and Marion). For a pulp-style movie, this seems a little out-of-character to me.
- Most of the time, Harrison Ford does a good job as Indy, even at his age. He doesn't quite pull it off all the time, and sometimes it strains credulity a bit, but still, for the most part, he does a good job.
- Colonel Jones of the OSS? Hell yes. Sign me up to watch those. Get Sean Patrick Flanery to do them or something.
- There were a lot of nods to the Young Indiana Jones Chronicles (such as Indy talking about his time with Pancho Villa), which I thought was really nice. I am a big fan of those, especially the ones with the aforementioned Sean Patrick Flanery, so it was nice to see.
- I have to say that the Soviets, while not quite as good as Nazis, were a good substitute, objections by some notwithstanding. And, as I said before, Cate Blanchett does a good job with what she has as Spalko.
- Shia LaBeouf did a good job as Mutt. I know he gets a lot of stick from some people, and when you're showing up in an iconic film that people are prone to criticize anyway, you're going to be stuck between a rock and a hard place. Unlike Ford, however, I never thought any of his lines fell flat and he did a good job with the scenes he was given. As a character, there's some scenes at the beginning of the movie where he seems way too defensive, even for a guy who is supposed to be defensive (taking "I've known a lot of Marys" as a slam against his mom, for instance), but it's not really that bad. Of all the things people could pick on in this movie, going after him seems like a rather silly thing to do.
- Marion frickin' Ravenwood. Yes, Karen Allen is getting on in years too, and maybe she doesn't cut quite as good a figure as she did in Raiders, but she manages to fall right back into her role and really does a superb job picking up a lot of the slack when other parts of the movie got to me. As much as I griped about the quicksand scene being somewhat unnecessary above, it really is a good scene, not just for the interplay between her and Indy ("Why the hell did you let him drop out of school?!"), but also for the only instance of Indy running into snakes in the whole movie. I don't think Ford played that scene as well as he could (I liked the scene in the jungle in Temple of Doom better as a one-off snake scene), but still a good thing to see.
- The ants were a pretty good creepy vermin followup to the rats of Last Crusade. There's a few shots in there that really creep me out. Not quite as good as the bugs of Temple of Doom, though.
So, overall, what's the verdict? A serviceable movie that no one can really claim "ruins the franchise," but nothing I'm going to rush out and buy on DVD as soon as it comes out either. Its biggest enemies, really, were some tough competition this summer for "best popcorn flick" and the franchise's own legacy.
Categories
Movies0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: The Man in the Hat.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.wraithwerks.net/mt/mt-tb.cgi/64
You weren't the only one who enjoyed 'The Shadow'. I loved the film--but am I the only one who loved 'Sky Captain'?
With all due respect, it sounds to me like you're apologizing for a rather mediocre film. If you have to see a movie with a crowd to appreciate it, isn't it the crowd you're enjoying, not the film? Just wondering.
Granted, I'm not a fan of the series. I adored 'Raiders', simply because that was the only film where I felt Indiana was a professor first, and this reluctant adventurer second. With 'Temple', Indy became something different--he was an indestructible Adventure Man! He had contacts all over the world! After the backlash against 'Temple', 'Last Crusade' went back to Nazis and the yuks--with Indy now being nothing more than Wile E. Coyote in a fedora.
The pulps were written by hungry men and women for an audience craving an escape from their lives. These films were made by multi-millionaires for merchandising rights. See the difference?
Lucas should really stop writing for films. That line Indy said about the problems with the other women he dated was HORRIBLE! The treatment of native people is on par with the typical treatment they get in hollywood films. The whole alien thing just made me laugh. When the mayan pyramids were discovered most europeans were convinced they were built by aliens because oh god surely the native people couldn't have done it themselves with their primitive societies. God I can't wait til this weekend for SATC and the Batman movie in a few months.
Kid Dork:
I thought Captain had some good bits, but as a movie it had problems holding together because they were trying to do too much in the movie, I thought. Throwing in every single possible pulp reference you possibly can makes the movie seem really disjointed -- I think it would have benefitted if it had picked one or two things and stuck with that, and saved the rest for the sequels, focusing on making a good, exciting story rather than a kitchen sink of pulp references. The acting fell short in a few parts too (Gwyneth Paltrow's reporter was one of the big problems -- one reason I was pleasantly surprised to see her do so well in Iron Man). A noble attempt, perhaps, but not really one I feel like I was going to miss out if I never saw.
As far as the mediocre film comment goes, yeah -- I'm not going to try to tell you this is a great movie. I don't think "serviceable" is a high compliment. Technically, it's fairly well made, which is still a step down from the others, as far as I'm concerned -- my few complaints with Raiders, Temple of Doom, and Last Crusade have nothing do with the directing, acting, or cinematography, only the script -- but the script is a big letdown in this iteration of the series.
I think you're being a bit hard on Temple of Doom and Last Crusade though; having pulp heroes be men of action is not really a new idea, and while I understand why a lot of people think Last Crusade did a disservice to many of the characters (especially Marcus and Sallah), taken on its own I think it's a good movie. Also, I don't know if you noticed, but in Temple of Doom Mola Ram RIPS A GUY'S HEART OUT OF HIS CHEST! :)
lilc:
I think if you went to this movie hoping for a nuanced portrayal of Native American peoples or even South America in general, you're probably not the right audience for a pulp serial-styled movie. I agree that the script had problems, and I agree that tribesmen who spend their entire day just waiting for someone to come and desecrate their holy ground so they can kill them is pretty stupid, but that's about as far as I'll go. That said, yes, I suspect Lucas is to blame for most of the groaners in this one (though I didn't have a problem with the Indy line to Marion -- I've always thought of all the Indy female pairings, she was the best one for him).
I'm not sure what to expect with the SATC movie -- I was a big fan of the series, but I don't know if a movie will work. I am very much looking forward to The Dark Knight, though.
I agree that tribesmen who spend their entire day just waiting for someone to come and desecrate their holy ground so they can kill them is pretty stupid, but that's about as far as I'll go.
Have you seen The Ruins? Oh my god, there's an entire village that does just that.
You're right--I'm probably am being too hard on the the other Indy films. I just so loved the first one. As for Sky Captain, I think one of the reasons every pulp cliche was thrown in was because everyone was convinced that there would never be a sequel. I like to think of the parallel world where there were, and we'd be sitting down to SKY CAPTAIN 4: THE RISE OF...um...something or other.
Actually I wasn't particularly offended by the people spending their days waiting around the holy ground. I just thought the whole alien worshiping and knowledge teaching thing was really offensive and played to the worst kind of stereotype. My hubby is on call this weekend, so I will have to wait til next week to see SATC. I am avoiding seeing spoilers since I am sure there would be tons! I see from the preview Mr Big finally got his under eye bags problem "fixed".