Indiana Jones 4: Early Review

[JasonEvans]

Well, I just got back from a screening for one of the summer's most anticipated films.

Bottom line-- it was not a disaster. That seems like a strange bottom line but I had been hearing some bad buzz and the trailer just looked horrible so I went in thinking it was possible it would be a disaster on par with the dreadful 2nd Indy film (Temple of Doom).

So, it was not a disaster...

But it was not great either. I would rate it close to but not quite as good as Indy 3 (Last Crusade). Compared to action fare like Iron Man, it comes up quite short. I still think it will do huge boxoffice, though probably only around $225 million, not nearly the $300 mill that some have predicted. It is not like people will have a bad time watching it, but, I am betting a lot of you will leave the theater thinking, "well, that could have been better."

The story is ok. It starts out really well -- we get a pretty decent action sequence right away and they really launch the story well. But then, it starts to fall apart a bit. The problem, to me, was the action sequences. They are really cartoonish. I know Indiana Jones is not supposed to be high on reality, but this stuff goes well over the top in suspension of belief. It is not just that Harrison Ford is like 60+ years old and have toe-to-toe fist fights with tall, strong, Soviet army officers (who look something like Ivan Drago in Rocky 4)...



... it is that the "escapes" are just ridiculous. For example, at one point our heroes are riding in a car without a roof and another car flies through the air and lands on top of their car and bounces off... and no one has a scratch on them. At another point soon after, the good guys drive a car over a cliff and land it on a tree that bends over almost to the point of breaking before gently depositing them exactly where they wanted to be. It is all so ridiculous that you never feel any sense of peril or excitement. It is almost like, "what crazy thing will they do next to get us out of this impossible situation. Yawn." The final conclusion of the story is somewhat confusing and not at all satisfying. The ending also feels a lot like something I have seen before... I am not sure where and if I speculate too much it will give away some stuff so I'll stop.

I am being too harsh probably. There are some nice humorous moments and the chemistry between Ford and Karen Allen is still strong. Shia LaBeouf is alright and has a few good moments. Cate Blanchett's character, the bad guy, is just horrible though -- especially her faux Russian accent and ridiculous looking wig. Blech!



There are still some good Indiana Jones staples -- including the latest insect/bug/snake mayhem that is especially terrifying and could give little ones a real fright. My 11 and 8-year-olds liked it, though not nearly as much as Iron Man. My wife thought it was alright.

I would give it a lukewarm thumbs up -- it is worth seeing, but having lowered expectations is probably a good idea and you will not be blown away.

I will be interested in seeing what others think.

--Jason "if your kids have not seen the original, I'd let them watch it first as there are a couple small but fun winks to people who have seen the great Raiders of the Lost Arc" Evans

[BCGroup]

So Jason, what I'm hearing is that if I like the original ones (especially the Last Crusade), then I'll like this one too, right?

[JasonEvans]

So Jason, what I'm hearing is that if I like the original ones (especially the Last Crusade), then I'll like this one too, right?

Yup, for sure.

As I said, it is not nearly as fresh and fabulous as Raiders and it is not nearly as hokey and horrible as Temple of Doom. It falls in between, fairly close to Last Crusade.

The more I think about it, the more I think my review reads more negatively than it should have. The film does move along at a nice pace and the action sequences are exceptionally well-directed and show real craftsmanship -- even if they are borderline silly in terms of what actually happens in them.

--Jason "expectations baby-- I am doing you a favor by lowering expectations " Evans

[HaveFunExpectToWin]

I'm a huge Raiders fan, I have been dreading this movie ever since I heard they were making it. It's the same feeling I had after seeing Star Wars Episode I.

I just don't want to be hurt again.

[glutton]

Yup, for sure.

As I said, it is not nearly as fresh and fabulous as Raiders and it is not nearly as hokey and horrible as Temple of Doom. It falls in between, fairly close to Last Crusade.

The more I think about it, the more I think my review reads more negatively than it should have. The film does move along at a nice pace and the action sequences are exceptionally well-directed and show real craftsmanship -- even if they are borderline silly in terms of what actually happens in them.

--Jason "expectations baby-- I am doing you a favor by lowering expectations " Evans

Just to throw in my 2 cents, I don't think Indy 4 even remotely compares to Last Crusade- which, in my opinion, is the best of the original trilogy and one of my all-time favorite movies. It's basically Raiders + Sean Connery, which equals a whole lot of awesome.

Anyway, I would place Indy 4 above Temple of Doom, but significantly below the other two. But I am glad my expectations were lowered by all the lukewarm reviews, because I ended up really enjoying it. As difficult as it is to recapture the old magic (which I'd imagine George Lucas would've figured out by now...) it's still entertaining and fun to watch.

I could've done without some of the CGI though.

[Lavabe]

--Jason "if your kids have not seen the original, I'd let them watch it first as there are a couple small but fun winks to people who have seen the great Raiders of the Lost Arc" Evans

Sorry Jason, but you the spelling issue Arc/Ark is a personal peeve.

Is there any subtle mention/tribute to River Phoenix? Crusade's casting (w/Phoenix and Connery) is still probably the best in the series.

Thanks,
Lavabe

[JasonEvans]

Sorry Jason, but you the spelling issue Arc/Ark is a personal peeve.

Is there any subtle mention/tribute to River Phoenix? Crusade's casting (w/Phoenix and Connery) is still probably the best in the series.

Sorry.

There is a mention of what is up with Sean Connery but he is not in the film. No River Phoenix mention/tribute at all as far as I noticed.

--Jason "it is better than Star Wars: Ep 1... but that is a really low threshold" Evans

[TillyGalore]

I'm looking forward to this movie. Am hoping I won't be as disappointed as I was with National Treasure 2. Watta ya say Jason, do think I will be or have I set my bar sufficiently low enough?

[Lavabe]

Sorry.

There is a mention of what is up with Sean Connery but he is not in the film. No River Phoenix mention/tribute at all as far as I noticed.

--Jason "it is better than Star Wars: Ep 1... but that is a really low threshold" Evans

Guess I'll JUST have to see it. Hopefully it won't be $20 a seat (this is what I am expecting for the American Girl movie my daughter has told me about). Thanks for the review, Jason.

As is my usual custom, on opening day each semester, I always ask my students for the name of their favorite anthropologist they know. Indy wins EVERY semester.

Too bad I'm not that kind of anthropologist.

Cheers,
Lavabe

[gvtucker]

My kids never ask to go see a particular movie. I mean NEVER. Our family just doesn't go to movies, for whatever reason.

And yet my kids all want to go see the new Indiana Jones movie. Something about their marketing just clicked.

I definitely need to get the DVD of Raiders first. My boys haven't seen it.

[allenmurray]

My kids never ask to go see a particular movie. I mean NEVER. Our family just doesn't go to movies, for whatever reason.

And yet my kids all want to go see the new Indiana Jones movie. Something about their marketing just clicked.

I definitely need to get the DVD of Raiders first. My boys haven't seen it.

My boys are 14 and 9. Neither of them had seen the originals, but the TV commercials caught their attention. Over the last two weeks we have watched the first three. They loved all of them. I'm looking forward to seeing the new one as a family.

In many ways I feel similar to this one as I did about the two National Treasure movies. They were not great movies, and I don't expect this one to be either. But there are not a whole lot of movies being made that can be enjoyed by two parents (ages 48 and 50), a 9 year old boy, and a 14 year old boy. Most movies that appeal to the 14 year old are inappropriate for the 9 year old. Most that appeal to the 9 year old the 14 year old feels are "babyish". And usually the choices of either the 9 or 14 year old have no appeal to the parents. It is really nice when there is one we are all looking forward to.

[gvtucker]

My boys are 14 and 9. Neither of them had seen the originals, but the TV commercials caught their attention. Over the last two weeks we have watched the first three. They loved all of them. I'm looking forward to seeing the new one as a family.

In many ways I feel similar to this one as I did about the two National Treasure movies. They were not great movies, and I don't expect this one to be either. But there are not a whole lot of movies being made that can be enjoyed by two parents (ages 48 and 50), a 9 year old boy, and a 14 year old boy. Most movies that appeal to the 14 year old are inappropriate for the 9 year old. Most that appeal to the 9 year old the 14 year old feels are "babyish". And usually the choices of either the 9 or 14 year old have no appeal to the parents. It is really nice when there is one we are all looking forward to.

My boys are 13, 11, and 9.

I think I've got a pretty good idea of a primary target market for this film.

[allenmurray]

My boys are 13, 11, and 9.

I think I've got a pretty good idea of a primary target market for this film.

Yep - your boys fall right into the primary market, as do mine. My point was that many of the movies that fall into "their market niche", I really don't enjoy at all. This one, while not rising to great movie standards, I will probably enjoy.

[Lavabe]

I'd like to thank my parents for taking me with my two older brothers to see THUNDERBALL in a drive-in (remember those?) way back when. I was only 5 or so at the time. At the time we were 5, 11, and 15.

Will take my appx. 12-yr old daughter to see Indy.

The primary target market is everyone.
Cheers,
Lavabe

[duke74]

My kids never ask to go see a particular movie. I mean NEVER. Our family just doesn't go to movies, for whatever reason.

And yet my kids all want to go see the new Indiana Jones movie. Something about their marketing just clicked.

I definitely need to get the DVD of Raiders first. My boys haven't seen it.

FWIW, they've been advertising the release of all three IJ movies as a package - "special editions". $34.99 on Amazon.

[OZZIE4DUKE]

As is my usual custom, on opening day each semester, I always ask my students for the name of their favorite anthropologist they know. Indy wins EVERY semester.

I vote for Dr. Temperance Brennen.

[NashvilleDevil]

I know your review was trying to lower expectations and I was not it expecting to match Raiders and Last Crusade. I was expecting a better movie than Temple of Doom and I did not get it. I went with a group of about 20 and we all had the same opinion it was a disaster. I am not going to give anything away. I just felt that the movie dragged on and did not have the flow of the first three. It will be huge this weekend but I anticipate a huge drop-off in the 2nd week.

Will be curious to see what other people think as they see it this weekend.

[JasonEvans]

I know your review was trying to lower expectations and I was not it expecting to match Raiders and Last Crusade. I was expecting a better movie than Temple of Doom and I did not get it. I went with a group of about 20 and we all had the same opinion it was a disaster. I am not going to give anything away. I just felt that the movie dragged on and did not have the flow of the first three. It will be huge this weekend but I anticipate a huge drop-off in the 2nd week.

Will be curious to see what other people think as they see it this weekend.

After this weekend we can talk about the faults and the such. I'd be interested to know if you were bothered by the same stuff that bothered me.

As an aside, it seems to be getting pretty good reviews. Rotten Tomatoes has it at a very healthy 79% right now. Then again, my review, which was lukewarm, probably would have resulted in a fresh not rotten rating on the tomatometer so who am I to complain

--Jason "others who have seen it-- chime in!" Evans

[Clipsfan]

As an aside, it seems to be getting pretty good reviews. Rotten Tomatoes has it at a very healthy 79% right now. Then again, my review, which was lukewarm, probably would have resulted in a fresh not rotten rating on the tomatometer so who am I to complain

--Jason "others who have seen it-- chime in!" Evans

That's one of my problems with their fresh ratings. First, they're subjective as to whether they call a rating fresh or not. Second, although there is an average score, no one references that. They only reference the fresh rating. So, as long as everyone thinks the movie is slightly above average you'll have a high fresh rating.

[JasonEvans]

FilmDrunk just destroys the new Indy Film. I don't see reviews on FilmDrunk very often, which makes this review somewhat notable. Then again, I don't read FilmDrunk all that much so maybe he reviews stuff all the time.

--Jason "FilmDrunk is somewhat associated with WWTDD and WithLeather" Evans