Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull
Paramount Pictures | Release Date: May 22, 2008
5.4
USER SCORE
Mixed or average reviews based on 1401 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
571
Mixed:
436
Negative:
394
Watch Now
Stream On
Stream On
Buy on
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Expand
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)

User Reviews

User scoreBy dateMost helpful
7
UrbanlistenerJan 18, 2016
Pretty cool movie. The concept is interesting, the camera work is as always for a Spielberg film amazing, it is great to see Ford back as Indy and he is still great in the role, there some good to great moments here and there. Where it goesPretty cool movie. The concept is interesting, the camera work is as always for a Spielberg film amazing, it is great to see Ford back as Indy and he is still great in the role, there some good to great moments here and there. Where it goes bad is its use of a **** of pretty bad CGI, ridiculous sequences like Shia swinging with some monkeys and a ludicrous CGI crapfest ending that makes all the attempt of making this movie a bit serious worthless.… Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
7
CineAutoctonoMay 20, 2017
"Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" is a very good movie, featuring Indiana Jones, old and new characters, the story was very good, the performances were good, the photography as it was regular but it was interesting.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
EpicLadySpongeJan 16, 2016
If aliens, Shia LaBeouf, and nuking the fridge aren't what you're complaining about, then yes; Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull will be as enjoyable as the first three movies.
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
7
Muskrat147Jul 26, 2016
Though featuring not-so-special effects and a controversial ending, Kingdom of the Crystal Skull still wows audiences with its strong villain and powerful performances.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
MonkiReviewsJul 1, 2017
I enjoyed it, don't listen to the bad reviews. The story started slow, but picked up quickly. The acting was amazing. It isn't as good as the original two though. It is worth a watch.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
RobwinzJul 31, 2020
It looks like you brought a knife, to a gun fight.
A pretty good Indiana Jones movie, I don't think it's better than any of the previous ones but its still a good movie. I can agree the movie's got some stupid moments throughout but there'sIt looks like you brought a knife, to a gun fight.
A pretty good Indiana Jones movie, I don't think it's better than any of the previous ones but its still a good movie. I can agree the movie's got some stupid moments throughout but there's some really good scenes throughout this movie as well. Also, the score for the movie is really nice and it's probably as good as it's been composed for the others I'd say and it's still made by the legend John Williams, so that's another positive. Overall, it's an underrated movie for the most part and yeah, it's got some stupid moments but it's got some really good scenes throughout. Also, it's followed up with some great acting and Harrison Ford is still amazing throughout this movie, the full series of movies are worth the watch.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
DunkaccinoApr 6, 2023
Stands on its own, and at its very core, this is still a fun movie. At the very least, we still have Harrison Ford, Steven Spielberg and John Williams. Nothing can go wrong with this combo.
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
7
alerikandersonApr 24, 2023
Don't get me wrong, it is the weakest of the 4 Indiana Jones movies SO far, but it still is entertaining enough.
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
7
ElliottHeutelJul 14, 2023
The bad part of this isn't the movie itself, but its existence. Spielberg should've just moved on to something new, instead of waiting 15 years and then releasing a FIFTH one.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
MarkDMay 26, 2008
Whoa, talk about mixed reactions! Anyone giving this a 9 or 10 is clearly blinded by nostalgia and people giving this below 6 are probably fanboys overreacting because they expected too much. Just taken as an action movie this is enjoyable Whoa, talk about mixed reactions! Anyone giving this a 9 or 10 is clearly blinded by nostalgia and people giving this below 6 are probably fanboys overreacting because they expected too much. Just taken as an action movie this is enjoyable nonsense but yes, it's dissapointing when you compare it to the other movies in the franchise. The appeal of the Indiana Jones movies is the way they were still exhilarating and involving even though they pushed the bounderies of believeability. This movie goes too far though. Several times i found myself thinking "that wouldn't happen" or "that's just silly". When this happens you struggle to suspend your disbelief and the magics gone.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
6
JonathanJun 3, 2008
Hey, dont worry, I hear that indy 5 has to do with genghis kahn and the holy cross jesus was crucified on, if it ever gets into production that is.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
6
JayH.Oct 10, 2008
6.5/10. Faithful to the other films in the series, a bit too much over the top, but the cast is terrific and it certainly has a fast pace. Exceptionally well produced and it is fun to watch.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
RobertB.May 22, 2008
The movie is fun, yes, and watchable but... and its a big one, there will be a point when they find and discuss the Crystal Skull where you will become suspicious of where the movie is going. Fortunately we go straight back to the fun until The movie is fun, yes, and watchable but... and its a big one, there will be a point when they find and discuss the Crystal Skull where you will become suspicious of where the movie is going. Fortunately we go straight back to the fun until the very end when George Lucas promptly kicks you in the shins and runs away to hide in his big piles of money. It is a deeply unsatisfying ending to the plot, stolen from a presumptive National Treasure 3, though it doesn't make me regret watching and enjoying the film - it just made me feel a little dirty for doing so.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
BenRMay 22, 2008
Not the best of the series, but not the worst. Full of action and all the expected Indy humour. More like a Lucas film then a Spielberg film, recycled John William's score, but all around a good film.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
DanB.May 26, 2008
It made me smile a lot, but it was not light enough on its feet to match the quality of the old ones. There were few flashes of wit, few great exchanges of dialogue. There were too many moments that were just too removed from physical It made me smile a lot, but it was not light enough on its feet to match the quality of the old ones. There were few flashes of wit, few great exchanges of dialogue. There were too many moments that were just too removed from physical reality (I don't mind supernatural, but swinging from vines?). Lastly, the crystal skulls... were... terrible. But. Still. It's Indy. I may not watch it 6 times in the theaters like I did Last Crusade, but I'll buy the blu-ray tetralogy and not skip this one when re-watching the movies.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
TayleyS.Jun 3, 2008
Well, I really wanted to like this film...and I was disappointed in a big way. It doesn't have the heart of the early ones. It felt like it was explaining itself too much, or something, which took all the mystery away from it. I guess Well, I really wanted to like this film...and I was disappointed in a big way. It doesn't have the heart of the early ones. It felt like it was explaining itself too much, or something, which took all the mystery away from it. I guess the older ones weren't riding as much on a franchise as this was felt like it was. It was like opening an old shoe box of trinkets. You get a little excited, but it quickly fades. There were also inconsistencies in the plot, which is especially frustrating in a story such as this. The villain was never all that scary (think Raiders and the guy with the glasses and coat hanger - nothing like that!). The fighting between Marion and Indy was contrived and gratuitous - they needed it because it provided a good distraction. The plot itself was disconnected, in my opinion - too much escaping and being caught again, too much bad guy has skull/good guy has skull. I couldn't suspend disbelief enough at times to actually enjoy the film (kid with one leg on each vehicle while they're both in motion, and oh ya, having a swordfight at the same time because he conveniently had taken FENCING at prep school....pullease!) There were some beautiful wide shots in this movie but some of the backgrounds looked quite fake (e.g. first 5 minutes, outdoors). I wish the franchise hadn't had its reputation - I think this film would have been much better if it were working to prove something. My favourite part was the 3 second shot of the ark of the covenant.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
ChrisROct 16, 2008
I was sorely let down in the theater, but somehow on video, the Indy/Marion stuff works much better. What felt gratuitous and a thin waste of talent and goodwill, now seems economical. I'm ok with it.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
SteveKOct 22, 2008
Not terrible if you come in with zero expectations. But this is INDIANA JONES! This is Spielberg and Harrison Ford! Almost impossible to do. The movie had fun moments, good actions scenes, and some really creepy moments too (I will never Not terrible if you come in with zero expectations. But this is INDIANA JONES! This is Spielberg and Harrison Ford! Almost impossible to do. The movie had fun moments, good actions scenes, and some really creepy moments too (I will never look at ants the same way again). But the real holes are in the plot. Too much said and not said. The whole thing is undercooked, like an excuse to make Indy, not an enthralling story that is interesting and draws you in. It starts interesting, but the end just fails to inspire. I think that people who want everything explained will actually be disappointed if it is, so I am not like everyone else on this site who are mad because "it wasn't explained", what bothers me is that we get no closure ON ANYTHING. And I'm a little tired of the whole the temple blows itself up plot device to neatly wrap everything up. Even National Treasure 2 did that, and that franchise shouldn't be able to hold a candle to Indy. I mean, they even did that in Last Crusade. We were just missing a cool Indy ending. There was nothing clever, inventive, or even interesting about the ending of this movie. They ran away and the Russians didn't. Go Indy, way to run. Seriously, I would like to see a director's cut where they fix the ending and they actually make it interesting. I don't care about the aliens, there are worse plot ideas in the world, but aliens that don't do anything are not interesting.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
JoshBMay 22, 2008
Keep your expectations very low, or you risk serious disappointment.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
ShellieKellyMay 22, 2008
Too unbelievable... Shia did a good job as did Harrison.. but the storyline was contrived and too far fetched.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
DamienD.May 23, 2008
Indy is back, but he kinda shoulda stayed where he was. This sequel is way too self aware with nostalgic references to the previous series and doesn't really find it's own steam. First half works pretty good with some decent action Indy is back, but he kinda shoulda stayed where he was. This sequel is way too self aware with nostalgic references to the previous series and doesn't really find it's own steam. First half works pretty good with some decent action sets on a nuclear test site and a chase sequence through Indy's campus. The second half, once the plot really gets revealed is really incosistent and very slow paced at times, with a couple of thrilling action pieces, the waterfall dives are just too ridiculous. The climax was just too lame. The movie relies too heavily on CGI which detracts from the charm of the overall series where practical effects dominated. Harrison Ford is still Indy and the end really just further confirms this. Shia LeBouef and Karen Allen hold their ground but Cate Blanchett's villiain is weak and John Hurt and Ray Winstone are too underused. It took almost 20 years to come out with another Indy Adventure but personally I think it was summed up best in 'Crusade" Indy "That belongs in a museum" Villain: "So do you!" He was right!… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
6
vrblknchMay 24, 2008
Problematic. Preface by stating that Star Wars was my 2nd favorite franchise to Indiana Jones from my first VHS viewing of Raiders around 6 years old... so it pains me to score so low. Walked in with a replica Indy Fedora on... left the Problematic. Preface by stating that Star Wars was my 2nd favorite franchise to Indiana Jones from my first VHS viewing of Raiders around 6 years old... so it pains me to score so low. Walked in with a replica Indy Fedora on... left the theater quickly with the hat hidden held close in my hands. Actors were great. Kudos to Harrison Ford for owning the role. It looked like he was doing all the light physical stuff with ease. Scaling crates in area 51 that would make me keel over now @ 30, let alone @ 65. Shia IS the future. Just as good as River as young indy. Spielberg started with a bang, but the Tarzan swings killed the movie. The chases were good times and the stunt work was top notch which is missing in modern cinema. After the ants it was downhill. Speaking of hills, the prarie dogs popped up one too many times. Other qualms, the cinematography was VERY hit and miss. The college campus and tomb lighting/lense was spot on, but everywhere else looked very washed and fake authentic, There was a soundstage look to RAIDERS, DOOM, CRUSADE that pasted with their ASC. Oh and the Raiders March was not featured as much as I would have liked, full fanfare maybe 3 times? The CGI was not unbearable even to my VERY crictical eye, but everything feeld second rate in terms of the Russian menace and the quest itself. Nice homages make for 3-4 REALLY good comedic/nostalgic scenes (picking up the hat beginning and end) and EXCELLENT stunt work make for 2-3 great action sequences. But they are leveraged by the 3-4 silly plot hiccups (peer into the skull, rope swing, tree driving). Indy needed quite a bigger threat to come out of retirement. Can't wait for Indy and Sleepwalking Screenwriters on dvd this December. Fin.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
6
TiernanS.May 24, 2008
I'm not sure if fans of Indiana Jones will be more disappointed than the uninitiated on this one, or vice versa. Ford does a great job putting the hat back on. It's also great to see Shia making the most of his role. Unfortunately, I'm not sure if fans of Indiana Jones will be more disappointed than the uninitiated on this one, or vice versa. Ford does a great job putting the hat back on. It's also great to see Shia making the most of his role. Unfortunately, the script is too academic and undercooked, never mind the unusual lack of humor, and doesn't allow these great characters to really shine or even intertwine.......and it wouldn't be difficult. Indy and the gang are fantastic characters. That part was set, or so I thought. The actual plot is arbitrary nonsense that is amusing, but not engrossing.....and as the film throttles into the finale, the light saber duels and telekinetic....um, whatever become downright stupid. Since the script is so muddled and inept, when the action stops, so does the movie. The self destructing action set pieces fall in line with tradition and they're as implausable as ever, but they're still fun to see. Loved the prairie dog cameos too. Still, this one gets a mixed note from me. It'll make a good rental.… Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful
6
FabioMay 24, 2008
Not nearly as good as the previous ones... it's fun to see Indy back on the screen but... not much thrilling, no real (dangerous) villain, not much personality in the characters, it pretty much seemed a luna park attraction came Not nearly as good as the previous ones... it's fun to see Indy back on the screen but... not much thrilling, no real (dangerous) villain, not much personality in the characters, it pretty much seemed a luna park attraction came alive... probably the worst Spielberg I've ever seen :(… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
JaredB.May 24, 2008
Being a HUGE fan of the other "Indiana Jones" movies, I was really looking forward to this one. While it isn't a total loss, it is nowhere near as good as any of the films in the previous trilogy. For starters, Harrison Ford, who made Being a HUGE fan of the other "Indiana Jones" movies, I was really looking forward to this one. While it isn't a total loss, it is nowhere near as good as any of the films in the previous trilogy. For starters, Harrison Ford, who made the first three so great, shows his age in a big way here. I would expect for anyone playing Indy to jump fearlessly into the stunts. Here, Ford seems more concerned about safety than realism. Speaking of realism, that leads to another problem I had. This film is completely implausible. For instance, there is a scene where the main characters are in a truck and something rolls over them. Normally, anyone who has this happen to them would be flattened. However, everyone comes out without even a scratch. If anybody can explain how this could happen, I would love to hear it. I also had a problem with the payoff. *Spoiler Alert* Near the end, the characters enter what appears to be an ancient Mayan pyramid. However, it turns out to be an alien spaceship. When is Hollywood going to stop making films where everything can be explained away by using aliens? I am getting so sick of this. Another thing I am getting sick of is Shia LeBeouf. Except his role in "Transformers," this guy is, in my opinion, a talentless hack. He should consider early retirement before he totally ruins Hollywood. If it hadn't been for some great special effects and humor, this thing would have been a complete disaster.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
MrToadMay 25, 2008
Fun, but inferior to the originals, and ultimately only so-so. Action/adventure sequences are entertaining enough, though. Good if you're in the mood.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
PiltdownManMay 26, 2008
The best parts of this movie are when people are simply talking to each other, not frantically racing through the jungle (endlessly) in a too-long chase scene that defines "overwrought" and "boring." Will someone ever learn that "less is The best parts of this movie are when people are simply talking to each other, not frantically racing through the jungle (endlessly) in a too-long chase scene that defines "overwrought" and "boring." Will someone ever learn that "less is more?" If you wanna impress the kids, don't worry; they'll see the chase scene, then be able to play it for themselves when the game comes out...so you don't have to over do it for the rest of us... But there is a great deal to like about this film. I was expecting way too much obvious CGI and a lot less muscle and sweat, but the CGI was mostly invisible and the sweat was palpable. One thing I really liked was the idea that intelligence and schooling matters. I know, I sound as old and crotchety as Indy, but it is really nice to see him speaking to the locals in their native tongue.... Smarts matter is a nice takeaway for the kids watching...actually for all of us! Many people have trashed the "alien" angle, but I found no problem with it. After all, they had pretty much plumbed Christian mythology (that's how I see it) already, so why not a secular bit of the supernatural?… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
IndianaJonesMay 27, 2008
This is not a bad movie, but it's not the Indy movie you were hoping for. It really is a shame; after all those years this is what they came up with. Whoever said "videogame" was correct. It gets the 6 for being such a let down.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
ColinCOct 28, 2008
Disappointing. Everything felt rehashed from earlier films. The buddy relationship of Indy and Dad from three was changed to a buddy relationship with his son. [***SPOILER ALERT***] The villians met the same end as they did in 1 and 3; one Disappointing. Everything felt rehashed from earlier films. The buddy relationship of Indy and Dad from three was changed to a buddy relationship with his son. [***SPOILER ALERT***] The villians met the same end as they did in 1 and 3; one being done in by the artifact they were seeking, the other being done in by their greed as they tried to escape (the blond nazi from 3 and Indy's Cold War pal from 4. And lastly, Harrison Ford just feels to old to be kicking so much ass. He goes toe to toe with a Russian soldier and wins. Even that scene was a rip-off from Indy 1 when he fights the big bald nazi who gets chopped up by the airplane propeller. George Lucas and Speilberg need to push themselves harder if they're going to do another sequel.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
SamF.May 21, 2008
Someone needs to confiscate George Lucas' computer sometimes. He just kills it with green screen.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
6
PaulK.May 22, 2008
I never got into the Indy films as a kid, although I did see parts here and there on cable in the 80's. So while not an ardent fan, I still have to say that this was good, not great. The story was ok, nothing exceptional. At times hokey I never got into the Indy films as a kid, although I did see parts here and there on cable in the 80's. So while not an ardent fan, I still have to say that this was good, not great. The story was ok, nothing exceptional. At times hokey and completely silly (the monkeys for instance), I found myself half laughing at the film and half with it. I have a feeling die hard fans might not like this too much. Everyone else will enjoy the ride for what it is, but few will walk out craving another sequel starring Shia LaBeouf as the next Indy.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
ShaunM.May 24, 2008
Squeaking by with a 6, only because it was slightly entertaining until the end.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
SwamiMay 24, 2008
It was OK, but it is missing that magic that the others had. Harrison Ford looked great, and I can't help thinking with a better script this movie could have been great. I get that many of the plots dealt with the fact this was set in It was OK, but it is missing that magic that the others had. Harrison Ford looked great, and I can't help thinking with a better script this movie could have been great. I get that many of the plots dealt with the fact this was set in 1957 instead of Nazi Germany times. However, for me, maybe it was trying too hard. It just did not have that sense of familiarity the other 3 did. LaBouef character was worthless and brought nothing but wasted screen time away IMO also. I didn't want to see Indiana Jones and the Fonz in the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, but that's what I got. Go in with an open mind and you might be pleasantly surprised. I was let down.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
JohnnyM.May 27, 2008
I don't think all the malicious vituperations directed toward this film are really justified. I mean, it doesn't seem very reasonable to expect the third sequel in a decidedly uneven series to measure up to the original, especially I don't think all the malicious vituperations directed toward this film are really justified. I mean, it doesn't seem very reasonable to expect the third sequel in a decidedly uneven series to measure up to the original, especially when you consider that it's been nineteen years since the last entry and there have been countless knock-offs and send-ups. Having said that, I can still understand what the fuss is about. Even though I feel it wouldn't be equitable to expect freshness and innovation from Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, it doesn't seem altogether unfair to ask for something a bit more ambitious. There isn't a single stunt, action sequence or special effect in KOTCS that hasn't been seen before and it lacks the breakneck pace and unrelenting energy of its predecessors. Though there is a plethora of big, elaborate action sequences, they are more absurd and over-the-top than anything we've seen in National Treasure or The Mummy pictures - there is even one that features Indy surviving an atomic blast by hiding in a lead-lined refrigeratror. As for the CGI, it isn't used as pervasively as many have claimed but when it does show up (in the form of voracious ants, vine-swinging monkeys and jittery prairie dogs) it is admittedly somewhat distracting. The movie's sole undeniable pleasure is seeing Harrison Ford return as Indy. Despite his age, Ford is more vital than ever and he delivers the film's (borderline tiresome) one-liners with relish. It's nice to see Karen Allen return as well but she isn't given a particularly substantial role. In fact, we see more of Shia LaBeouf's preening, thick-skulled Mutt than we do Marion Ravenwood which is simply inexcusable. LaBeouf hasn't one iota of screen presence or charisma and his character quickly becomes a bit of an annoyance. Then there's the matter of the story's disappointing climax, which involves the discovery of "interdimensional beings" a colossal flying saucer. This sequence had some people in the audience tittering but I didn't find it to be anymore ridiculous than what we've seen invovling the Ark of the Covenant or the Holy Grail. Overall, I must concede it was a bit of a disappointment but it isn't nearly as awful as its myriad detractors have said it is.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
pasikkoMay 28, 2008
Though I wasn't expecting greatness,I still came out a bit disappointed.After 19 years of waiting it should have been so much better.I have to say this is easily the worst of all four,the whole thing seemed quite routine and forced.The Though I wasn't expecting greatness,I still came out a bit disappointed.After 19 years of waiting it should have been so much better.I have to say this is easily the worst of all four,the whole thing seemed quite routine and forced.The plot was nothing to write home about,although served the purpose.Still,after all that brainstorming and developing,I wonder if they really couldn't assemble a more inspiring and creative one. Action scenes in Indy movies have always been exaggerated but still enjoyable and charming.In this however they disappointingly often are just plain stupid.Sword fighting extravaganza on moving vehicles,the monkey scene with Mutt and much discussed refrigerator scene are prime examples.In previous films absurdities almost like these somehow worked,sadly not here.Simply too much implausible action sequences,even for an Indy movie.Thanks to the advancements in digital imagery there were more laughs in ridiculous action than in most alleged humor,which didn't quite hit the mark in many situations. And yes,the most annoying thing in the movie was the overuse of CGI and how, in this day and age,can special effects look so bad.In this regard it often could've been almost a "Librarian" tv-movie.What happened ILM... However,as a big fan of all previous installments,it was nice to see Harrison Ford wearing Indy costume one last time.In whole the movie was still entertaining,if nothing special.I'd say 6/10.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
ArkonBladeAug 23, 2010
growing up loving the original trilogy i couldnt wait for this film . though i believed it arrived 15 years to late. its not a bad film but really doesnt capture what the original trilogy was . shilo boof like always is annoying and a insultgrowing up loving the original trilogy i couldnt wait for this film . though i believed it arrived 15 years to late. its not a bad film but really doesnt capture what the original trilogy was . shilo boof like always is annoying and a insult to fans to think he may become the next indiana jones . some people where upset that they moved away from the reliougous theme towards aliens . i didnt mind it it infact its still following the same lines if you know your history . many archioligists believe that the nascans and other from that area worshiped some thing that resembled aliens . so it looked to me they where still on that theme . the action was good although didnt feel near as good as raiders or last crusade . it was a ok entry to the series but not really the ending i woulda liked the series to go out on. my only last and best hope is they dont bring that moron shilo boof in to replace harrison ford as indiana jones . just let this series stay dead.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
billrullerMar 15, 2012
I get why ppl hate this movie, I do. I was expecting that there was gonna be a big red bar full of "negative" votes. But here's my opinion about the movie, I thought it was okay. It's definitely not a masterpiece or as goos as Raiders of theI get why ppl hate this movie, I do. I was expecting that there was gonna be a big red bar full of "negative" votes. But here's my opinion about the movie, I thought it was okay. It's definitely not a masterpiece or as goos as Raiders of the Lost Ark & Last Crusade, but does it mean it's bad? Of course not! I want to review the 2 main rants that people nitpick all the time.

1. Aliens don't belong in an Indiana Jones movie. It's like Indie meets Mars Attack.

- I wouldn't put it that way. Did anyone even know that the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull are known to be Extra-Teresstrial? Also, why don't aliens belong in an Indie movie? Did anyone even watch the other Indie movies? What about the Ghost that killed ppl in RotLA, the 700 year old knight protecting the holy grail from Last Crusade, or the voodoo stuff from Temple of Doom? Why not have science fictional experience?

2. The refrigerator scene was ridiculous and unrealistic.

-No Sh*t! I know this isn't realistic, many movies do that all the time but nobody complains about them. Again, did you watch the other movies? The unexpected and unseen tank escape from Last Crusade, falling off a helicopter with a inflatable boat and making it off a cliff without a scratch or a broken bone from Temple of Doom. I haven't heard anyone argue about that.

In my opinion, I thought the movie was okay. I found it like a great comeback to Indiana Jones and the other 80's and 90's icons. We got the comeback of Die Hard, Terminator, Scream, Mission Impossible, Rambo, and Rocky Balboa and coming soon Men in Black. I liked that Indie came back as well. I would like to see Lethal Weapon 5 or Ghostbusters 3. Anyways, Indiana Jones 4 wasn't as bad as a lot of people put it. I liked it, my friends liked it, my family liked it, basically many people liked it, and others hated it. But I honestly find it to be a decent adventure movie.… Expand
3 of 3 users found this helpful30
All this user's reviews
6
crstfrJul 13, 2023
I genuinely like this movie! I agree that the CGI is overused and distracting and there are some silly moments but for me, they don’t detract from what is ultimately an enjoyable ride that still has the spirit of Indiana Jones. I don’t know,I genuinely like this movie! I agree that the CGI is overused and distracting and there are some silly moments but for me, they don’t detract from what is ultimately an enjoyable ride that still has the spirit of Indiana Jones. I don’t know, these movies should just be fun and I think this one is!… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
TyranianApr 13, 2019
Is mildly entertaining but worse in every way than previous films. Ford is too old and story is stupid though it has some of what made the previous films so good.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
Movie1997Apr 29, 2013
This movie definitely has its mixed reviews. It's usually you either really hate this movie or really love this movie. Personally, I'm kind of inbetween, but honestly it was still an enjoyable Indiana Jones movie. I think it's safe to sayThis movie definitely has its mixed reviews. It's usually you either really hate this movie or really love this movie. Personally, I'm kind of inbetween, but honestly it was still an enjoyable Indiana Jones movie. I think it's safe to say that it has some of the old and the new. For old, it still has its enjoyable swash-buckling action sequences, which truly helps give the movie a boost (in a sense). For the new, it adds in some new characters and a plot that doesn't live up to the trilogy's expectations. All the characters are pretty average and have some good moments, but there's one big problem that stands in there way. This movie has some of the worst screenplay I've ever heard. When you hear a character say those cheesy on-liners, it just sounds terrible. The reason I gave this movie a 6 is that it has good memorable swash-buckling action and the story (beside getting to the alien part) really tries to bring back a legend. Overall, for some of its major bumps on the road, it's still an enjoyable Indiana Jones movie.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
TheApplegnomeJun 14, 2015
This is the less impressive Indiana Jones film in the franchise. It began pretty well, with really good action and it felt superb. But after the first act..well lets just say that it totally hit the ground! The plot became weird and boring.This is the less impressive Indiana Jones film in the franchise. It began pretty well, with really good action and it felt superb. But after the first act..well lets just say that it totally hit the ground! The plot became weird and boring. It didn't feel like a Indiana Jones film, more like a bad remake. The adventure is a bit good, but it's still disappointing, especially in the second and the third act. The dialogs are at the same time very strange; there's no thrilling feeling in it! There are at the same time unnecessary subplots, and the plot is overall uninteresting and just awful at some places. The ending was okay, but not as good as what I expected to see.

But it's still an Indiana Jones movie, and it got its moments of adventure and humor, but not as much as the old movies. Those had a bigger feeling to it.

6.5/10… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
moviematthewNov 8, 2013
I don't know why, but I somehow liked this movie. I don't love it, but I don't hate it either. It's not the best of the Indiana Jones Movies, but it is certainly not the worst. Then again, none of them are bad to me.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
buttonscasperJul 6, 2015
My least favourite of the 4 but still deserves credit for it's decent story but CGI is overused especially with the monkeys scene but this film is not terrible.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
kyle20ellisMar 17, 2022
I agree Indianna Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is the weakest of the series and has a lot of flaws. But it is not a bad movie. The story is not as well-thought out and paced, the script lacks that extra wit and energy, the filmI agree Indianna Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is the weakest of the series and has a lot of flaws. But it is not a bad movie. The story is not as well-thought out and paced, the script lacks that extra wit and energy, the film can get too slow and Cate Blanchett is wasted with a rather unexceptional character. And the film is perhaps a tad too long too. But.. it does look great, the costumes, sets and cinematography are still truly fabulous, and the music score is rousing enough. The action is often breathtaking, such as the motorcycle chase through a university campus, the pursuit through the Amazon Jungle, the giant ants, the secret passageways and even the alien visitors, and I liked the old school stunts. Harrsion Ford displays a good amount of world-weary charm, and Shia LaBoeuf is likable enough. Overall, it lacks excitement but it is not a bad film by all means. 6/10 Bethany Cox… Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
6
Duke_NukemOct 10, 2015
Whoever came up with the idea of letting Shia La Puke play the son of Indiana Jones should be handed over in the hands of Mola Ram. Why does Indiana need a son anyway? Was it so the series can continue with his son as the hero? Ridiculous.Whoever came up with the idea of letting Shia La Puke play the son of Indiana Jones should be handed over in the hands of Mola Ram. Why does Indiana need a son anyway? Was it so the series can continue with his son as the hero? Ridiculous.

Harrison Ford is playing his role perfect as usual, although he's getting too old for this. Marion is back and she gained a few pounds extra. The music is still good and there are some nice parts in the movie. But mostly the cgi is so bad and the movie feels like a parody on the Indiana Jones movies. Shia swinging in the trees with monkeys is the best example of this. Also the giant ants are clearly computer animated, It's like Spielberg and Lucas didn't even try to make it look real.

Also the whole idea about the aliens or beings from another dimension is so over the top. I read somewhere that this was the idea of Lucas, while Spielberg realised that the alien thing had been done plenty. Unfortunately Lucas got what he wanted.

They should have stopped after the original trilogy which was perfect.… Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
6
XtremeNerdz12Feb 26, 2016
It was okayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy6666y666
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
6
CoreGamer1408Jul 25, 2021
It was a fun and "yes way over the top" action adventure movie. So long Indie and please don't come back ok.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
popdodJan 19, 2019
It's a fun movie but nowhere near as good as the 1st or 3rd, yet still better than the 2nd. The very low score negative reviews are exaggerated. If you like the original films, this is definitely worth it. That said, even though the series isIt's a fun movie but nowhere near as good as the 1st or 3rd, yet still better than the 2nd. The very low score negative reviews are exaggerated. If you like the original films, this is definitely worth it. That said, even though the series is supposed to be a throwback to similar historically and culturally inaccurate campy adventure films from the 30s to 60s, so being critical that it isn't realistic is misunderstanding the series, it does push the unbelievable and supernatural (in this case, also sci-fi) elements WAY too far, the worst in the series in that regard, even more than the 2nd. They overused the green screen and computer generated effects. The Mutt character was really unlikable, don't think the issue was the actor, though not as awful as Willie from the second. Ox is never really treated like Marion's ex husband or Mutt's surrogate father. The Russian Soviet villains were not as interesting as the German Nazis. The plot plays out pretty predictably. Wish they either used traditional film or a filter making it look like that rather than the blurry white glow filter.… Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
6
DogeGamer2015Jun 13, 2020
Aunque no es tan buena como las 3 películas originales, es lo suficientemente entretenida para disfrutarla.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
StaTplay6May 15, 2022
It is much much better than everybody says. It is complicated but that doesnt mean it is bad.
It is good to watch it multiple times.



It is also funny and probably the second darkest indiana jones movie (after temple of doom of course.)
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
Jas76450May 19, 2023
This gets way more heat than it deserves. It's 2 hours of pure popcorn fun. Its one major flaw is that it lacks the solid emotional foundation that the original trilogy had. There's no real depth or stakes here. Not that I'm watching anThis gets way more heat than it deserves. It's 2 hours of pure popcorn fun. Its one major flaw is that it lacks the solid emotional foundation that the original trilogy had. There's no real depth or stakes here. Not that I'm watching an Indiana Jones film for profound storytelling - but it does feel like something is missing. The aliens, the CGI monkeys...those things don't bother me so much. If Spielberg had the technology we have today at his disposal in the 80s, the originals would look and feel a lot different than they do, so visually I don't think it's fair to make that comparison. What ultimately is missing is Spielberg's heart here. There's a lot of fan service, Ford is outstanding and it moves at break-neck pace...it's a fun movie, but it's a fun movie with no heart. Overall worthy of the series, but definitely the weakest link.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
moviefanicJul 5, 2023
Say what you want to say about this movie, but you got to admit it was trying to be creative. Mutt was a OK sidekick/son to Indiana Jones.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
NeilG.May 24, 2008
In its day, the indiana Jones movies were innovative; they have been since surpassed by the superhero films, Matrix trilogy and others. There was nothing new here. It seemed like it had been made 20 years ago with the other three.
1 of 1 users found this helpful
5
KarelD.Jun 4, 2008
Ford is old, Spielberg is complacent and Lucas is senile.
2 of 2 users found this helpful
5
mesoNov 20, 2008
Dull, hollywood cheese. Stupid, stupid, stupid.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
StevenK.May 24, 2008
I'm a big Indiana Jones fan. I've seen the first 3 more times than I care to mention! And although I love them all, I do admit that all 3 have flaws, plot holes, and problems with the storytelling, but as entertainment, they beat I'm a big Indiana Jones fan. I've seen the first 3 more times than I care to mention! And although I love them all, I do admit that all 3 have flaws, plot holes, and problems with the storytelling, but as entertainment, they beat almost everything that dares to challenge them. After having seen Indy 4 last night, I can say that I was underwhelmed and dissatisfied by it, especially because I had to wait 19 years for it and the best that they could offer was Crystal Skull. It's unforgivable! The talent involved, the caliber of the people involved, the money involved, and the time it took to work on this should have yielded much, much better results. Most of all, I feel heartbroken and crestfallen. Stuff I hated: ----SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS---- I hated the CGI monkeys! And the CGI prairie dogs for that matter. I hated the idea of the Tarzan-style swinging. I hated just how fake the swinging looked and how well Mutt managed to do it and how he even caught up with the vehicles without much trouble. I hated how Indy survived a nuclear explosion just because he was in a lead-lined fridge. It's not like the entire fridge was lead-lined and even if it was, it would be thin lead-lining, not enough to protect Indy from a blast, much less a nuclear blast. And he walks away from it all unscathed. This is Indy, not Superman!!! And why did the fridge have a curved trajectory from the nuclear blast? And why was the fridge the only thing that was ejected from the blast site? And why was Indy safe from the radiation once he got out of the fridge? And why was the test site so close to Area 51? I hated just how boring and undefined a villain Spalko was. It's like Blanchett didn't know where to go with her character. Her accent was also the conventional Russian accent that we've come to expect from Hollywood, so I expected better from this Academy-Award-winning actress. But we can fault the writing too. Also, how come nothing ever came off of her alleged ability to read minds? I hated just how adept Mutt was with the sword-fighting. He was fencing with Spalko the pro on top of moving vehicles yet he never missed a beat! And the whole thing with Mutt's leg split and crotch pain was more ridiculous than funny or clever. I hated how boring the music was. The first three movies had distinctive memorable themes and tunes that I could whistle to, this one didn't. It felt like John Williams was going through the motions. I hated the cinematography! The cinematography of the first three was beautiful when it had to be and gritty/realistic when it had to be. With Indy 4, the cinematography made it look hazy, out of focus, as if the colours washed over each other, there were annoying light flares and no crispness or sharpness to the images. In fact, the cinematography gave the movie this fake, artificial, inauthentic look/feel. Kaminski's style worked in Private Ryan and Minority Report, for example, but not here. I hated how Mac (Winstone) was a completely unnecessary character that didn't advance the plot forward. He was also a confused character but that was the writers' fault. Also, Mac didn't really have to die. He could've easily saved his own life or have been saved by Indy. Karen Allen was bad! I'm sorry people! And she was too eager to please which came off as desperate. Also, she didn't seem like a woman from the 1950s, in fact, she felt more like a loopy, drugged, modern-day soccer-mom. Indy and Marion were never given a moment to reconnect as characters after not having seen each other for so long and after having been through all these calamitous events. They just launched into their schtick immediately after they had met. There wasn't a single romantic moment between them like in Raiders. Not only that, but he abandons her for 10 years in Raiders, then backs away from the marriage and leaves her for 19 years, then she has his child without telling him and married some guy that Indy supposedly introduced her to and then suddenly, in Crystal Skull, she falls into his arms and is in love with him again and ready to marry him without skipping a beat?!!! Come on! And how tired is that cliche? The long-lost son?! I hated the CGI. Too much CGI (apparently Spiely was lying to us when he said that this movie was not going to rely on CGI and was going to be old-fashioned). It felt like Spiely was copying The Mummy and Lara Croft, which is ironic, since those awful movies were inspired by his work. The ending, for example, when the entire city whirls around and gets engulfed in a whirlpool of dust, debris and water... that was CGI overkill and it reminded me of the endings to the Mummy movies. Not only that, but to add insult to injury; the CGI was shoddy. The entire bit at the end of the sequence inside the alien temple when it starts to fall apart and the portal to another dimension opens up and sucks everything up was just not detailed enough as a piece of CGI. It looked terrible. Is it me or is CGI getting worse every year?! The whole chase scene in the jungle felt and looked absolutely fake! Almost all of it: the sword fighting, the swinging, the monkeys, the racing-near-the-cliffs, the CGI jeep landing on top of Indy… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
StevenH.May 30, 2008
Ridiculous! All of the waiting and anticipation and this is what they came up with?! Aren't their lives worth more than just the money they make on this crap?
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
EddieD.Sep 10, 2008
Too much fooling around. Crystal Skull doesn't get to the point.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
JamesO.Oct 16, 2008
Maybe Im geting too old for Indy movies, Im sure kids will love it but it just didnt wash with me.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
ChuckSOct 26, 2008
This is how the movie is: -If you want a fantasy adventure movie, you will think this movie was 8 or higher. -If you want an Indiana Jones movie, you will think this movie was 2 or less. This movie, while entertaining, does not have the same This is how the movie is: -If you want a fantasy adventure movie, you will think this movie was 8 or higher. -If you want an Indiana Jones movie, you will think this movie was 2 or less. This movie, while entertaining, does not have the same feel that made the original Indy movies so appealing. So, what you get from this movie depends on what you want from this movie. If you want Indy, you'll get disappointed. If you want a 2 hour distraction, you'll get a pleasant surprise.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
AllenT.May 18, 2008
occasionally Indy IV genuinely entertains and gives you the warm, fuzzy feeling that you get when one is the company of a character you love. However, far too many moments fail to make an impact, too many ideas so disappointingly half-baked. occasionally Indy IV genuinely entertains and gives you the warm, fuzzy feeling that you get when one is the company of a character you love. However, far too many moments fail to make an impact, too many ideas so disappointingly half-baked. The fatal flaw though is the film's utter lack of dramatic tension, and an absence of the sense of danger and adventure so vital to the success of the previous instalments.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
5
peterrMay 19, 2008
I was very disappointed. And I had low expectations too. I think the reviews, overall, have been being very 'kind' I wanted to love this film but Lucas' continued emphasis on technology and production advances with computer I was very disappointed. And I had low expectations too. I think the reviews, overall, have been being very 'kind' I wanted to love this film but Lucas' continued emphasis on technology and production advances with computer generated sets really bogs down everything organic, playful and ultimately everything that was so cool about all the Indy films. I heard that Spielberg wanted to make a 'non-cgi film' but he did not get his way. Look for the cute digital prairie dogs at the opening of the movie. Your enjoyment of the picture will probably be determined by how much you like or dislike them.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
5
JonMay 23, 2008
Good spirit, but too far out. Even Indy doesn't survive 500 foot waterfalls, much less along with four others.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
5
DanM.May 25, 2008
Outrageous and hackneyed storyline coupled with non-believable action sequences, too digitalized, I do not lump this in with the original trilogy and will not acknowledge this as an Indiana Jones movie.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
MrDorkMay 26, 2008
Entertaining movie altogether, but for crying out loud... It's just so over-the-top cheesy hollywood-spielberg-lucas mumbojumbo. Half-way the movie it just went from hilariously nuts to total LSD trip. Gimme a break!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
ArthurS.May 28, 2008
There were some cool special effect scenes, but other than that I found myself wishing for the movie to be less than 2 hours long (which it was, thankfully).
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
GMoneyMay 29, 2008
I think the part that killed it for me was how unrealistic almost everything was... from being shot at by 40 russian soldiers with machine guns, and going down 3 niagara falls sized waterfalls and coming out scratchless was just silly. Lets I think the part that killed it for me was how unrealistic almost everything was... from being shot at by 40 russian soldiers with machine guns, and going down 3 niagara falls sized waterfalls and coming out scratchless was just silly. Lets hope there isn't another one… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
KeithL.Jun 1, 2008
George Lucas is an incredible hack job. What a putz. Steven Spielberg is now Steven Cheeseberg and they have disgraced my all-time favorite movie (Raiders) and the hero it launched. We waited 19 years for a special effects rampage that made George Lucas is an incredible hack job. What a putz. Steven Spielberg is now Steven Cheeseberg and they have disgraced my all-time favorite movie (Raiders) and the hero it launched. We waited 19 years for a special effects rampage that made me want to vomit. Where's the bullwhip guys? Why was Indy a cranky old man? Why was this a vehicle to make tons of cash with Shai LaBouf down the road as the "new" Indy? Steve...George...RETIRE! You suck!… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
BrandonT.Jun 27, 2008
A poor Indiana Jones film. Decent in comparison with the movies out around the same time but it won't last in movie history. Terrible ending.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
SteveOJun 3, 2008
This movie was so unrealistic. Entertaining, sure, but so unrealistic to the point that I wanted it to end. I mean aliens helping build the mayan civilization? Anyone with a decently working brain knows that aliens dont exist... jeez This movie was so unrealistic. Entertaining, sure, but so unrealistic to the point that I wanted it to end. I mean aliens helping build the mayan civilization? Anyone with a decently working brain knows that aliens dont exist... jeez hollywood, you'll have to do better then this.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
nomadJul 16, 2008
Folks this is why you have to appreciate Sly. Rembo and Rocky are two icon franchises and he capped them off in an exemplary, superb fashion... many other beloved cherished and loved franchises were tarnished by travesty sequels.. Long live Sly.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
PaulL.Jul 21, 2008
IT a good but definitely not great either. "It more of a national treasure feel to it because it involves around aliens. I didn't like it how is it set in 50s because it a b movie era rather the 1930s adventure serial. not worth a wait. IT a good but definitely not great either. "It more of a national treasure feel to it because it involves around aliens. I didn't like it how is it set in 50s because it a b movie era rather the 1930s adventure serial. not worth a wait. The CGI IS Horrible. Anyway it a good movie but not great.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
robJul 8, 2008
I was overjoyed to hear a new Indiana Jones movie was coming out. Then i saw it, and wished they hadn't. The ending was incredibly unusual for an Indiana Jones.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
PaulCMay 22, 2008
I was very, very disappointed. A spaceship should never be in an Indiana Jones movie...guess what???
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
ChadS.May 22, 2008
A slow start, a crushing bore of a start, really, kills your nostalgia, right off the bat, because the film regards its own mythology a bit too pompously. We know where the lost ark is being stored. We don't need a reminder. As for A slow start, a crushing bore of a start, really, kills your nostalgia, right off the bat, because the film regards its own mythology a bit too pompously. We know where the lost ark is being stored. We don't need a reminder. As for Indiana Jones himself, Harrison Ford may look great for his age, but he sounds disinterested. Grumpy. This fourth installment of "Raiders..." needs a comedy transfusion; a young female sidekick who constantly reminds the aging archeologist how he's becoming the very thing he studies and collects, a relic. Shia LeBeouf is a good actor. But he's totally lost, here. Talking about comedy transfusions, at the very least, "...Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" needs a shot of Short Round, stat! In the wake of all those "Star Wars"-wanna bes that followed the mother-of-all-blockbusters(which killed off the personal filmmaking trend of American directors during the early-to-mid seventies) in '77, George Lucas actually got around to sueing two of these space opera "homages": the ABC series "Battlestar Galactica", and "Battle Beyond the Stars", starring one of "The Waltons", for story infringement. Twenty-five-plus years later, now the shoe is on the other foot, since writer/producer Chris Carter might have a little something to say about Lucas' so-called original story.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
5
SteveMay 22, 2008
Really?! This is the best they could do?! 20 years mulling over a script and this is the result?! Yeah, it had the skeleton of an Indy movie, but you've actually seen very single aspect of the plot/story/dialogue before...somewhere in Really?! This is the best they could do?! 20 years mulling over a script and this is the result?! Yeah, it had the skeleton of an Indy movie, but you've actually seen very single aspect of the plot/story/dialogue before...somewhere in the first 3. So...it's boring. To boot, not even John Williams came up with something unique...they just recycled the same themes from the other movies. Lame. Let's see, what else sucked? Oh, the gags. Every moment in the movie is a gag, whether that be the "punch," (of which there were too many), the bullets that miss (again, too many), the car chases, everything Indy says now is a one-liner, and the inexplicable less-than-realistic action sequences are more comical than they are thrilling, the monkees, another Tarzan reference (like they did with Chewbacca in Star Wars 3/6), ripping pants...the list is endless really. At least Indy got shot in the 1st one, and we thought he fell off that cliff in the 3rd one. It would take Kryptonite to destroy him in Crystal Skull. Speaking of Kryptonite: There are aliens, just like in "Signs." And an atomic bomb. And Russians. And Indiana Jones was a secret agend during WW2. Don't waste your $10.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
5
MikeCMay 23, 2008
Deeeeeeeply disappointed. It was the same disappointment that you got when you saw the Phantom Menace. It just isnt the same indiana jones that we all know and love.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
MrjonesMay 23, 2008
The first 45min of the film was engaging and exciting. The last hour and a half of the film sorry to say derailed into self-indulgent, unfunny and over the top mess. Hollow characters never developed beyond weak accents and wacky The first 45min of the film was engaging and exciting. The last hour and a half of the film sorry to say derailed into self-indulgent, unfunny and over the top mess. Hollow characters never developed beyond weak accents and wacky expressions( thanks George Lucas) I'm starting to despise the cheap effects that computers can generate. If there were actually ants like that in South America no one would live there. Disappointing.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
5
mikemMay 23, 2008
Average in every way. no inspiration, no excitement, strictly going thru the motions.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
ChrisKMay 24, 2008
When they were making this movie - somebody somewhere was thinking videogame.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
MichaelG.May 24, 2008
Usually when I see a movie like this, I suspend all belief and just have fun. But with Indiana Jones, I just thought it was stupid and pointless.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
JohnHMay 25, 2008
Cool action sequences, bad script.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
JohnN.May 26, 2008
I liked it, but it doesn't live up to the other movies. It was a fun addition, yet there were several flaws. I did like the ants though.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
JohnF.May 27, 2008
What an unbelievably crushing letdown. All the talent they had working on this, and all the time they had to work on it, and they couldn't come up with anything better? The story is absurd. The acting is half-hearted, with the exception What an unbelievably crushing letdown. All the talent they had working on this, and all the time they had to work on it, and they couldn't come up with anything better? The story is absurd. The acting is half-hearted, with the exception of Cate Blanchett, who seems like a fish out of water in this movie and does about as good as one can with a prepostrous character. The characters are boring except for Indy and Marian. The effects are lousy -- not once do you feel like you are looking at something other than second-rate CG effects. The enemies are dull. The action sequences are either "been there/done that" or totally absurd (Tarzan LaBeouf... I'd call that the Indiana Jones version of Revenge of the Sith's "Noooooo" moment if there weren't several moments that qualified). The movie does have some moments, but the bad overshadows the good. I thought this movie flopped even harder than Phantom Menace. Based on this movie and the Star Wars prequels, George Lucas should probably retire before he does anymore damage. What a waste.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
BenM.May 27, 2008
5 only because the acting wasnt terrible, but the plot was. As we have already seen Lucus has fallen far to the dark side, and shouldn't be allowed to write anymore. These old men have peaked long ago, time for some new blood, and new 5 only because the acting wasnt terrible, but the plot was. As we have already seen Lucus has fallen far to the dark side, and shouldn't be allowed to write anymore. These old men have peaked long ago, time for some new blood, and new movies. Iron Man, for example, was great.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
CharlieJul 24, 2008
It was good, it just wasn't Indy.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
PaxsterOct 11, 2010
Although this film retains all of the Indiana Jones necessities it goes way over the top when introducing the 'extra-dimensional' beings to the equation. This is Indiana Jones and not Star Trek. Apart from this, Ford is as lively and asAlthough this film retains all of the Indiana Jones necessities it goes way over the top when introducing the 'extra-dimensional' beings to the equation. This is Indiana Jones and not Star Trek. Apart from this, Ford is as lively and as brilliant as ever and keeps his comic timing but LeBoeuf, well, he just didn't cut it.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
5
ERG1008Sep 1, 2010
Indiana Jones returns, but with Russians, skulls, atomic bombs & the 1950s.
Well it wasn't as bad as I'd expected it to be. Being a massive Raiders fan there were some nice returns & references.
Shia Labeouf plays his part pretty well whilstIndiana Jones returns, but with Russians, skulls, atomic bombs & the 1950s.
Well it wasn't as bad as I'd expected it to be. Being a massive Raiders fan there were some nice returns & references.
Shia Labeouf plays his part pretty well whilst Cate Blanchett is on Autopilot as the stereotypical baddie.
The main problems with it is that it's too far fetched, even for Indiana Jones (fridge & waterfalls). These make the rubber dingy bit in Temple of Doom look perfectly viable.
Also, the story is a bit ropey. I believe it was all George Lucas's idea so this explains why. Maybe he'll go back & change it in a few years?
I also thought with all the CGI used, it didn't have the same charm as the other films.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
5
ryancarroll88Aug 27, 2010
If there is one thing this movie succeeds at it is entertainment, even if only in the campiest sense of the word. Unfortunately, in this case fans were hoping for so much more.
3 of 5 users found this helpful32
All this user's reviews
5
grandpajoe6191Sep 24, 2011
"Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" is a decent movie to add into the Jones Franchise. The movie is way outdated with a 'old' performance by 'old' Harrison Ford. Looks like Spielberg & Lucas is getting older...
4 of 8 users found this helpful44
All this user's reviews
5
LivingonairDec 31, 2012
The saddest thing about this movie.. is if it weren't for just a few really terrible scenes (that could leave some viewers insulted by suggesting they are so gullible and easy to please that they will buy into ridiculously outlandish andThe saddest thing about this movie.. is if it weren't for just a few really terrible scenes (that could leave some viewers insulted by suggesting they are so gullible and easy to please that they will buy into ridiculously outlandish and stupid scenes)... it could have fit nicely with part's 1 and 3. Unfortunately, this film was somewhere near the temple of doom (although I would say Temple of Doom was still worse).

The main scene that comes to mind is the part where Indy's son and the Russian are sword fighting on two jeeps... this is where I really made up my mind that this film was totally blown, even though it was already heading in that direction fast. The beauty of Indy 1 and 3 and many other good adventure classics, are that although very fantastical, they still have an element of believability within the world created by the movie.

Indy and the Crystal Skulls completely lost sight of trying to stay believable, and I think that's why so many hardcore fans were really turned off almost feeling that their intelligence had been insulted (Although I know this certainly wasn't the intent of the makers, but just the reality of how many viewers felt).… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
imthenoobDec 27, 2012
The whole Aliens ending was an awful way to end the film but it was still enjoyable to watch. It was action-packed, had good acting, and was entertaining. I can see why Indiana Jones fans hate it but it wasn't all that bad.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
python2000Jan 13, 2013
The spark of action humour and villains has fizzled out and George Lucas has killed another good film series, repeating the disaster of The Phantom Menace and Attack of the Clones.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
RayzorMooseNov 13, 2013
Crystal Skull has viewers bashing in theirs.
Indiana Jones makes a very unnecessary sequel to the otherwise spotless series. The acting was okay, but the story was painfully flawed with a mediocre script, and a nearly pointless ending.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
AaronWasserman2May 5, 2014
Uhhh guys...what happened here? i kinda expected this frm Lucas after the prequels but speilberg? really? this was thebest you could do? you couldnt have just left Indy to be a trilogy ?
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
JipaDec 7, 2014
This movie wasn't so good. AND I MEAN It WASN'T! How does aliens have anything to do with Indiana Jones! This is not Halo or Star Wars or Star Trek! What the hell? Hmph. Sorry. The movie is definitely GOOD but the Alien thing and theThis movie wasn't so good. AND I MEAN It WASN'T! How does aliens have anything to do with Indiana Jones! This is not Halo or Star Wars or Star Trek! What the hell? Hmph. Sorry. The movie is definitely GOOD but the Alien thing and the refrigerator part were kinda cool and dumb.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
homer4presidentMar 28, 2015
Harrison Ford has still got it in him to return his landmark action hero to the screen and please old fans and new ones alike. To bad that everything else didn't turn out so well. Shia laBeouf was the worst choice for a supporting actor and aHarrison Ford has still got it in him to return his landmark action hero to the screen and please old fans and new ones alike. To bad that everything else didn't turn out so well. Shia laBeouf was the worst choice for a supporting actor and a lot of the plot elements have been re-hashed. Watching it, it reminded me of the Jaws sequels. Not Jaws number two. Because that was the good one.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
gameguardian21Mar 20, 2016
I never thought Indiana Jones would be disappointing, but Spielberg has made it like it should have never been. While Harrison Ford still remains the star of the show as jones, shia loubof made it feel like he didn't care, that monkeyI never thought Indiana Jones would be disappointing, but Spielberg has made it like it should have never been. While Harrison Ford still remains the star of the show as jones, shia loubof made it feel like he didn't care, that monkey swinging scene with shia, and losing its humor, this is not what I expected.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
NolanLundgaardMay 15, 2018
They really should have stopped after The Last Crusade. I cannot overemphasize how much of a mistake this movie was. Indy should have retired.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
InjuredDriverAug 26, 2022
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. First of all, I'm not going to spoil the overall plot of this movie, however, what I am going to discuss will certainly *spoil* certain events and outcomes of certain scenes throughout this movie, as well as some scenes in the prior movies of the series. That being said let's continue... I saw this movie in theaters when it first came out in 2008 and recently watched it at home in 4k when I bought the 4 movie collection. Each time I was blown away by the production value, soundtrack, and the visuals. The problem with this movie isn't the cinematography, it's great. Neither is it the soundtrack, it's typical Indian Jones. Nor is it the acting or directing, they're both great. A person could, understandably, argue that the main problem is the plot, and in doing so that person may be getting a bit closer to the real problem of 'Kingdom of the Crystal Skull'. The real problem being the absolutely ridiculous, over the top, rocket ski jumping over the shark levels of unbelievableness of particular action scenes in this movie. Let's be real here... There absolutely have been moments in the previous Indiana Jones movies that are over the top when it comes to the action or escape methods of the main characters. A few notable examples being; Jumping out of an airplane that is about to crash and using an inflatable life raft as a substitute for a parachute for three people to glide down onto a snow capped mountain peak unharmed. Three people in a mining rail cart jumping a 50ft gap in the rails while perfectly landing on the subsequent tracks. Many action movies have ridiculous / hard to believe things happen in them all the time. However, I feel like in this movie things are taken to the next level of absurdity; Surviving a nuclear blast by hiding in a fridge that is blasted about 50 miles through the air, then rolling out and walking away completely unbruised... Shia LaBeouf's character learning how to perfectly Tarzan swing on jungle vines after watching monkeys do it for a split second, then cathing up to a caravan of speeding vehicles while doing so. Driving a jeep type vehicle off a 500 ft cliff only to deny physics and be caught by a tree which bends and perfectly cradles the Jeep, lowering it down into a river, where the Jeep drives off the tree and starts miraculously floating on the water as if it just turned into some nautical car type boat, or something... Which then floats down the river and proceeds to fall over *three* waterfalls, each at least 200 ft high, with all five passengers remaining perfectly unharmed through the entire ordeal. There is more, oh boy is there more, but those are a few of the most egregious examples. And again, some people might think I'm being too harsh or nitpicking since every action movie has its ridiculous points. Just watch it for yourself. This movie is absolutely ridiculous. I've watched tons of action movies with over the top scenes that would never actually play out in real life. This movie has all that x10. In other words the writers, rather than take the time to write more realistic and convincing action scenes, chose to take the easy way out and just gave every main character an *absurd* amount of plot armor. All in all, not a horrible movie, but not great either. The production, cinematography, soundtrack, sound effects, are all pretty good, but coupled with the plot armor and absolutely absurd "jump the shark" moments, this is a painfully average film in my opinion.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
Page:
More From This Movie

65 Critic Reviews

5.4 User Reviews

Details & Credits|Trailers

Current Movie Releases
By MetascoreBy User Score
1 77 Project Hail Mary
2 75 Send Help
3 73 Hoppers
4 72 The Sheep Detectives
5 68 Crime 101
SEE ALL
Essential Links
New on Amazon Prime Video
New on Netflix
Coming Soon to DVD/Blu-ray
SEE ALL