By From the Burn
"Please don't suck! Please don't suck!" These 3 words have been looping in my head ever since I wiped my shed tears of joy after hearing that glorious trumpet and seeing that familiar fedora hat lying on the ground in the teaser trailer for Indiana Jones and The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull a few months ago. But I have a perfectly good reason to be worried - hand over mouth, faking coughing sound - "Star Wars". You see, and I know I'm not alone in this, Star Wars and Indiana Jones are not just movies, they are the essence of my childhood.
A childhood marinated in escapism that still to this day keeps me from becoming cynical even as I cocoon into adulthood. The way I feel after watching an Indiana Jones/Star Wars movie is the same way I feel after a strong deeply moving spiritual experience. After all they're not called "The Holy Trilogies" for nothing. But there isn't enough menthol in the world to wipe away the bitter taste that still resonates three years after the last of the Star Wars prequels was released. After several years of therapy, I have been able to come to terms with the severe disappointment, and even see some of the good in them. But the trauma was so much that there was no way I could survive something like that again. Recovery would be impossible and as the movie approached release I even started looking into psychiatric hospitals to prepare for the worse.
Well the anticipation and worry is gone because I've seen it and the fact that I'm able to write this review proves that it didn't suck...but was it awesome? Eh, kinda, not totally. There was good, there was bad, and there was definitely some ugly, but in the end I think there was enough good to not completely send my body into shock. Let's start with the ugly...The jungle car chase scene; Shia's Tarzan impression, cartoon monkeys, bad CGI all around, and an elastic tree. Basically the movie became The Mummy 3 for a good 20 minutes. The bad; Kaminski's (the cinematographer) overt theatrical lighting that often made it feel like an exaggerated Indiana Jones film instead of one of the originals, the climax was a little hokey, and I thought Marion Ravenwood could've been a much stronger character than she was especially towards the end.
But amidst the bad and the ugly the good still outshone, especially the whole first hour of the film. It was everything you'd hope for in a new Indy film because simply it felt like an Indy film but it also took into consideration the passing of time as well as his age and that made it feel fresh and relevant. The action sequences were fun, the characters were great (There were no Jar Jar's in it), John William's score was one of his best in a while, and the very end was for me a satisfying conclusion to the franchise. There was actually a moment where I got choked up, in the scene where it is revealed that Sean Connery's character has passed away there is some dialogue between Indy and the dean of his school about the fact that life isn't what it used to be and they're getting older and that they're at the point where “life has started taking instead of giving.” That brought tears to my eyes, not because of what was happening in the story but because I started thinking about Harrison Ford, Stephen Spielberg, and George Lucas and realized that that is the point where they're at in life. Then I thought about the fact that there will come a day when they're not making movies anymore and that thought resonated with me as I watched the rest of the movie. So even with the bomb shelter refrigerators, angry monkeys, and flying saucers I found myself trying to take it all in and not wanting it to end and that is why I do recommend seeing this film.
The best way I can summarize the experience is to give you another example. Last year my favorite band of all time The Police
got back together and I got to see them, the performance itself wasn't amazing, they were definitely a little rusty, definitely getting old, and definitely not as energetic as I'm sure they were in their prime, but I still got to see The "freakin'" Police. Just to be in their presence for two hours was all I needed to quench a longing thirst in my soul. I accepted the performance for what it was knowing that I may never get another chance to experience The Police live again. The same is true for me with the new Indy film so my advice is to just accept it for what it is and take it in because you probably won't get another chance to experience something that is so SPECIAL to not just you or me but all of us.
Posts
7 comments:
I have to agree with almost all of your take.
To me, Raiders was a near perfect, genre defining film. To expect a repeat is foolish. But after watching all three preceeding movies and going to see Crystal Skull it was clear that Lucas and Spielberg dropped the ball on this one big time.
This was Temple of Doom 2.0. All flash and no soul. Their no problem with temporary suspension of reality in and Indy film (um, invisible foot bridge, hello?). But you can't string 5 visual exagerrations in a row.
My biggest problem with the film is that their is no crisis of faith or belief. As was the case in Doom, do we ever get the feeling that Indy gives a rip about finding the meaning behind the Skull?
The character of Mac (Ray Winstone) was absolutely worthless. When they supposedly had a huge history and he burns Indy in the first 10 minutes, it doesn't really sting. I missed John Rhys-Davies and Denholm Elliot immensely. Marion was dynamite for 15 minutes and then she said all of 5 words in the final act. I liked Shia and his chemistry with Ford was great. Connery was missed greatly.
I liked the film but when you realize it was Frankensteined from 5 seperate screenplays, you feel cheated on what could have been. It was great to see Indy again (and it may not be the last time) but I for one feel cheated if this is it.
Man, my spelling took a vacation on that last comment....
Maybe Indy has Star Trek disease where every other one is good. I did like this one better than Temple of Doom and I think it mainly had to do with the family dynamic. Which with that being said, it should've been stronger.
Burn and Red Baron,
You make a good point with the crisis of belief/faith - there was very little internal tension going on, save perhaps a little family sort of thing in the back of the truck.
That "little" was emblematic, I think, of the whole film - there was a "little" family tension, a "little bit" of the "we're getting old" tension (nice pickup of that theme, Burn), but those were mostly afterthoughts because there was action to have and spears to dodge and such.
I think the mistake that was made (hah, no blame in this sentence) was the thinking that these characters had been developed enough from the previous films that we could handle straight action - when I found myself wanting to know what was going on with these characters than whether they got the skull back (why did they need to get the skull back? - there was no connection there - or if there was it wasn't important enough to remember for me).
5 scripts huh? That could be part of the blame for the disjointedness. It was entertaining, but I must say I was disappointed.
Your review is pretty much right on what I felt, although I do feel John Williams score was severely lacking. He overused the main theme and just punched in other old themes at apparent times.(Theres the Ark! Ark Theme! Theres Marion! Marion theme! Hes thinking of dad! Henry Jones theme!)
The only original motifs were the russians and the skull. both were 2 note forgetfull snoozers. Then there was the spazzy chaotic "Mutt" theme. Nothing you could really hum too. At least Temple of Doom had some great original music that is some of the best in the series.
I found it interesting in watching the first three movies back to back that Temple of Doom actually takes place before the events in Raiders. Raiders starts in 1936, Temple in 1934, and Crusade in 1939. The flash forward to the 1950's was pitch perfect during the opening, the atomic bomb test, the motorcycle chase, and the diner fight. The homage scenes (Indy teaching class in Raiders, Crusade, and Skull plays almost exactly the same)worked to perfection.
There was just no reason to care about the plot. I would have pushed the plot to the backburner and really explored what has become of Indiana Jones in the 19 years since we last saw him.
Lucas only drafted the premise. Star Wars I-III proved that Lucas doesn't have a feel for characters that he once had and none of the final script developed those characters. They should have done more to tie it to the past with cameos and back story.
At least it played well for an hour and fifteen minutes as a nostalgia trip.
I'm glad the Crystal Skull didn't retraumatize you, Burn. No amount of exposure therapy would have saved you this time around.
Post a Comment