Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull

3

WaltS.Dec 19, 2008

Well, I'm not a die-hard Indiana Jones fan, nor a jaded hater off big motion pictures. All I wanted was a popcorn movie that could give me 2 hours of entertainment. The good news: the first 60-80 minutes of this movie are enjoyable. No, Well, I'm not a die-hard Indiana Jones fan, nor a jaded hater off big motion pictures. All I wanted was a popcorn movie that could give me 2 hours of entertainment. The good news: the first 60-80 minutes of this movie are enjoyable. No, it's not on the level of Raiders of the Lost Ark by any means, but it gets the job done. The bad news: the last 40 minutes are absolutely horrible. The script is the real zero here: unquestionably wretched. The special effects make you want to do a double-take because they are so ridiculous. Literally, the last 40 or so minutes look like the product of Spielberg, Lucas, and whoever else throwing together patch-work ideas and other scenes borrowed from previous Indiana Jones movies and trying to make them stick. It is a little depressing that this movie is ranked in the Top 25 highest grossing movies of all time. Customers came looking for a great time and were cheated. Shame on everyone involved in the creation of this mess.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

GreatbealloFeb 23, 2012

This movie should have never been made. It is a discredit to the original trilogy, and it damages the series as a whole. Aliens should not have been included in an Indiana Jones film. Also, I know that there has always be an element of theThis movie should have never been made. It is a discredit to the original trilogy, and it damages the series as a whole. Aliens should not have been included in an Indiana Jones film. Also, I know that there has always be an element of the ridiculous in the franchise, but seriously, some of the scenes in this film are downright ludicrous. Spielberg and Lucas need to learn that their classics should not be tampered with. A train wreck.… Expand

3 of 5 users found this helpful32

All this user's reviews

3

cowbell31Feb 5, 2012

A movie of complexity that doesn't pay off. The story is so compounded, it seems like it was a combination of 20 different ideas. But it was one of those movies that was popular with the public, mainly because they can't tell a good movieA movie of complexity that doesn't pay off. The story is so compounded, it seems like it was a combination of 20 different ideas. But it was one of those movies that was popular with the public, mainly because they can't tell a good movie from a bad movie.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

3

FranzHcriticJul 24, 2014

'Kingdom of Crystal Skull's' action scenes are so effortlessly fake I instantly find a dislike for the movie. The action scenes lack the deadpan delivery of Harrison Ford, the CGI was horridly unnecessary, that it destroyed the classic'Kingdom of Crystal Skull's' action scenes are so effortlessly fake I instantly find a dislike for the movie. The action scenes lack the deadpan delivery of Harrison Ford, the CGI was horridly unnecessary, that it destroyed the classic tradition of Indian Jones, and Shia Labeouf was so conceited I wished he had gotten eaten by the ants (By the way, Siafu ants don't live in South America, George Lucas). This film should have been made in the mid 90's at the most, when this s**t CGI didn't exist.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

3

BigZSep 10, 2014

Okay, fail. Just fail. I heard they were gonna do another Indiana Jones and I was really excited. It's hard to argue with the consistency of the other three films and their delivery. But what happened? Why??? There had to be hundreds of ideasOkay, fail. Just fail. I heard they were gonna do another Indiana Jones and I was really excited. It's hard to argue with the consistency of the other three films and their delivery. But what happened? Why??? There had to be hundreds of ideas they could have considered for the plot, but they had to pick one about aliens. And personally I am incredibly tired of alien movies. Of course they try to make it not seem like its about aliens by trying to twist the plot into seeming like it's about "alternate-dimensional beings" and not aliens. Even though they look just like aliens and travel in flying saucers. George Lucas...stop guy, just stop. You've already proven all you can do is make movies about space and milk it for all it's worth. Steven shouldn't have listened to you. I loved seeing Harrison Ford back in action but they threw him in an environment that made his character seem off-step and on the cheesier side. They had good elements and solid plot points to work with like Indy having a long lost son, but Shia was not a good cast for it, watering down any good momentum they had. The CGI seemed out of place and labored as well. I wanted to like this. But I just can't. Crystal Skull mortally wounded the Indiana Jones series.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

3

AaronWasserman1Apr 11, 2016

So poor, failed attempt to recapture the classic trilogy. Harrison Ford is awesome once again as Indiana Jones, but... that's the only positive I can really say about this movie. Why Shia Labeoff????

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

3

Aaron_WassermanJun 1, 2016

Goddamn it guys, you ruined a classic and great trilogy, which can no longer remain one of the best trilogies because now it has 4 parts and the 4th part is awful. Why would you bring in Shia Labeuof?

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

3

FilipeNetoFeb 22, 2018

In this film, the latest in Indiana Jones franchise so far, the explorer and archaeologist will go in search of the crystal skulls, objects about which abound myths. Directed by Steven Spielberg, this film has screenplay by David Koepp andIn this film, the latest in Indiana Jones franchise so far, the explorer and archaeologist will go in search of the crystal skulls, objects about which abound myths. Directed by Steven Spielberg, this film has screenplay by David Koepp and has Harrison Ford, Cate Blanchett and Shia LaBeouf in the lead roles.

The script is the main problem of this film, totally unrealistic. The action scenes abused in computerized effects and eventually became so absurd that only lacked some laser swords to the characters during the fencing scene. There is still a certain character, "Professor Oxley", played by John Hurt, that I don't know what the hell is doing for 90% of the movie because he's left in the plot. And this kind of basic errors multiplied by the script. Harrison Ford still doesn't accuse the weight of his age, managing to fulfill his role in a very good way, but in a film that doesn't do justice to his talent. The stunning scenery are in accordance with the script, and are as unbelievable as it. The picture is very good, perhaps the best of the franchise to date, as well as special visual and sound effects, unsurprisingly. The soundtrack fulfilled her role without much brilliance.

I will never be able to understand why Spielberg almost cannot make a film without involving extraterrestrials. Is himself an alien giving clues to the human race in blockbuster movies? When directors want to impose by force an idea into a script this is what happens: Spielberg likes sci-fi, and is not able to keep it away from movies that don't belong to that style. This film, lamentably, is a confusing and boring mix of Indiana Jones and "Close Encounters of the Third Kind", soaked with computerized effects as if Spielberg had never seen a computer before. I regret that the film hasn't been lost in the forest before finding theaters or our technology doesn't allow Mr. Spielberg to go for a ride to Mars, on a one-way trip, if he comes back trying to shove aliens where they are not needed.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

3

Toasty87Jul 12, 2020

Absolute mess of a story and plot with wooden acting and delivery should not have been made.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

3

MaddoxWhiteApr 25, 2021

Guys aren't they like immortal or whatever so where even is the danger I don't understand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

3

Craftnight405Jun 30, 2023

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. In Indys viertem Abenteuer muss er einem jungen Mann namens Henry (Shia LaBeouf) helfen, dessen Mutter zu retten. Dabei muss er einen alten Kristallschädel, zu seinem richtigen Platz wiederbringen. Dabei sind ihm die Russen auf die Spur und wollen die Menschen damit kontrollieren. Mit auf der Reise sind noch andere Charaktere wie Indys alte Freundin Marion (Karen Allen).

Indiana Jones und das Königreich des Kristallschädels gilt bei vielen Leuten, als der schlechteste Teil der Reihe und ist für viele eine Katastrophe. Diesen Leuten kann ich nur zustimmen. Der Film ist wie der Titel einfach viel zu lange. Indiana Jones hat in diesem Film fast gar nichts zu tun, während er in den anderen Filmen, Rätsel lösen muss und Fallen ausweichen muss, sind die Fallen in dem Film gar keine Bedrohung. Realismus kann man hier komplett vergessen, in den anderen Teilen ist es auch nicht gerade realistisch, aber dort geht es um Mythen, welche sich als Wahrheit entpuppen. Und diese Mythen sind auch interessant und gut gemacht. Aber hier ist es nur übertrieben dargestellt und gar nicht realistisch. In einer Szene befindet sich Indy in einem Kühlschrank und überlebt einfach eine Bombenexplosion. Diese Szene ist auch total überflüssig und diese hätte man ruhig wegschneiden können. Kommen wir zu den anderen Charakteren. Shia LaBeout ist eine komplette Katastrophe. Er ist nervig und nur dafür da, um eine Geschichte von Indy aufzubauen, welche auch am Ende nicht authentisch wirkt. Henry ist ein Klischee aus den 50er Jahren. Ein Teenager mit Lederjacke und Elvis Frisur, der immer sich sein Haar kämmen muss. Dann gibt es noch John Hurt als Professor Harold Oxley der nur eine Lachnummer ist. Er spielt einen Mann, der nicht richtig sprechen kann und verrückt geworden ist durch die Kontrolle des Schädels. Die Sets sind auch nicht mehr so gut wie in den anderen Filmen. Es gibt eine Verfolgungsjagd, die durch CGI gemacht worden ist, die richtig schlecht aussieht. Der Anfang des Films hat mir noch gefallen bis Indy und Henry sich aufmachen die Reise zu beginnen, ab wird der Film immer schlechter und schlechter. Der Humor ist einfach nur peinlich und nicht clever gemacht. Die Szene mit dem Treibsand fand ich ok und ein bisschen witzig.

Indiana Jones 4 ist kein guter Film, welcher einfach nur langweilig ist und viel zu übertrieben dargestellt wird. Indiana Jones hat hier nichts zu tun, andere Leute übernehmen seine Aufgaben. Diesen Film hätte es nicht geben müssen und wird zu Recht von vielen ignoriert.

3/10… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

2

MattBMay 22, 2008

I want my $10 back. This movie was horrid! On par with Crash Landing and Gigli.... it was a freaking joke from beginning to end. Horrible, horrible, horrible. Do not see this movie!

2 of 3 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

2

BrianL.May 25, 2008

Maddeningly idiotic. I was so angry when I left the theater as to what they did to a great franchise. It has George Lucas's stamp of cutesy lameness all over it. I hated this movie, and I was so excited to see it.

2 of 2 users found this helpful

2

JoeAnonymousMay 31, 2008

Full of ridiculous sequences that would never work and also inconsistencies that make it painful to watch. (Some spoilers) Two parallel paths through thick south american jungle even after the machine is blown up? A skull which decides to be Full of ridiculous sequences that would never work and also inconsistencies that make it painful to watch. (Some spoilers) Two parallel paths through thick south american jungle even after the machine is blown up? A skull which decides to be sporadically magnetic. A cloth prevents the magnetism but a metal case and crate don't? Surviving an atomic bomb at ground-zero? Falling down three waterfalls onto jagged rocks without any injury? Swinging on vines faster than jeeps?… Expand

2 of 2 users found this helpful

2

JimJ.Jun 5, 2008

yes truly, this film is a crime against cinema. Given the time that was supposedly spent on getting the story right and the 3 great films preceeding it , to come up with this rubbish is unforgiveable. The problem is its Indiana Jones and you yes truly, this film is a crime against cinema. Given the time that was supposedly spent on getting the story right and the 3 great films preceeding it , to come up with this rubbish is unforgiveable. The problem is its Indiana Jones and you feel compelled to see it no matter how bad the reviews and heresay. If you are a fan of the previous films try your best not to fall into this cynical trap.… Expand

2 of 2 users found this helpful

2

SeanC.Oct 30, 2008

A disgusting display of Lucas' CGI. His answer to every problem in filmmaking seems to be, let's just do it in post with computer graphics. Spielberg's motive's for making this film are unbeknowst to me, the acting was A disgusting display of Lucas' CGI. His answer to every problem in filmmaking seems to be, let's just do it in post with computer graphics. Spielberg's motive's for making this film are unbeknowst to me, the acting was lousy and the story, weird and disconnected (Even for an Indiana Jones Movie) and the effects were even worse. I wouldn't mind another Indiana Jones, just don't let Lucas get his mits on it and let Harrison Ford take a seat. I enjoy sequels that are done in appreciation of the previous films, this was not the case. I will not be buying this unholy mess on DVD and I don't recommend it to anyone.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

GeorgeJMay 22, 2008

Beware! This movie is to the Indiana Jones series as the prequels were to Star Wars, as Generations was to Star Trek: a horribly-bungled attempt to milk a cash cow one time too many. Nothing in the entire movie was handled with even an ounce Beware! This movie is to the Indiana Jones series as the prequels were to Star Wars, as Generations was to Star Trek: a horribly-bungled attempt to milk a cash cow one time too many. Nothing in the entire movie was handled with even an ounce of finesse; it was just a series of one cliche after another. If you have good memories of the Indiana Jones series, this movie will do nothing but tarnish them; you will be a much happier person if you just skip it completely.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

2

JOsMay 24, 2008

Certainly sucked. Three word summary: Prairie Dog, Monkeys.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

LaurettaM.May 27, 2008

The new Indiana Jones was a let down. It was like the ride at Disney Land. I was expecting a "GREAT" movie but it was "CHEESEY"!

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

MatthewN.May 27, 2008

This is one of the worst films I have ever scene. They have destroyed what was once a good film series, it should never have been brought back.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

JamesW.May 30, 2008

How can Lucas keep destroying the characters he made so great? What happened to the writing and creativity that made Star Wars and Indiana classic? It seems to me their skills should be improving as movie makers. But everything Lucas has How can Lucas keep destroying the characters he made so great? What happened to the writing and creativity that made Star Wars and Indiana classic? It seems to me their skills should be improving as movie makers. But everything Lucas has touched since 1995 makes you wonder if he ever had anything to do with the originals.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

GuyHMay 30, 2008

Pretty dreadful - but then the 'Temple of Doom' is an incredibly irritating film too but people gloss over that so maybe this will be received well. This film is completely schizo and reminds me of the Peter Jackson King Kong Pretty dreadful - but then the 'Temple of Doom' is an incredibly irritating film too but people gloss over that so maybe this will be received well. This film is completely schizo and reminds me of the Peter Jackson King Kong approach - throw all the sh#t you have at the screen and see what sticks. The title of the movie might as well have been 'Indiana Jones in the Outer Limits' - the plot is absolutely barkin' mad. The villains are pathetic - a stiff Russian dominatrix type (seen before countless times) and the double dealing best mate turned bad (seen even more often). The worst thing though is that the big set pieces are rubbish - especially the moving vehicle jungle mash up that starts at ridiculous and then shoots through the stratosphere of dumb. Mind numbing… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

DroogJun 12, 2008

Please don't see this movie -- it's awful. The first three Indy movies stand perfectly well on their own, so don't tarnish their memory by watching this boondoggle. Many people have said Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is too Please don't see this movie -- it's awful. The first three Indy movies stand perfectly well on their own, so don't tarnish their memory by watching this boondoggle. Many people have said Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is too absurd, but that's not quite it. It's just lazy. The dialogue is poor, the acting is tired, and the predictable storyline about aliens have been done far better in other films. Previous Indiana Jones movies have dealt with the supernatural before, but at least they were original. In contrast, there's isn't a single original idea in Crystal Skull. I feel everyone involved in this movie just showed up to get paid and then to go home. It's a shame, and we shouldn't support this kind of poor movie-making.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

charlesgJun 13, 2008

Wow. This was a mess. The only guy who followed this storyline was the author of the last 2 Pirates of the Caribbean flicks. Never good for your essay grade when your concluding logic depends on dudes from outer space.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

MargaretT.Jun 2, 2008

Overrated. What a waste of time. The critics must love anything Lucas, Spielberg & Ford make regardless of the quality. Horrid acting, dull dialogue, nothing new to show us.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

TonyPJun 2, 2008

Got borred within the first 30 minutes and it never got better.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

K.WardJul 11, 2008

What a stinker, the wink, wink, nod, nod (I'm Indiana Jones) performance from Harrison ford wasn't the worst of the film. side bar roles that you wanted to care about but didn't Overly long and boring chase scenes, and the What a stinker, the wink, wink, nod, nod (I'm Indiana Jones) performance from Harrison ford wasn't the worst of the film. side bar roles that you wanted to care about but didn't Overly long and boring chase scenes, and the story was just a mess. Aliens, fricken aliens... you've got to be kidding. Even in the end they presented it like it was a mystery... maybe for a child. Boo.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

DominicJul 14, 2008

If the filmmaker tried to make this story or movie funny, it's not funny at all! One of the worst movies of all time!

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

JayD.Aug 30, 2008

Best way to describe it? Another George Lucas cash-grab. Ford is too old and creaky for the role now, and it's obvious each scene he's in. Karen Allen is another who hasn't aged well, leaving the love aspect between the two Best way to describe it? Another George Lucas cash-grab. Ford is too old and creaky for the role now, and it's obvious each scene he's in. Karen Allen is another who hasn't aged well, leaving the love aspect between the two akin to watching your grandparents makeout. Ech. And why why why why why does Speilberg say Shia LeBouf is the next Tom Hanks? From his deep, riveting roles in Transformers & this stinker? I doubt he's ever read from a script not written by a 12 year-old. Great, another wonderful trilogy from my childhood marred by George Lucas' lust for a 12th home in the Carribean. On the contrary, the only cool part was the aliens. Didn't think I'd ever say it, but Indiana Jones could have used more aliens in it. Ouch.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

JohnM.Aug 4, 2008

This is such a bad film that I cannot believe Speilberg directed this. Is he actually happy with the end result?! The script is so overly cheesy, and what is it with Lucas and CGI, someone needs to teach him when and where it

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

JamesL.Oct 12, 2008

I'm sorry. Indiana Jones defeats the aliens after he survives a 'nukular' blast. They write in a double agent that Indiana lets follow them around just to stir things up. I really have to wonder if all of these reviewers I'm sorry. Indiana Jones defeats the aliens after he survives a 'nukular' blast. They write in a double agent that Indiana lets follow them around just to stir things up. I really have to wonder if all of these reviewers weren't paid off by Lucas.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

EnriqueMay 22, 2008

R.I.P.

0 of 1 users found this helpful

2

BrittD.May 22, 2008

This movie was the biggest disappointment of all time. Absolutely terrible.

0 of 1 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

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

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

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

2

DonS.May 26, 2008

Terrible dissapointment. I felt used and decieved. What a waste.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

A.NonymousMay 27, 2008

This is not the same calibrated campiness that is enjoyably found in the prior three films. No. This time around Lucas in his worsening senility has gone way outside the franchise's established universe to cook up pointless sequences This is not the same calibrated campiness that is enjoyably found in the prior three films. No. This time around Lucas in his worsening senility has gone way outside the franchise's established universe to cook up pointless sequences that can only be taken as insulting to one's intellect. Any one of the following phrases could, on it's own, summarize the disaster this film is: - CG prairie dogs - Nuclear blast-launched refrigerator ride with injury-free exit - CG monkeys with Tarzan sequence - Aliens - Psychic powers - Riding over falls of Niagara proportions (or even greater) multiple times with nary a scratch - Did I mention CG prairie dogs? I found myself wincing in the theater at the sheer funless, pointless, stupidity that these and many other portions of this film had to offer.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

2

SaraHMay 27, 2008

This is Indiana Jones scrubbed free of anything that made it remotely fun- Lucas was concerned about making it too violent, so he "toned it down." Translation: it is incredibly lame. Almost anything that was good in it is a rehash of the old This is Indiana Jones scrubbed free of anything that made it remotely fun- Lucas was concerned about making it too violent, so he "toned it down." Translation: it is incredibly lame. Almost anything that was good in it is a rehash of the old movies, which had grit and grime. The film quality is muddy because it was digitally filmed, and the ridiculous plot- complete with aliens and crystal skulls- is laughable. If the idea of a squeaky clean, murky looking video game with lame jokes is appealing to you, then run, don't walk. And bring your grandma.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

2

BrandonD.Jun 1, 2008

This movie is an embarrassing pile of sh*t. If you replaced Harrison with Rowan Atkinson from Mr. Bean, it would be f*cking hilarious. Spielberg has managed to stoop down to Lucas' level in being a money grubbing whore that knows what This movie is an embarrassing pile of sh*t. If you replaced Harrison with Rowan Atkinson from Mr. Bean, it would be f*cking hilarious. Spielberg has managed to stoop down to Lucas' level in being a money grubbing whore that knows what art can be, but just doesn't give a shit anymore.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

BillB.Jun 29, 2008

This film insults the audience. You really get the strong sense the producers smugly knew they could throw together this utterly mediocre effort and it would still be propped up by critics and fan boys. Either that, or it's a really This film insults the audience. You really get the strong sense the producers smugly knew they could throw together this utterly mediocre effort and it would still be propped up by critics and fan boys. Either that, or it's a really lame attempt by those involved, who undoubtedly had their heyday back in the 80 and 90s, to prove they can still hack it.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

LouF.Jul 11, 2008

This was a terrible and disappointing movie. The plot was non-existant. It was just a stream of cgi and unbelievable special effects. George Lucas tarnishes yet another classic trilogy. Thanks George!

0 of 1 users found this helpful

2

JonB.Aug 3, 2008

Some of the adventure remains from the original trilogy, but being on the bench too long has led to atrophy of this classic series.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

NC.Nov 12, 2008

From it's opening green screen madness (it's everywhere, but totally replicable by set and just done by choice by mr lazy bum himself)... it is clear, and eventually undeniable, that this film has been savaged by the now soulless From it's opening green screen madness (it's everywhere, but totally replicable by set and just done by choice by mr lazy bum himself)... it is clear, and eventually undeniable, that this film has been savaged by the now soulless wonder who made one of my all-time favourite childhood gems. I speak of George Lucas, who, allowed to go near the charcters and, oh dear God no, the STORY, has made the most blasphemous, ridiculous, endless yawnfest of unreailstic set-pieces (No, NO, NO! That is NOT what the series is based on and NOT what it has traditionally espoused at all Roger Ebert... I LOVED the other films, especially Raiders of the Lost Ark (But I HATED this dredge))... Back to film school Roger you hack. It's full of unconvincing acting or acting hammed up to the eyeballs (cos they knew it was crap, it's written all over the more astute actors' visages). It is childish, uses poor cgi to make animals that are cute but totally beside the point - totally (except to george, the retarded kidult), has balls been hit repeatedly etc (oh, hahahahahahaha, yeah, aweeeesome bro...)... and I would definitely rate this as the MOST disappointing movie I have seen since the turn of the century.... and I have watched PLENTY.... I have passed stools smarter than this film. Shame on you Geroge, get out of the game buddy, stop 'revisiting' (ie., ruining) classics and trying to make new ones when you have 100% lost it - artistically and intellectually... you are too old, let go... and as for you Mr two thumbs up Ebert, unless you want me to take your job and give it to one of the chimps from the film, learn to respect the difference between timeless classics with daring stunts as compared with mashed-up, hodge-podge, technically-obsessed (this film is full of machines and lasers and aliens, even though it is the 50s, nice one George, you f'ing iiiiiiiiiiidddiot) garbage with ridiculous transporter part 29 stunts that don't rase a heartbeat because they are George Lucas' yawny, dreamy, boring wet dreams about s*** that never happens and no one gets off on unless they are idiots or are 4 years old or both. The movie was total, utter, unmitigated GARBAGE. Go back to the ranch George, and FO. U ruined a classic series, ruined it. I am simply not counting it. It never happened. It's like a Crow sequel... WHAT crow sequels? That's what I say, and now I say, "What Indy 4? Stop talking nonsense." Hang your head in shame buddy.... and you Steven, how'd you let him do it!? Appalling..... Need an example? Girl drives car off cliff with everyone on board and onto a tree that bends over all the way to the bottom of the canyon (pefectly, with not a bump, hundreds of metres below) and they drive gently off.... cos who wouldn't? It's totally unrelaistic and also uncool.... wow!! Idiots....... I should give it 1/10, but it was the first blu-ray I watched on my new system and so I give it 1 more for looking awesome (and, I might add, awesome enough to see they barely used one set in the WHOLE film..... lazy scum).… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

DaveYMay 21, 2008

Huh, what the hell just happened? Just back from the Midnight premiere. Indiana Jones meets Mars Attack. Not to mention killer ants, sword fighting, and Shia LeBeauf swinging on vines with a gang of monkeys. I am extremely baffled. I really Huh, what the hell just happened? Just back from the Midnight premiere. Indiana Jones meets Mars Attack. Not to mention killer ants, sword fighting, and Shia LeBeauf swinging on vines with a gang of monkeys. I am extremely baffled. I really am. Aliens...really? C'mon Spielberg, lets try to keep Indiana Jones and E.T. seperate films. And please god don't let Shia become the heir to the throne. End this series now, before you make it worse...again.… Expand

6 of 7 users found this helpful

2

crystaldullMay 22, 2008

George Lucas needs to be stopped. I could have come up with a better plot in about nineteen minutes, he had nineteen years... The film degenerates into a bunch of CGI nonsense - I mean, for god's sake George and Steven, we've all George Lucas needs to be stopped. I could have come up with a better plot in about nineteen minutes, he had nineteen years... The film degenerates into a bunch of CGI nonsense - I mean, for god's sake George and Steven, we've all seen this sub-Playstation stuff before. Close encounters of the third-rate. While Spielberg should be castigated for what amounts to a vanity project, the real failing of the film is the utterly nonsensical story (thanks, GL); this is quite an achievement given that the first films involved the Ark of the Covenant, the Holy Grail and Sankara stones, which let's face it looked like glow-in-the-dark potatoes. If the film had any saving grace, it was that Jar Jar Binks didn't feature; if he had, I wouldn't have been at all surprised. Yet another Darth Vader/Frankenstein 'Noooooooo' moment, which amounted to a ruination of fond childhood memories.… Expand

0 of 1 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

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

2

DanH.May 26, 2008

I'm not a harsh critic, but goodness, this movie was head-slap horrible. Plot holes, incomplete explanations, predictable without fail and a script ripped straight from Chariot of the Gods. Kate is hot, but that kid they want to replace I'm not a harsh critic, but goodness, this movie was head-slap horrible. Plot holes, incomplete explanations, predictable without fail and a script ripped straight from Chariot of the Gods. Kate is hot, but that kid they want to replace Jones with sure won't pull it off. (and I liked him in Transformers.)… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

AramisG.May 27, 2008

CGI aliens, nukes and commies aside....this movie will deeply offend anyone who respects rationality and values their hard earned time and money. With all the plot holes and inconsistencies that occur, I was still offended at how irrational CGI aliens, nukes and commies aside....this movie will deeply offend anyone who respects rationality and values their hard earned time and money. With all the plot holes and inconsistencies that occur, I was still offended at how irrational the ending was.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

JasperV.May 31, 2008

or, Indiana Jones and the Half-hearted Effort - The characters in this movie talk and talk and talk. Maybe an hour into it, we're finally out of the States, in the complex grave of a conquistador... where, IN THE GRAVE, the characters or, Indiana Jones and the Half-hearted Effort - The characters in this movie talk and talk and talk. Maybe an hour into it, we're finally out of the States, in the complex grave of a conquistador... where, IN THE GRAVE, the characters again bring the movie to a dead stop, to talk for another ten minutes. Is it a metaphor? The grave is a perfect place to leave this films weak energy level. --- The script is structurally poor. It seems like it's composed of unrelated lesser scenes from the other movies. This movie has no pacing, whatsoever. It never develops a rhythm. It never reaches any level of intensity. The big climax arrived (after fits and starts), and my reaction was "Oh, I was supposed to care about that?... uhhh... oh that's what happens when you put the thirteenth skull of a dead alien crew back in place... something not very interesting happens. ...I guess that's an ending." --- Well yeah, of course the damned thing needed to come to life, because there's nothing else exciting in the damned movie, but that's all you have it do? Despite the work of a CGI team, the movie never achieves any inspired, large-scale moment. Another problem is that the film waits eons to advance a lackluster Chariots of the Gods/Stargate/2001 theory; that aliens affected human civilization. The movie is at least the 4th to venture into this territory - It's not exactly fresh material. Harrison Ford could look ten years younger if he stood up straight and stopped walking around like he just crapped his adult diapers. Bogging things down further, the movie has no sexual tension. --- For the final tease to work (LaBouef almost tries on Indy's hat) the movie has to have reached some of the heights of the previous ones, which would make us consider watching another set of Indy movies. It doesn't. --- Sean Connery turned down this script. He has taste.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

JustinBJun 16, 2008

I didn't think the acting was as bad as many who voted. But this movie was awful. Poorly written, predictable, and derivative. Even if it wasn't predictable, you just don't care enough either way.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

PhilH.Jun 18, 2008

How did this movie score only one genuinely negative review? This movie fails critically on three levels: 1) CGI saturation, especially when Spielberg promised otherwise. Seriously, could the producers not find a real gopher or army truck to How did this movie score only one genuinely negative review? This movie fails critically on three levels: 1) CGI saturation, especially when Spielberg promised otherwise. Seriously, could the producers not find a real gopher or army truck to film? 2) Ford's performance feels phoned in. Watch Raiders and then this one again. The Indy spark is gone. Well, I suppose that last statement applies to this movie on all levels, but even more so when you compare Ford's previous performances to this one. Before there was energy, passion, a sense of adventure. Now, nothing. Granted Indy is decades older now, but you'd think that would just mute his character traits a bit, not turn him into a grumpy old robot. 3) Aliens. The plot as a whole is messy and contrived, but the inclusion of aliens really brings it over the top. My suspension of disbelief as far as Indiana Jones goes is Biblical mythology. Arks, Grails, etc. Aliens and some cockamamie dimensional vortex belongs in Star Trek, not in the adventures of an archaeological professor. Also, the Russians being lame bad guys didn't help either. To sum it up, this movie is a giant waste of potential. Spielberg and Ford were just going through the motions, and Lucas was allowed to ruin another franchise with crap writing and CGI ad nauseum. Stick with the original trilogy and pretend this one never happened.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

WWABTT123Sep 18, 2010

19 years to wait for the 4th movie of Indiana Jones and it a half disappointing

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

All this user's reviews

2

SpacePopeSep 4, 2011

For years there were rumors of the new Indiana Jones movie. Finally it was confirmed and we eagerly awaited the 4th love child of Steven Spielberg, George Lucas, and Harrison Ford. There were a lot of naysayers out there who thought Ford wasFor years there were rumors of the new Indiana Jones movie. Finally it was confirmed and we eagerly awaited the 4th love child of Steven Spielberg, George Lucas, and Harrison Ford. There were a lot of naysayers out there who thought Ford was too old, that Lucas/Spielberg ought to leave well enough alone, but they saw past all that and went for it. The result: Unbelievable Crap. Lucas explains to the AP: â… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

2

KevyBJan 12, 2014

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I had to create an account just so I could review this atrocity! I honestly can't find one thing positive to say (It took me two attempts to even get through it!). Harrison Ford is as grouchy as ever and has no chemistry with anyone on screen. Karen Allen still can't act and Shia LeBeouf brings nothing to his role. Even Cate Blanchett seems to have nothing to do with her stereotypical role beyond her accent and atrocious wig. The plot is moronic and the third act may have actually cost me IQ points! Every chatty scene (and there are A LOT of them!) looks like it takes place on an indoor set and every action scene looks like it takes place in front of a green screen. Which may be on purpose but it's far more obtrusive than in previous installments. I could write full paragraphs on the stupidity of the refrigerator, Oxley, the monkeys, the quicksand/snake scene, the ants, the waterfalls, the aliens, the well as deus ex machina OR the fact that Mutt's real name is Henry Jones III, yet he somehow believes it's Henry Williams. OR a tenured professor who cannot pronounce the word "nuclear" correctly. Ugh.… Expand

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

2

MoviedoozieJul 4, 2015

I am pretty sure now that the effects budget and cross reference check budget was pocketed by LUCASBERG. These are guys that don't go out in public, live behind giant gates and walls on compounds and haven't had to really work from aI am pretty sure now that the effects budget and cross reference check budget was pocketed by LUCASBERG. These are guys that don't go out in public, live behind giant gates and walls on compounds and haven't had to really work from a creators point of reference for a very long time. It's all rehash and touch up. How can these guys be considered the cream of the crop. C'mon, what have they done that shows any passion for their craft within nearly twenty years???including all Star Wars movies and Jurassic park with a vengeance. Will anyone say this in a publication with decent circulation? It has to be said. George Lucas doesn't even smile! I don't get it. They were good once. What happened? STOP GIVING THEM HUGE AMOUNTS OF CASH TO CRAP A STINKER WHILE NOT CARING. KNOWING THEY CAN COAST FOREVER ON "STAR WARS"ORIGINAL,AND "ET" JURASSIC "ORIGINAL"fan base will carry them for the duration. They will continue pocket obscene cash for tofu get in cheek turds. Another private beach somewhere away from reality... Bye bye once creative men.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

2

EC2015Nov 26, 2015

Oh God...What happened? ! The past Indiana Jones showed actions at the lumit of the human spectrum ability. But this one is made of several consecutive stunts which are totally unrealistic and litterally massacred what could have been a goodOh God...What happened? ! The past Indiana Jones showed actions at the lumit of the human spectrum ability. But this one is made of several consecutive stunts which are totally unrealistic and litterally massacred what could have been a good movie. The characters are more skilled that any navy seals and more lucky than a four leaves...Actors, budget and special effects are misused. Why don't the producers don't ask professional advices about what is humanly possible. This movie has nothing to do wirh the previous ones. It is a huge disappointment. That's the first time I was looking at my watch during an Indiana Jones...… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

2

powerhouse1996Jul 5, 2016

Whats Wrong With This Movie Everything This Movie Is A Disgrace To The Indiana Jones Trademark And Should Be Wiped Off This Planet ... Why The Hell Would You Put Shia lebuff as "JR" like WTF Were There Smoking 40kg Of Weed When Makeing ThisWhats Wrong With This Movie Everything This Movie Is A Disgrace To The Indiana Jones Trademark And Should Be Wiped Off This Planet ... Why The Hell Would You Put Shia lebuff as "JR" like WTF Were There Smoking 40kg Of Weed When Makeing This Movie... Nuff Said I Gotta Go Watch The Original 3 Movies Just To Compensate The Pain Of Reviewing This **** Pile Of ****… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

2

KlebartNov 1, 2019

Bad. Forced. Bad characters, bad twists, bad chase scenes. Movie killed the franchise.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

2

brandoteekAug 2, 2023

this movie is terrible and has a lot of false arguments like Pancho Villa was in Peru? Cusco is a Detroit City? Seriously? Horrible.

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

1

KirkM.May 27, 2008

As with all recycled forms of art and entertainment, there is a serious danger of losing something important in any later reincarnation of something so intangibly brilliant. Hence the relationship between this newest of Indiana Jones films As with all recycled forms of art and entertainment, there is a serious danger of losing something important in any later reincarnation of something so intangibly brilliant. Hence the relationship between this newest of Indiana Jones films and the incomparable first installment of the legendary trilogy. Artistically speaking, Spielberg and Lucas have sacrificed all integrity and craftsmanship in making this movie, and it sadly begs the question of arrogance, greed, and/or possible serious degradation of their once electrifying, even magical movie-making skills. This film is not only an insult to their previous work and its enduring audience, it embodies everything that is wrong with modern film production. What made such films as "Raiders" and "Star Wars" so compelling was their balance of superb acting, script, and plot, coupled with a measured employment of technology, thus delivering a movie that had a soul and a story to tell. Just as in modern music production, we're seeing less and less of that as the years go by. Just because we have CG doesn't mean it must be used rampantly, and just because a film has Indiana Jones contained in the title doesn't mean you don't have to try as hard to deliver on the fundamentals. Perhaps all concerned with this movie are laughing all the way to the bank, but it leaves one with a dejecting, inescapable question: are these really are the same people who brought us those iconic masterpieces of yesterday? Maybe so, but thankfully the works they made when they were hungry, innovative, and masterful will live on even if their ingenuity won't.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful

1

daveJun 16, 2008

terrible acting, karen allen should've stayed home, Harrison Ford seemed all hunched over when he walked and if they think Shia Labeouf will be the next indy for years to come, this will be very disappointing

2 of 2 users found this helpful

1

HenryJ.Oct 3, 2008

So bad, you'll be angry.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

1

P.J.S.Oct 6, 2008

This is the worst kind of Hollywood drivel. The whole film looks like a Saturday morning kid show shot on a badly dressed sound stage. Other Indy movies were fun and action filled. This movie tries too hard to be fun, so it'd nothing This is the worst kind of Hollywood drivel. The whole film looks like a Saturday morning kid show shot on a badly dressed sound stage. Other Indy movies were fun and action filled. This movie tries too hard to be fun, so it'd nothing but forced humor that's never funny, and it comes off as just plain dumb. If I had not been in the theater with other people, I would have walked out.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

1

JamesC.May 18, 2008

He doesn't wear the fedora with quite the same jaunty angle, his bullwhip doesn't crack as smartly - and Harrison Ford looks all of his 65 years.

0 of 1 users found this helpful

1

GwenA.May 22, 2008

This is possibly the worst movie ever made. It only gets a 1 because it is entertaining in the sheer horrendousness of every aspect of this movie. If you like Indiana Jones, don't see this.

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

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

1

JDMay 28, 2008

Ok, I'm really confused. Because some of you people actually seemed to like this film. I feel like I mistakenly wandered into the wrong one, because the "Indiana Jones" (and it hurts me to call it that) I saw was possibly the most Ok, I'm really confused. Because some of you people actually seemed to like this film. I feel like I mistakenly wandered into the wrong one, because the "Indiana Jones" (and it hurts me to call it that) I saw was possibly the most horrible, rambling, nonsensical, characterless piece of rubbish I've seen since Pirates 3. Someone needs to get George down from the ceiling fan and remind him of what used to make his stories good... simple plot, good characters (CG monkeys not the same thing), sense of humor, and just a dash of subtlety.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

1

GaryBJun 17, 2008

The funny thing is that Lucas refuses to let anyone see his infamous "Star Wars Holiday Special" from 1977. That was far more entertaining than this piece of garbage. Face it, he's a con man.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

1

AlexAlexJun 25, 2008

Horridly Overdone ! I was watching awful acting preformed on a Disney ride. Well at least some theme park has a stunt show. Might as well have donated $10+popcorn to the senior home for 90's actors. Can you put more special effects in a Horridly Overdone ! I was watching awful acting preformed on a Disney ride. Well at least some theme park has a stunt show. Might as well have donated $10+popcorn to the senior home for 90's actors. Can you put more special effects in a movie? Might as well have been animated. Not just: "Thumbs down", Thumbs cut-off. The 1 pt is for getting it to the movie theater in time (Unfortunately).… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

1

LevS.Jun 26, 2008

Yes, it's meant to be a big, fun, blockbuster, but then again, so were National Treasure and Pirates of the Caribbean. What I'm sure everyone loved about the Indy movies was the charm and sense of adventure that are completely Yes, it's meant to be a big, fun, blockbuster, but then again, so were National Treasure and Pirates of the Caribbean. What I'm sure everyone loved about the Indy movies was the charm and sense of adventure that are completely lacking in this one. Completely out of touch with the originals and sadly, poorly executed in all fields. Just another money-turner.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

1

KevinG.Sep 30, 2008

Terrible movie. Anyone who gave this movie a positive review is a complete moron. Fake looking sets,like everything was flimed on a sound stage.Bad acting,Talking and talking and talking to eat up time and about things that don't Terrible movie. Anyone who gave this movie a positive review is a complete moron. Fake looking sets,like everything was flimed on a sound stage.Bad acting,Talking and talking and talking to eat up time and about things that don't advance the plot. I put this movie on the same level of howard the Duck and death to smoochy.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

1

JamesB.Sep 5, 2008

Proof that George Lucas needs to be sterilized for the good of humanity!

0 of 0 users found this helpful

1

nigeJan 4, 2009

What i really don't get is why have CGI gophers, monkeys, scorpions and ants, but then use a rubber snake for Indy's biggest phobia? Silly, silly film. Some unintentionally funny lines though 'Not space.......the space between What i really don't get is why have CGI gophers, monkeys, scorpions and ants, but then use a rubber snake for Indy's biggest phobia? Silly, silly film. Some unintentionally funny lines though 'Not space.......the space between space' ??!?? John Hurt must have cringed all the way to the bank.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

1

ALMay 3, 2009

One of the worst movies I've seen in a long time. Unbelievably bad. Startlingly implausible at every turn, Wildly illogical and improbable occurrences in almost every scene. Embarrassing dialog throughout, as if it were written by a One of the worst movies I've seen in a long time. Unbelievably bad. Startlingly implausible at every turn, Wildly illogical and improbable occurrences in almost every scene. Embarrassing dialog throughout, as if it were written by a child. And this is the first ILM film (assuming they did the FX) I've seen with anything other than impressive and innovative visual effects... in fact, they were shockingly substandard. The CGI on this film looked about like the quality of what you'd see on a, say, a Sci Fi channel original film... which is to say not very good. It seems as if they decided to rush a new Indy flick to the theaters; it seems to be cobbled together hastily with no attention to even the most basic points of physics and logic, maybe to meet some contractual obligation... or maybe just to squeeze one last drop out of the Indiana Jones series before Harrison Ford gets too old to be believable in the role.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

1

RayH.Oct 22, 2008

This movie is absolutely pathetic! It represents everything that is wrong with movies today. They are ruined by trying to appeal to everyone and in doing so, they don't please anyone. Shia L. was obviously added to appeal to the teeny This movie is absolutely pathetic! It represents everything that is wrong with movies today. They are ruined by trying to appeal to everyone and in doing so, they don't please anyone. Shia L. was obviously added to appeal to the teeny boppers. The CGI gophers and the monkeys that "befriend" Shia L.'s character within a matter of seconds were added to appeal to the kiddies. The fake ants, the sword fight between two moving vehicles while Shia's character is hit with branches in his most private area, not to mention that the main characters were bullet proof, makes me want to vomit. Top it off with falling down three waterfalls without a scratch and Indiana Jones surviving a direct Nuclear blast because he was inside of a "lead fridge" and then thrown for a country mile unscratched makes this film completely useless to society. Anyone that is giving it a good review is doing so because they are one of the previously mentioned groups or because their kids laughed. This movie is pathetic!… 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

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

1

FrancescoC.May 23, 2008

Very bad. There aren't a story and the characters are awful.

0 of 1 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

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

1

PaulMay 26, 2008

The film starts with a bad CGI gopher, and really goes downhill from there. Bad plot, too many wooden and supporting actors and Indy rarley shines or has good lines - and dont even get me started on the ending! It seems that special effects The film starts with a bad CGI gopher, and really goes downhill from there. Bad plot, too many wooden and supporting actors and Indy rarley shines or has good lines - and dont even get me started on the ending! It seems that special effects and turning the action meter up to 11 were more important that good scripting and pacing or making this feel like an indiana jones movie. I avoided seeing trailers and reading reviews and hoped for the best - what a dissapointment. It's a real pity that even if you read this review,I know your going to go and watch this anyway. If like me you grew up with the trilogy, and can possibly steel you nerves - avoid this insult to the original films.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

1

AndrewS.May 27, 2008

The plot was bad, the direction aimless, casting misguidedl overall, the worst movie in Spielberg's career. My biggest disappointment - how did any critic, albeit there were just a few, give this one a pass. Truly horrid fiilmmaking!

0 of 0 users found this helpful

1

ChrisL.Jun 19, 2008

Nothing in the film looked dangerous. Indy, a old man, a fat guy, Marion, and Mudd were all getting past the traps without even a scratch. You might as well throw in a kid in a wheelchair passing up Indy. The effects were bad, the action was Nothing in the film looked dangerous. Indy, a old man, a fat guy, Marion, and Mudd were all getting past the traps without even a scratch. You might as well throw in a kid in a wheelchair passing up Indy. The effects were bad, the action was dull, and Indy was out of character. I almost walked out of the theatre. Avoid this one and fondly remember the others.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

1

RussellJJun 27, 2009

This is dire. Saw it at the pictures and it was like having my childlike self ripped apart. The equivalent of finding Santa on xmas morning wanking onto your mince pies you left him. The story was shit. There was no suspense or mystery. The This is dire. Saw it at the pictures and it was like having my childlike self ripped apart. The equivalent of finding Santa on xmas morning wanking onto your mince pies you left him. The story was shit. There was no suspense or mystery. The action was laughable and full of cgi. The acting was atrocious even Harrison Ford couldn't pull it off he's too old for the role. To be fair it maintained itself with a certain sense of disbelief all the way to the Amazon scenes and the film just gave up. So many bad scenes in a row. Mutt swinging from vine to vine like Tarzan. The giant (cgi) ants. Three waterfalls. Kill me now. The worst is left to the end of the movie. Spielberg do you really think we'll buy this shit with the aliens as lightheated fun. Raiders worked because it was mythological but aliens shouldn't be in this type of movie. Especially in a close encounters style. Oh Indy I still like you in the trilogy without jowls.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

1

ManuelB.Nov 8, 2008

There is no depth to this movie. It is definitely not the continuation of a legend. Its boring and the plot is downright ridiculous. I don't understand how an actor with the backgroud of H. Ford agree to do this retarded show.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

1

BCDec 11, 2008

this movie was completely cartoonish. I haven't seen this much randomly sprayed automatic weapons fire since the A-Team. The CGI quality of the chase scene thru the Jungle was laughably bad. Don't waste your time, please, this movie was completely cartoonish. I haven't seen this much randomly sprayed automatic weapons fire since the A-Team. The CGI quality of the chase scene thru the Jungle was laughably bad. Don't waste your time, please, you'll thank me.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

1

OwenP.May 22, 2008

Hmmm, let me think for just a moment....why did they make this movie? Better yet, how did they allow this script to get in the hands of Spielberg. Suppose they said,"The hell with it." I thought Temple of Doom was the weaker of the series, Hmmm, let me think for just a moment....why did they make this movie? Better yet, how did they allow this script to get in the hands of Spielberg. Suppose they said,"The hell with it." I thought Temple of Doom was the weaker of the series, but it's a masterpiece next to Crystal Skull. I wanted to like this movie, but the interest just gets tired as it progresses. Sorry to all fans, stick to the originals.… Expand

3 of 4 users found this helpful

1

BethD.May 22, 2008

Worst movie I have ever seen. I'm sorry I stayed up late to watch the premiere. Absolutely terrible.

3 of 4 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

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

1

DD.Jun 15, 2008

The plot was awful. Not worth the money.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

1

AnonymousDec 11, 2008

Simply wretched from beginning to end ... and the middle kinda sucks too.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

1

dellamorteMay 10, 2011

This episode of Indiana Jones takes place several years after the TV series ended, but to my mind is the best episode to date. The fact that they decided to not use Sean Patrick Flanery and instead Shiabelouff as the Young Indy is a fatalThis episode of Indiana Jones takes place several years after the TV series ended, but to my mind is the best episode to date. The fact that they decided to not use Sean Patrick Flanery and instead Shiabelouff as the Young Indy is a fatal mistake, but doesn't stop the episode from being highly original and very, very entertaining. The story sees an bloated ageing Indiana Jones save the world from Russian Nazi's by climbing inside a refrigerator and time traveling back to the 1930's where he meets his younger self, but now bizarrely modelled as James Dean in a gay hat for some reason. The use of monkeys and rubber snakes really works here though, as does the over-crowding of old people. Karen Allen's brilliantly observed portrait of senile dementia is right on the money, even though she looks about as attractive as your dead grandmother sucking off a horse. And John Hurt is brilliantly miscast as Sean Connery's incontient jibbering brother. Although not as good as Flanery (or Jaquin Phoenix for that matter) Shialeboufddff does prove a welcome asset to offet the stench of decay as the Young Indy to the gang of coffin dodgers, but at times is jarring considering the amount of dust falling off the old folks and filling the stale putrid air. I also don't know why at the end they had to have not one, but about twelve old farts running around the Aztec temple trying to save the world when Indiana Jones and his younger self would have sufficed. Oh well the stunts are as always well above anything else on TV and the high production values at times make it seem as though your watching an actual movie and not just some unnecessary bloated distraction to an otherwise perfect series of old school adventures.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

1

RedfordstoJul 21, 2015

This is a movie so bad that it tarnished a beloved franchise. The writing is and cinematography is beyond hackneyed; it disgraceful. If they character's name wasn't Indiana, it wouldn't have been made because no one would be willing to fundThis is a movie so bad that it tarnished a beloved franchise. The writing is and cinematography is beyond hackneyed; it disgraceful. If they character's name wasn't Indiana, it wouldn't have been made because no one would be willing to fund it. It's not even enjoyable for the it's idiocy like Sharknado because you can sense the serious effort and subconscious contempt for a classic. In fact, if the character had not been Indiana Jones and just Harrison Ford screwing around fight communist sterotypes that were tired when the original Indiana Jones came out, it might be worth a laugh a zoning out while it's on in the background on TNT while you're cooking in the kitchen; much like The Postman. It's so terrible, the internet has coined a phrase to note when a series or franchise has destroyed itself. Look up "nuking the fridge" in google. This is literally the only movie I've asked for my money back after a full viewing. The manager, who is required to watch each new movie, actually gave me my money. Crystal Skull is so bad, the UN actually met in 2012 to consider the forced viewing of this movie a war crime. Admittedly, the last one is an exaggeration. The only reason I gave this movie a 1 rather than a zero is that I didn't physically vomit during the screening. This movie is so bad, I repressed the memory of watching it till I saw it in a 99 cent DVD bin and became enraged enough to write this review. Seven years after watching this movie, just seeing the box art for seconds ruined my day. That's how bad this movie is.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

1

mintloNov 25, 2011

Steven Spielberg went full retard on this one. Sure, the other ones weren't believable either...but this one? Dr. Jones survives atomic bomb test in a refridgerator, survives thousand foot drop from waterfall, and then he brings in the aliens.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull

User Reviews