HTF Blu-Ray Review: Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull

Originally Posted by Nathan Eddy

All the preposterous stunts are valid points (and they are true to an extent with the previous movies, too), but I think these criticisms miss the main point. The main problem with this movie wasn't ridiculous stunts, it was a plot that violated some very basic rules of story-telling.

For one thing, Indy's motivation was unclear, ambiguous, which drives a wedge between character and audience. In all the previous Indy films, he really wanted the "McGuffin," for reasons that went straight to the heart of his character: his love and respect for archeology, as an enterprise which revealed and celebrated not only cultures of the past, but reminded us what we treasure about cultures and people around us today (hence his struggle against Nazis, and his quest to get the stones back to the starving tribe). These items *meant* something, and gave his quest a focus and gravitas. Who can forget the quiet sense of awe as he depicted the Staff of Ra on the chalkboard, explaining the importance of the Ark? This low-key explanation cemented his authenticity as a passionate scholar, which made his "ridiculous" super-humans struggles seem justified, even when those struggles changed their focus from a treasure to rescuing people he loved.

And that personal motivation translates directly into audience interest. But in Crystal Skull, Indy undermines that connection by
Warning Spoiler! Click to show


It wouldn't matter how realistic the stunts were, or how great an adventure story it could have been, it wouldn't be a compelling Indiana Jones story when you treat the main character as a mere vehicle for action pieces.

But the problems go beyond the main character to other crucial areas of the plot. There were so many lost chances for suspense and tension. The central conflict of the movie--the struggle between the "good guys" and the "bad guys"--was entirely superfluous.
Warning Spoiler! Click to show

Coupled with a weak villain, and the fact that Indy had nothing to do in the last 30 minutes, of the movie, there's no way you can make a compelling story out of these core narrative failures. You could Mythbust each and every stunt, prove them to be plausible, and in the end you'd still have a story that makes no sense, and a character who indifferently floats from scene to scene until he ultimately just stands around. That's not a story, folks.

Originally Posted by Edwin-S

The "Nuke fridge" sequence just went too far. It just exceeded my ability to stretch the limits of reality. There was no way that I could accept that even Indy would survive the heat, concussive force, and radiation of a nuclear blast by hiding in a fridge, even one lined with lead. In my mind, it was too ridiculous.

Originally Posted by James@R

Nearly every major scene could be the cover of a 1950's pulp magazine sprung to life. So while I definitely saw the technical flaws and script woes, the other stuff was just too much fun for them to really matter to me.

Originally Posted by Carlo Medina

It's always "Raiders of the Lost Ark" because Indy himself was also a raider. And quite honestly, in his quest for treasure in all three, he's always been a raider.

Originally Posted by Edwin-S

Also some of your examples took place in a framework of tongue-in-cheek humour. The fridge incident doesn't. There is nothing inherently funny in Indy's desperate attempt to survive the blast. To me, the humour only occurred when I saw the fridge flying out of the blast zone at high speed. I couldn't help but laugh at the absurdity of the whole scene. The stuff with the plane, the bomb crater, etc. was intended to be funny. The nuke fridge incident in Crystal Skull wasn't meant to be funny but became so merely because it broke the camel's back when it came to absurdity.

Originally Posted by Adam Lenhardt

Got the 2-disc SD-DVD with booklet at Target and watched it again. Still loved it. In my book, there's Raiders and three sequels of roughly equal quality far below. Among those sequels, this one definitely rates above Last Crusade, which immitates Raiders but makes the crucial mistake of turning Indy into a supporting character in his own film. Last Crusade is Sean Connery's film, and it's lesser for it.

Originally Posted by Douglas Monce

I also have to disagree with this. I thought the whole situation was hysterical. The mannequins, Howdy Doody on the TV. The whole thing seems to me to be played as a twisted farce. They NEVER build these things to this level of detail for these tests.

Then there is the irony of getting into a fridge, a place that those of us of a particular age will remember was dangerous and we were warned never to get into a fridge. (those of you of a younger age may not know that they used to have a latch on the door, and it couldn't be opened from the inside, so a kid inside one could suffocate)

For me it was VERY tongue-in-cheek.

Doug