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
5
JohnHMay 25, 2008
Cool action sequences, bad script.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
whydidtheymakethis??May 25, 2008
A big disappointment. This film is a caricature of the original trilogy, almost completely devoid of any heart or character development.. and don't even get me started on the plot, starting out of nowhere, quickly becoming tedious, and A big disappointment. This film is a caricature of the original trilogy, almost completely devoid of any heart or character development.. and don't even get me started on the plot, starting out of nowhere, quickly becoming tedious, and ending preposterously. I feel cheated as I disregarded the negative press and watched this film based on my love of the original three. I guess I should have realised what was coming when the cinema screened an advert for a Indy 4 toy just before the film started- a movie designed around merchandising bah.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
MarilynZMay 25, 2008
Wonderfully entertaining. Great fun. The only movie we have seen in years where we went on the first day and paid full price instead of waiting for it drop to half price in two weeks. I can't wait until I get this on DVD.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
RMMay 25, 2008
Nothing new here. fell asleep a couple of times. certainly doesn't deserve the money it's making, much like the star wars prequels. Much ado about nothing.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
CaptainSpauldingMay 25, 2008
Alright gang, I know that everyone is questioning just about everything in this movie. Indy and Aliens? Son? Old girlfriend? No Connery? I saw this movie and liked what I saw. It wasn't my favorite Indy flick (actually fell in 4th out Alright gang, I know that everyone is questioning just about everything in this movie. Indy and Aliens? Son? Old girlfriend? No Connery? I saw this movie and liked what I saw. It wasn't my favorite Indy flick (actually fell in 4th out of 4), but any means. Made "Temple of Doom" seem like an Oscar winner. But besides all the whinning, bitching and moaning...it's a frickin' Indiana Jones move!?! INDIANA JONES! Accept it for what it's worth...a 2 hour great escape from the rest of the world! Indy VI anyone (without Mutt Williams if possible)?… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
TimCMay 25, 2008
Cinematagrahy was the best part of this movie. There was no feeling of adventure or risk that the previous Indiana movies provided. The ending was a huge disappointment based on the time period and what happened. The sense of wonder about Cinematagrahy was the best part of this movie. There was no feeling of adventure or risk that the previous Indiana movies provided. The ending was a huge disappointment based on the time period and what happened. The sense of wonder about the crystal skull was a huge let down when the ending was revealed.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
MattS.May 25, 2008
Too over the top. Shia Lequeef sucked as usual.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
RussellD.May 25, 2008
This was the most contrived, embarassing dissillusionment I have seen I have seen in quite some time. The script smacks of ambitious college students with little education, and was painful to watch. Me and my comrades left this movie whilst This was the most contrived, embarassing dissillusionment I have seen I have seen in quite some time. The script smacks of ambitious college students with little education, and was painful to watch. Me and my comrades left this movie whilst speeding jeeps in the jungles became platforms for a corny family fueled humourous sword fight between Indy's son, and a sword weilding KGB agent of sorts. Save your cash.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
peterMay 25, 2008
We already seen the great car chaches on a cliff, secret temples hidden in the rocks, and incredible non-human made objects that can change the world. This movie was just like a remake of all the different Indiana-Jones movies put together! We already seen the great car chaches on a cliff, secret temples hidden in the rocks, and incredible non-human made objects that can change the world. This movie was just like a remake of all the different Indiana-Jones movies put together! this movie was disaproving!… Expand
0 of 0 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
1
MargaretM.May 25, 2008
This is no indiana jones movie. what happened? would have been just as easy to make a decent movie now wouldn't it? Fools.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
MichaelB.May 25, 2008
This is the worst Indiana Jones movie by such a wide margin it made me long to watch Temple of Doom again. The best thing I can say about Lucas' ridiculously bad script (he needed nearly 20 years to come up withthis??) is that there is This is the worst Indiana Jones movie by such a wide margin it made me long to watch Temple of Doom again. The best thing I can say about Lucas' ridiculously bad script (he needed nearly 20 years to come up withthis??) is that there is no Jar Jar Binks.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
Gustavo²May 25, 2008
It has all the magic and adventurous elements that made Spielberg the King of Hollywood. Already an underrated masterpiece.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
GerryM.May 25, 2008
Completely ridiculous and a huge terrible mistake. The only saving grace is that Harrison Ford still has the charm of being Indy, but everything else just stinks out loud.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
GeorgeP.May 25, 2008
Indy is back and quite frankly - it had better not be for the last time - I want more Indiana Jones! I'll be seeing it at least three times this week, and likely once more after that. Guys - bring us more Indy! George, Steven, Harrison Indy is back and quite frankly - it had better not be for the last time - I want more Indiana Jones! I'll be seeing it at least three times this week, and likely once more after that. Guys - bring us more Indy! George, Steven, Harrison - I want at te very least two more. Harrison proved he not only isn't to old, but that he was once again born to wear the hat and carry the whip! Don't say goodbye - give us a new Trilogy!… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
ChadM.May 25, 2008
The sequel, along with the aging Ford, has lost it's charm over the years... The movie, like a never-ending visit to grandpa in the retirement home, drags on and on and while Spielberg tries to keep up the flash and pop of the prequels The sequel, along with the aging Ford, has lost it's charm over the years... The movie, like a never-ending visit to grandpa in the retirement home, drags on and on and while Spielberg tries to keep up the flash and pop of the prequels and in part is successful in creating a flurry of impossible escapes, although with the clumsier, older Ford Spielberg may have bitten off more than he could chew. The result is an increase in chase scenes and Jones (and also son) swinging from whips and vines in an attempt to compensate for the poor quality green-screen video overlapping. The only saving grace in the latest Jones saga is that it does not pretend and embraces every cliche. Let's call it what it really is, a hilariously unintentional farse!… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
ThomasC.May 25, 2008
A complete re-invention of a classic hero ! Indy 4 is a great 1950's sci-fi movie.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
BrandonH.May 25, 2008
Replace Ford with a character like Mr. Bean, and this movie would have been hilarious. Sadly, it just comes off as depressing and poorly written and directed (seriously Steve, lay off the soft focus).
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
EmmaG.May 25, 2008
The world is different but Indy is the same.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
JulieGMay 24, 2008
Captures the humour and charm of the 1st and 3rd Indy movies. Fans of those will love this; but if you didn't like the earlier ones, this won't change your mind.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
shawnc.May 24, 2008
Wow. What a silly, uninvolving disappointment. Spielberg is done.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
JOshradMay 24, 2008
Lucas ruins another saga. Wow, Steven is a sell out for letting this film be made.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
AnnS.May 24, 2008
Idiotic drivel with amazingly flat, boring characters. Not like the old Indy.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
jackS.May 24, 2008
[***SPOILER***] Aliens. Are you kidding me. Aliens. You guys are rating this too high. When did Aliens ever cross a Indiana Jones movie. This movie was just a pass the torch movie to Shia. Lucas is crazy. He screwed up the Star Wars series [***SPOILER***] Aliens. Are you kidding me. Aliens. You guys are rating this too high. When did Aliens ever cross a Indiana Jones movie. This movie was just a pass the torch movie to Shia. Lucas is crazy. He screwed up the Star Wars series and now this. HE HAD 10 YEARS TO WRITE THIS. It's unbelievable how bad this movie was. I would write more but I don't want to miss the Aliens landing on my front lawn. - OUT!… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
CharlesG.May 24, 2008
Goes where no Indiana Jones movie has gone before. The territory this movie covers is completely unexpected - at least if you avoid spoilers. The action was fantastic just like the other Jones movies. Shia and Ford are great together. This Goes where no Indiana Jones movie has gone before. The territory this movie covers is completely unexpected - at least if you avoid spoilers. The action was fantastic just like the other Jones movies. Shia and Ford are great together. This movie was worthy of resurrecting the Indiana Jones franchise.… 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
2
JamesG.May 24, 2008
This is one of the worst films I have ever seen. It is a disgrace to the Indiana Jones franchise and should never be seen by anyone.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
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
0
KyleB.May 24, 2008
This was the biggest piece of sh*t I've seen in years. It was even more disappointing than The Phantom Menace. Imagine watching a fan film made in an all new Indiana Jones theme park ride. Who wants to be Indy? How 'bout you This was the biggest piece of sh*t I've seen in years. It was even more disappointing than The Phantom Menace. Imagine watching a fan film made in an all new Indiana Jones theme park ride. Who wants to be Indy? How 'bout you Grandpa! The writing sucks, the acting sucks, the special effects really suck, even the lighting sucks! I could have forgiven it all its other faults if only Harrison Ford hadn't looked so sedated and completely uninterested in what was happening. My eight dollars should be worth at least one scene with some dramatic tension.… Expand
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
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
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
2
RobMay 24, 2008
Same problems as Star Wars episodes 1-3 and all of the other shameless remakes currently being released: overcomplicated plot, excessive action, awkward dialog, miscast actors, obviously computer generated special effects - all tied together Same problems as Star Wars episodes 1-3 and all of the other shameless remakes currently being released: overcomplicated plot, excessive action, awkward dialog, miscast actors, obviously computer generated special effects - all tied together by reused quotes and plot devices from the earlier films. I loved Raiders, liked Temple, and really enjoyed the Last Crusade, but this film was painful to watch. There were a few brief moments where it had potential, but then another blue-screen generated chase sequence would start.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
SlyF.May 24, 2008
I was not hyped and thus not dissatisfied at all. Indy 4 is a fun 148 min of escapism.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
10
JaclynK.May 24, 2008
Rated 10 to increase reader average to what this film deserves - its a thoroughly enjoyable comeback, if a little silly.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
AliciaI.May 24, 2008
I went to the movies with all my family we are PERUVIANS and we got so upset about : First Nazca lines are in the coast of Peru Not in the Andes because CUZCO is in the andes. Then the music was not native PERUVIAN music. Moreover, we never I went to the movies with all my family we are PERUVIANS and we got so upset about : First Nazca lines are in the coast of Peru Not in the Andes because CUZCO is in the andes. Then the music was not native PERUVIAN music. Moreover, we never had MAYA culture in PERU. We had INCA CULTURE furthermore, we never had those pyramids in Peru. So, I think the director needs to go back to school to learn more about Inca culture before making a movie about a culture that he doesn't know and sell crap instead or real stuff.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
4
RobertC.May 24, 2008
A disapointment. The movie has one cliche after another. All it is is chase scenes. The plot does not make any sense, the chase scenes and plot have been done dozens of times in other movies. Kate Blanchett is wasted in the film with an A disapointment. The movie has one cliche after another. All it is is chase scenes. The plot does not make any sense, the chase scenes and plot have been done dozens of times in other movies. Kate Blanchett is wasted in the film with an accent that I found comedic. Harrison Ford is not very good in the movie. Shia LeBeouf is also wasted not given a chance to display his talent. Shame on Lucas productions and Steven spielburg for passing this crap on us.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
JOsMay 24, 2008
Certainly sucked. Three word summary: Prairie Dog, Monkeys.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
EvanTMay 24, 2008
This movie stays defiantly true to the previous films. There was only one problem that I myself had with this film, but I still rated it a ten becuase it is just my tastes. With the expanded tech in recent years, most of the effects are This movie stays defiantly true to the previous films. There was only one problem that I myself had with this film, but I still rated it a ten becuase it is just my tastes. With the expanded tech in recent years, most of the effects are digital, which is a dissapointment, but my good sir do not fret, this is as genuine an Indy experience as you will get. 10/10… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
RMMMay 24, 2008
Looking forward to the next installment, where Harrison plays to Shia, as Sean did to Harrison. Pls don't make us wait until 19 years!
1 of 1 users found this helpful
9
NickTMay 24, 2008
Not as good as Raiders or Crusade, but a very good entry in the series.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
TimP.May 24, 2008
So he's older and the story's a bit crazy, but lets face it, its still an enjoyable movie. Its not gonna be as good as the other films, because they were amazing, and because you're older now, and more critical!!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
AndyC.May 24, 2008
For an Indy film it is disappointing and a little weak. Taken on its own, it is a fun pop-corn ride that doesn't make an awful lot of sense.
0 of 0 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
5
ChrisKMay 24, 2008
When they were making this movie - somebody somewhere was thinking videogame.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
AkioC.May 24, 2008
CG gophers! Shia Tarzan Labuff! Alien Flying Saucers! George Lucas has completed his descent. Game over Georgie!
0 of 1 users found this helpful
3
chadsMay 24, 2008
This is an absolute embarassment to Spielberg's resume. How could such an extremely great director make such a garbage film. Spielberg is by far one of my favorite directors and Schindlers list is by far the best movie ever made, but This is an absolute embarassment to Spielberg's resume. How could such an extremely great director make such a garbage film. Spielberg is by far one of my favorite directors and Schindlers list is by far the best movie ever made, but this indiana jones is ridiculously over the top and in an extremely cheesy way. Harrison Ford is that old grandpa you see everyone once in a while who always has a dumb one liner or joke for you and you just smile at how stupid it was to make him feel good. The comedy in this movie was worse than epic movie or meet the spartans, yes its possible. Also, the story is ten times more far fetched than any previous indiana jones. Why in the heck is supernatural alien crap the central focus in an indiana jones movie? are you kidding me? Please just go rewatch the other movies in the series because this is a failure in every way. I pray there is no indiana starring shia, i pray!… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
8
TonyT.May 24, 2008
This is not the best Indy movie, but it is a damn good one. I would say it is better than Temple for sure. The action is tight, Harrison still delivers and Shia is surprisingly good in his role. The chase scenes in this one are some of the This is not the best Indy movie, but it is a damn good one. I would say it is better than Temple for sure. The action is tight, Harrison still delivers and Shia is surprisingly good in his role. The chase scenes in this one are some of the best in the Indy series. While the film doesn't hold a candle to Raiders, I would say that it still a good movie overall and a great Indy film.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
NateMay 24, 2008
This shallow, pathetic effort defiles and insults the legacy of "Raiders of the Lost Ark," and raises major questions about the ongoing viability of Speilberg as a legitimate creative force. Much as we may fondly remember the mastery that This shallow, pathetic effort defiles and insults the legacy of "Raiders of the Lost Ark," and raises major questions about the ongoing viability of Speilberg as a legitimate creative force. Much as we may fondly remember the mastery that was "Raiders," this film is simply a cheap and insulting exuse to exploit nostalgia for the original films to get people into the theater. Yes. It is that bad. The dialogue consists of little more than lame one-liners, the plot is overstuffed and underdeveloped, the acting (especially Indy himself) is wooden and embarrasing, character development is non-existent, and even the action sequences themselves are unoriginal and uninspired. This is an offensivley bad film.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
JuanC.May 24, 2008
I dont see why people say so much trash about this movie? are they dumb? what did they expect? you have to be dumbt to expect a lot from this movie and let yourself be dissapointed... if you expect a good and fun movie, you'll love it.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
DimitreR.May 24, 2008
I'm an Indy fanboy; I grew up with the original three movies and loved every single one of them (even Temple of Doom). I was of course, extremely excited to see this one. The first 45 minutes were good but then the movie morphed into a I'm an Indy fanboy; I grew up with the original three movies and loved every single one of them (even Temple of Doom). I was of course, extremely excited to see this one. The first 45 minutes were good but then the movie morphed into a distasteful combination of X-files, National Treasure, and Tarzan... The magic's simply gone and ultimately there was no reason whatsoever for this film to be made... well okay, I guess it was for the money... Speilburg, Lucas; how far the mighty have fallen.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
IanB.May 24, 2008
Sure, it isn't perfect - but it's a load of goofy fun with a ton of nostalgia heaped on. Ford is fabulous as ever as Indy, and it's great to see him in the role again. Go see it and just enjoy it, and leave the overanalysis to Sure, it isn't perfect - but it's a load of goofy fun with a ton of nostalgia heaped on. Ford is fabulous as ever as Indy, and it's great to see him in the role again. Go see it and just enjoy it, and leave the overanalysis to the cynics who've forgotten how to just have fun.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
RobH.May 24, 2008
This one seems to have divided people. All I know is that I loved it... all of it... apart from the monkys.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
GuenterO.May 24, 2008
Movie gives this magic Spielberg feeling. But Indy 3 is still the best.
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
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
2
thedudeMay 24, 2008
It's really hard to figure out what happened here. Were they trying to make this as bad as possible? Lucas and Spielberg turn the cute and the camp up to eleven, and manage to make Temple of Doom look like a classic by comparison. It's really hard to figure out what happened here. Were they trying to make this as bad as possible? Lucas and Spielberg turn the cute and the camp up to eleven, and manage to make Temple of Doom look like a classic by comparison. Granted, it would have been hard for me to be satisfied with anything here, as Raiders of the Lost Ark is one of my all-time favorite films, but I went in expecting it to be around the quality of the Last Crusade, which wasn't too bad, or at worst Temple of Doom, which was bad but nowhere near this bad. I just can't think of anything worthwhile about this film. The more Lucas does now, the more he detracts from the excellent work he did in the late seventies and early eighties. I will be forever grateful to him for American Graffiti, Star Wars, Empire Strikes Back, Raiders of the Lost Ark, and Return of the Jedi, but everything since then is a disaster, and this film, unfortunately, just continues that trend.… 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
8
WilliamTMay 23, 2008
If you disliked the earlier films, don't watch this movie. If you enjoyed them, jump on in. While it's not as good as its predecessors and feels a bit rushed in places, it's a ripping good time to be had.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
SlumpsB.May 23, 2008
A film wholly unconnected to human intuition, though not without gratuitously empty references to the motifs of the 'Indy' installments that came before it. The film's vein attempts to flesh out its own credibility are as A film wholly unconnected to human intuition, though not without gratuitously empty references to the motifs of the 'Indy' installments that came before it. The film's vein attempts to flesh out its own credibility are as non-believable as the preposterous veil of Russian accented-speech provided by the train-wreck of a character displayed by Cate Blanchett. There is not a wide shot to be found in the movie entire, save for the distracting glow of CGI shots George Lucas clearly devised in a wet dream. Shia 'The Beef' LeBoeuf is in obvious Academy Award form, offering a plethora of hilarious one-liners and not a single reasonable excuse for his presence in the film. John Hurt's portrayal of the lovably-one-dimensional 'Ox' left me wondering if he was payed for his role or if he had merely gotten drunk and refused to leave the set. My only hope is that I will muster the courage to watch the original trilogy some day in the future.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
JosephAccettaMay 23, 2008
Just as much fun as the others. I don't see what all the fuss is about. At first I had difficulty with it but frankly it quickly swept me up in an extremely fun adventure.
1 of 1 users found this helpful
1
DavidM.May 23, 2008
Seeing Harrison Ford was the only redeeming quality of this movie. It drifted so far from the origins of the series into a hard-to-believe concoction of failure.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
4
JustinH.May 23, 2008
Quite possibly one of the biggest movie disappoints I can remember. Full of extremely corny lines that are not only poorly written but poorly acted. This movie might have a huge opening weekend but the drop off is going to be so big that not Quite possibly one of the biggest movie disappoints I can remember. Full of extremely corny lines that are not only poorly written but poorly acted. This movie might have a huge opening weekend but the drop off is going to be so big that not even Dr. Jones can stop it. Save your money.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
Darkmage2002May 23, 2008
This was a fun movie but suffered from a bit too much ambition, plot-wise. And, unfortunately, there were too many scenes where the viewer was treated like a complete idiot/moron. If you've seen the movie, I'm sure you'll This was a fun movie but suffered from a bit too much ambition, plot-wise. And, unfortunately, there were too many scenes where the viewer was treated like a complete idiot/moron. If you've seen the movie, I'm sure you'll agree with me that the nuclear-detonation refrigerator stunt, triple-waterfall stunt, ant attack scene and ESPECIALLY the scene with Mutt swinging Tarzan style with the monkeys were just so preposterously ridiculous that the movie was severely weakened.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
RobKMay 23, 2008
Read the Village Voice review, it is right on the money with its review. George Lucas had his directorial hands all over this movie. I couldn't get over how fake this movie looked. There was no authenticity at all. Not a single action Read the Village Voice review, it is right on the money with its review. George Lucas had his directorial hands all over this movie. I couldn't get over how fake this movie looked. There was no authenticity at all. Not a single action scene looked real. The dialogue was atrocious. Karen Allen looked scary with her plastic surgery face grinning creepily throughout. There was no joy or crispness to the plot. Aliens? Really 19 years and that's the script they used one involving aliens. Indy always was about mythology and history but never sci fi. Awfully disapointing in every way. Its a shame… 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
1
MiguelVerdeMay 23, 2008
I walked out in the first 15 minutes. It was that bad. Lucas Jar Jar'd another one.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
JudyTMay 23, 2008
This movie was really bad. The action was cartoonish. Spielberg usually does better and Indy deserved better. But with so many problems getting decent writers whatelse could we expect. Poor old Harrison Ford didn't even start acting This movie was really bad. The action was cartoonish. Spielberg usually does better and Indy deserved better. But with so many problems getting decent writers whatelse could we expect. Poor old Harrison Ford didn't even start acting until Karen Allen, the one bright spot, came on screen.… Expand
0 of 0 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
9
CraigH.May 23, 2008
Everything it should have been and more.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
DaynziC.May 23, 2008
Pretty damn awesome, except for the stupid CGI animals. Totally could've gone without those. It was a good addition to the series. But did it bother anyone else that they almost NEVER CALLED HIM INDY?!?
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
PhilS.May 23, 2008
Worse than Temple of Doom. George screws up again.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
JanieH.May 23, 2008
Cheesy movie, from start to finish. Indy is supposed to push the limit of believability, but this flick jumped right off that cliff. From poor plot to substandard acting, an utter disappointment. Save your cash and rent it in a few months.
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
3
JackW.May 23, 2008
This was an extreme let down. There was not a single scene which I remember as being worth viewing. The story was sporadic and muddled, the acting flat(especially harrison- it seemed like he didnt want to be there), the set pieces This was an extreme let down. There was not a single scene which I remember as being worth viewing. The story was sporadic and muddled, the acting flat(especially harrison- it seemed like he didnt want to be there), the set pieces unexciting, the finale rushed and confusing. Unlike the other indiana films, kotcs did not make me forget I was sitting in a cinema. The beauty of the old films (as well as all great movies of this genre) lay in their ability to draw you in so that time seems to stand still outside the screen- you become so absorbed you forget where you are. Here though, from the very start I was continually made aware I was in fact watching a very poor production with hammy acting and a diabolical script. CGI can, in some films be used to great effect, but this was just not the case here. The effects took away from the rawness and authenticity of the previous films. This was purely a money making scheme at the cost of sullying an otherwise seminal cinematic franchise.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
ChanciusD.May 23, 2008
Worst Spielberg movie I have ever seen. The screen play is atrocious. All of the principle actor really enjoy their parts, but do to the plot their performances lack. All of the other Indy films have instances where the viewer needs to Worst Spielberg movie I have ever seen. The screen play is atrocious. All of the principle actor really enjoy their parts, but do to the plot their performances lack. All of the other Indy films have instances where the viewer needs to suspend disbelief, but the outlandish situations in this one leave only a feeling of awkwardness.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
INCForestMay 23, 2008
Hey Dude. This movie is a real piece of SH*T!, Just a Dirt kingdom of dust.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
MarkT.May 23, 2008
Worst of all of them. So ridiculous. If I wanted Sci-Fi and ancient archeology I would watch Stargate. Get your Sci-Fi out of my Indy movie!
0 of 0 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
2
CNMay 23, 2008
If you expect a quality picture and an amazing gripping story like in the first three, you will definitely not find it in number 4. You would think great film giants such as George Lucas and Steven Spielberg would consider ending their If you expect a quality picture and an amazing gripping story like in the first three, you will definitely not find it in number 4. You would think great film giants such as George Lucas and Steven Spielberg would consider ending their career on a high note; unfortunately, this movie was very disappointing borderline awful.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
MikeR.May 23, 2008
That was the last movie I ever see that has any involvement of George Lucas. You sir ought to be ashamed of yourself. 20 years to get this movie right and this is the schlock you put out. I expect this kind of garbage from Michael Bay and That was the last movie I ever see that has any involvement of George Lucas. You sir ought to be ashamed of yourself. 20 years to get this movie right and this is the schlock you put out. I expect this kind of garbage from Michael Bay and Brendan Fraser - but come on....utterly disasterous.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
3
RobynMay 23, 2008
This movie was completely rediculous. The story line was boring and I was falling asleep in the theater, literaly. I dozed off and woke up to see Shia Lebuf winging with monkeys through a forest to get back to the jeep. Then an X-Files This movie was completely rediculous. The story line was boring and I was falling asleep in the theater, literaly. I dozed off and woke up to see Shia Lebuf winging with monkeys through a forest to get back to the jeep. Then an X-Files moment accured and that is when I really wanted my money back. Do not see this movie in the theaters, wait until the dvd comes out, if you still have a desire to see this awful movie. I've seen the others, and this one was just terrible.… Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful
10
AndrewG.May 23, 2008
Good clean fun, never dull, and good to see him back. The story is a bit bizarre, Blanchette could have been a little more sympathetic - but it's simple to follow. Better than Temple of Doom, which at least serves to elevate this new Good clean fun, never dull, and good to see him back. The story is a bit bizarre, Blanchette could have been a little more sympathetic - but it's simple to follow. Better than Temple of Doom, which at least serves to elevate this new offering. Rated 10 to increase the average to what this film deserves! (about 7-8).… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
8
TMoMay 23, 2008
This movie rocks. Ya'll are haters... what'd you expect, 2001: A Space Odyssey? C'mon, cut 'em some slack.
1 of 1 users found this helpful
9
MIMay 23, 2008
HE"S BACK!!!! Indy is still great. This is a movie to just enjoy and not to take serious. Don't analyze it, just have fun with it.
0 of 1 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
9
DanR.May 23, 2008
This is classic Indiana Jones. The formula has not been modernized to appeal to the more jaded theater audience of today. Those unaccustomed to watching fun, adult-oriented action movies may not get it. For those of us that remember and This is classic Indiana Jones. The formula has not been modernized to appeal to the more jaded theater audience of today. Those unaccustomed to watching fun, adult-oriented action movies may not get it. For those of us that remember and loved them, however, it is an absolute blast. They don't make them like this anymore, and that's a shame.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
NateHMay 23, 2008
I thought this movie was very good. The action is great, the story is well thought out and really cool, and there are a lot of hidden easter eggs for indy fans. My only complaint is that this should have been done sooner.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
WillC.May 23, 2008
Not a Masterwork, but good clean Indie fun the way you remembered it. A tad too much popcorn for the kids, but plenty of adult level plotting to keep you engaged during the entire "ride".
1 of 1 users found this helpful
2
PurgueF.May 23, 2008
I've given the movie 2/10. Watching this movie I felt very disconnected due mostly to the bad acting, the plot holes, and inconceivable physics (Lucas made Gold magnetic). We all loved the originals but if you are on the fence about I've given the movie 2/10. Watching this movie I felt very disconnected due mostly to the bad acting, the plot holes, and inconceivable physics (Lucas made Gold magnetic). We all loved the originals but if you are on the fence about seeing this movie just think Star Wars Episode I. With worse acting.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
1
FrancescoC.May 23, 2008
Very bad. There aren't a story and the characters are awful.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
10
WargamerMay 23, 2008
This film was everything I hoped it would be. It felt every bit as thrilling as the old trilogy, and it is going to take some beating. Indy 4 is lining up to be my Film of The Year!
1 of 1 users found this helpful
0
SteveW.May 23, 2008
Horrible in all ways! Terrible acting, ugly visual effects, substandard direction, and worst of all, horrendous screen-writing. May rank as my most hated film of all time! Don't waste your money on seeing this trash.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
7
GaryB.May 23, 2008
This should be spoiler free, so here goes: The good bits are really, really good
1 of 1 users found this helpful
9
AustinB.May 23, 2008
Not as good as the old ones, but a helluva lot better than the star wars prequels. Besides, after seeing Iron Man, every movie from now on is superfluous.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
1
kend.May 23, 2008
I have been a dedicated Indy fan for many years, and when you consider ticket prices these days, I think all Indy fans should have received a better plot for thier buck. The acting was great and it was nice to see an old friend.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
7
PaulM.May 23, 2008
I have to say this movie doesn't disappoint, however it doesn't really impress either. With better than just average performances from Kidder, Ford and LaBeouf, I was surprised to discover the terrible "russian" accent delivered I have to say this movie doesn't disappoint, however it doesn't really impress either. With better than just average performances from Kidder, Ford and LaBeouf, I was surprised to discover the terrible "russian" accent delivered was by none other than Cate Blanchett. Terribly cheesy. Like Gorgonzola. The special effects are, as expected from George, fairly spectacular. Sadly the scenes of showing me a ground hog's reaction to a nuclear explosion are reminiscent of Jar Jar Binks. The cinematography, editing and stunts are all fine, but to wrap it all up, the story is far too thin to let you walk away saying "Wow I wish it was longer". It's more like " Wow I wish I had waited to rent this."… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
BenP.May 23, 2008
This was the movie I had hoped I wouldn't see. How could the critics have liked this? I want to know. What about this was good film-making? The dialoge was tedious, the script was terrible, and the editing and cinematography was This was the movie I had hoped I wouldn't see. How could the critics have liked this? I want to know. What about this was good film-making? The dialoge was tedious, the script was terrible, and the editing and cinematography was flat-out laughable. Everybody who made this should be ashamed. I would have been pleased with a movie half as good as Temple of Doom, but wasn't even given that. Spielberg, Lucas, AND Ford, how dare you? Critics, please watch this film again, it is not a good film by any means. It is closer to being horrible than good. I'm hurt that this movie was made. I grew up on Indiana Jones and this is the thanks I get? Again...how dare you?… Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful
7
FredG.May 23, 2008
I was expecting more. It was fun and went by quickly, but contained no new material. Thought the crystal skull looked like it was made of plastic and tin foil.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
8
MatthewA.May 22, 2008
The movie is a welcome addition to the existing trilogy, and although it does not break much new ground in the style and telling of the adventures of Dr. Jones, it has changed considerably with the introduction of what may be an otherworldly The movie is a welcome addition to the existing trilogy, and although it does not break much new ground in the style and telling of the adventures of Dr. Jones, it has changed considerably with the introduction of what may be an otherworldly McGuffin. If you can buy Indy Jones hopping from the action serials of the 30's into something resembling a 50's sci-fi B-movie, then you'll do just fine with this movie. There is plenty of Spielberg magic here, and although the film is not without its detractions, the same can be said for the other Indy movies, Raiders notwithstanding.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
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