Film

What's on at the cinema plus reviews of the latest movie and DVD releases

Updates:

Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (2008)

Director: Steven Spielberg

Time Out rating

Average user rating

121 reviews

Movie review

From Time Out London

Dr Indiana Jones: a hokey, old-fashioned movie action-hero from the childhood of many film-goers who was based, back in the burgeoning summer blockbuster days of the early 1980s, on a hokey, old-fashioned movie action-hero from the childhood of director Steven Spielberg.

Yes, in case you haven’t realised, Harrison Ford is back as the university professor with a sideline in battling bad guys in a strictly archaeological context and a skill for dodging bullets and boulders in comic book fashion – without suffering a graze. Other pop-iconic inventions, like Batman, have since enjoyed the post-modern treatment at the hands of younger filmmakers like Christopher Nolan, but Spielberg avoids any nod-and-a-wink approach. There’s the odd self-referential moment that points to Indy’s age and to past plots but mostly this is played as straight as the fringe on Cate Blanchett as the villain of the piece.

It’s 1957, Jones has a good war record behind him, the Cold War is in full thrust, and fetish fans can rest easy in the knowledge that Indy has kept that hat, whip and leather jacket from his younger days. He digs them out when Mutt (Shia LaBeouf), a young lad who rides into the movie in a nod to Brando in ‘The Wild One’ – all leathers and attitude – offers Indy the challenge of hunting down the Crystal Skull of Akator.

Of course, Indy’s not alone in the search. There are Soviet agents on his trail, led by Blanchett. These are the same agents, all with that glassy stare that American movies often attribute to commies, who we’ve already seen Indy battle with on an American air field in the film’s first action set-piece. For this episode, he narrowly escapes from a nuclear test-bomb that’s detonated on a mock-up of the typical ’50s town. This is surprisingly chilling in tone and slightly recalls the creepy suburban set-up of the early scenes of Spielberg’s ‘AI’. But only Spielberg would puncture this nod at nuclear horror with a quick cut to an anodyne shot of fluffy desert animals.

The rest is familiar. There are car chases, quick sand, river pursuits, poison darts, and exotic locations from the Nevada desert to the jungles of Peru and the Amazon. The only real additions to the mix are some new characters, including Shia LaBoeuf as Indy’s younger sidekick and Ray Winstone as a companion closer to his own age, and a recourse to computer imagery that becomes less and less hidden as the film unfolds. There’s a nod to alien involvement towards the end of the film that feels out of place, and the more the film relies on spectacle, both from special effects and from production design, the more it segues from what audiences really want: human stunts and up-close combat. It’s all perfectly acceptable as a minor thrill ride – nothing more. The film doesn’t feel as punchy, amusing or as fast-paced as the best of the other three films, but it’s passable both as nostalgia and old-fashioned action-adventure that favours impossible leaps from waterfalls over psychological insights and anything in the realm of plot that you could possibly need to believe.

It’s John Hurt as an old academic buddy of Mr Jones who utters a significant line as this fourth adventure, 21 years since the last, comes to a close in a scene that’s so sentimental – even by Spielberg’s standards – that you might be shoving your fist down your throat at the very sight of it. He ponders ‘How much of human life is lost in waiting.’ Is that Mr Spielberg suggesting we shouldn’t get our hopes up over these silly things? If so, he’s definitely right. Expect little, remember that the first three films were all basic affairs, and you might just – just – avoid disappointment.

Author: Dave Calhoun 2008-05-18 19:44:54

Time Out London Issue 1970, May 21 - 27, 2008

Bookmark

User reviews of this film

Subbu said...

Posted on Jun 11 2008 16:32 The movie is same as Nicolas Cage's 'National Treaure' in many ways. One who has seen 'National Treasure' will nto enjoy this movie....

Report as inappropriate
Madara said...

Posted on Jun 11 2008 05:20 ps. i rather have the movie title change from indiana jones and the crystal skull to magnetic skull..

Report as inappropriate
kerry jo said...

Posted on Jun 09 2008 23:18 I grew up watching these films and if you go into it with the same mentality as you did when the last one came out you won't be dissapointed. ( I was 8 at the time) Combining two of Lucas's fav themes its worth a watch after you have got your sugary SITC fix i kind of felt for Harrison Ford, time to hang up the whip now indie?

Report as inappropriate
Joel Hyams said...

Posted on Jun 09 2008 16:14 I just had to, had to see it, had to be utterly dissapointed by an totally nonsensical pile of festering drivel. Picture the scene, Speilburg, Lucas and Ford all relaxing at the skywalker ranch, just seen the edited version and thought, WOW what a cracking film we've got here, what an absolute scorcher, what a pile of absolute dross, save your money and get the that root canal you've been talking about, trust me it'll be more entertaining...

Report as inappropriate
Paul said...

Posted on Jun 08 2008 17:22 Nobody tells me what to do in my place.... Karen Allen (Marion Ravenwood) played a tough kicking, sexy, independent jaw cracking drinking gal who took no nonsense from anybody. All Spielberg's got her doing in the latest flick is smiling, oh and driving everywhere looking 'frumpy'. When Harrison Ford changes into the Indy attire it's a relief as the suits he wears in the film make him appear too old. (Harrison plays the part so well). The Last Crusade it isn't, nor Raiders, nor Temple of Doom, but there are those moments which make you feel - ah! there’s the old Indy I know. Unfortunately, the things it misses are the Cario Sword swinging, Mirror jaw breaking (priceless), Lao Che bullet ridden gong moments. Ray Winstone (annoying), Jim Broadbent (all due respect) is no substitute for Delholm Elliot, John Hurt (not required), Cate Banchett Russian accent kept dropping, no Sallah, no Connery. no apparent torture devices which turn into coat hangers and no perfectly timed Belloq (Paul Freeman) type moments of wit. However it's worth going just for the Indy mannerisms you know and love.

Report as inappropriate
ND said...

Posted on Jun 08 2008 08:48 If you are expecting a nostalgic trip to the 80s trilogy you will be very much disappointed. The movie has lost all of the magic of Raiders and has resulted in a weak movie with over use of CGI, a poor plot and poor villains. Before dressing a movie with special effects you must have characters you love,characters you hate and a good plot. THIS FILM CONTAINS NONE OF THIS. The only character you warm to of course is Indy,who even at 65, delivers a believable performance, and is far less of a relic than the rest of the characters. The film's early moments with the Nuclear Explosion was a great idea, but spoiled by the introduction of fluffy desert animals. The character Mutt is as annoying as the unbelievably bad 'tarzan' swinging scenes and surviving 3 waterfall moments. The ending is poorly planned and disappointingly executed. It was like a bad Close Encounters meeting x-files. In terms of end product and overall feeling of disappointment, I think George Lucas decided that he would go back to 1999 and make us all suffer through another dose of Phantom Menacitis. To sum up, the good points..Harrison Ford. The bad ones...the plot, the other characters, the over use of CGI, unbelievable and very very impossible action scenes, a villain which wasnt evil enough, and the ending. Bring back a solid script and use cgi in patches....sorrry Spielberg I am a fan of yours but this was no Minority Report or Jaws.

Report as inappropriate
Fletch said...

Posted on Jun 07 2008 22:04 Utter pap!

Report as inappropriate
Laura Jones said...

Posted on Jun 06 2008 14:29 What is everyone going on about, this movie was classic Indiana Jones. Too many people are entering the cinema with huge expectations of old Indie, it contained all the elements sought after in an adventure flick such as this, Action, Great acting (Shia Lebouf was excellent, and Harrison ford genius as always) and a great comic script that keeps you engaged throughout. The story line was thrilling and exciting, it kept you wondering and on edge of your seat up until the end. Strange the movie may be, but what do you expect from talents such as Lucas and Spielberg. Oh and the sets mostly hand built were jaw dropping! I do not know about everyone else but i am not a film critic i have no film or media qualifications, i am merely a viewer who wants to be entertained, and i was it delivered for me i went out with a warm feeling and i for one am glad of the return of the snake fearing adventurer!!! So thank you Spielberg and Lucas for allowing a 21-year-old Indiana Jones fan to see him on the big silver screen, Historic!!!

Report as inappropriate
sarah said...

Posted on Jun 06 2008 13:05 This was so awful and dissapointing. What a waste of money. The storyline didn't follow and noticed people yawning halfway through. For a Steven Speilburg film i feel he has let himself down big time. I read that Harrison Ford wanted to do this for his fan's but he now has no fans. What an insult to the previous Indianna Jones film's that have made him a household name.
It was a waste of good actor's , everything was so unbelievable especially the fencing scene which was cringeworthy. Was so bored that was thinking about work!!
Please do not go see this film unless you are 10 years old or under as this will be the only age range which would enjoy it. Even as left the cimema could hear people talking about how dissapointed they were and how let down they felt. Overheard someone wanting a refund . RUBBISH , go watch sex and the city

Report as inappropriate
Tom McMaster said...

Posted on Jun 05 2008 07:20 At last, a rollicking good film which holds your attention throughout. Unlike all the utter dross which is showing these days.

Report as inappropriate
Josh Gray said...

Posted on Jun 05 2008 00:38 Ok, i am going to be honest here. I am a massive Indy fan, have the DVD box set, VHS the works. I just saw the movie and i was so disappointed, it is the worst one. Predictable story line, extremely far-fetched scenes and to top it all off the death of the villain was poor. Now, there are good points to this film, Stunning CGI work, and of course the return of the one and only Indy himself (the nostalgia comes flooding in) but in my opinion thats where the good essence of the film fades. Its worth watching to release some of the happy memories you had watching the first three, but don't expect something spectacular.

Report as inappropriate
Mikey said...

Posted on Jun 04 2008 15:47 WWWWIIIIIIICCCCKKKKKKKEEEEEDDDDDDD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Report as inappropriate
Mikey said...

Posted on Jun 04 2008 15:46 I am a massive indy fan so this film is wicked as all of them are!

Report as inappropriate
JUDI J said...

Posted on Jun 04 2008 14:33 Superb, Indy never lets you down. Although I have to say I preffered the older films with less CGI. Good, escapist fantasy. Bring it on!!

Report as inappropriate
joe said...

Posted on Jun 03 2008 14:20 i enjoyed this film, ok some bits like balancing between 2 jeeps and having a sword fight was a bit of a no-no. also how many leather jacket wearing kids in then 50s could swing through the jungle on vines, but thats how cgi is playing these days. look at die hard and rambo, and how much cgi they used! and also i think the dudes guarding the pyramid could of been given a much better fight or chase. i could say a few more things that i think could be improved but bottom line is i enjoyed this film, its easy to watch, enjoy and despite his age harrison still pulled of indy.

Report as inappropriate