So about Indiana Jones 4....

[jones]

You older folks, I think nostalgia is getting the best of you. Sure, it was no Raiders, but it was a damn good time. Just be glad Shia LaBeouf got the hat taken away from him. Now THAT would have been a bad movie!

I wish I could say that it was my nostalgia that was getting in the way of liking this movie, but it isn't. If it didn't have the name Indiana Jones tacked on the front of it people would not be lining up for it at all. It would just be another derivative, bland summer action movie.

The following points are just a few of the things that keep me from liking it. If you haven't seen the movie and don't want to see any spoilers stop reading now.

(*SPOILERS AHEAD*)

Pretty much from the beginning it felt like a film in search of its identity. Unfortunately it never seemed to find it. Harrison Ford looked like he was asleep for about the first half hour or so and it seemed like he got captured every time he turned around. Hell, the movie even started with him captured!

I'd also like to ask the question... When did Indiana Jones become invincible? At the very beginning he falls through the cab of a large truck and manages to not get injured in any way. Then in the nuclear blast he is in a fridge that is hurtled who knows how far and he walks away from it?!?!? I can only suspend my disbelief so far. In the other movies Indy got beat up and suffered through the effects of those beatings. It made for good drama, but here he has apparently become Superman. Lame!

Also, what was up with the magnetic skull? It seemed to only be magnetic when it was convenient for the plot. During the awful jungle chase sequence Cate Blanchett is able to snag the sack the skull is in with her sword. This happens without regard to the fact that the previously demonstrated magnetic pull of the skull would have made this virtually impossible. Then there seemed to be a gimmick where the skull lost its magnetism if it was covered with a shroud or cloth of some sort. Although that was blown out of the water when Indy first got the skull after noticing some gold coins being pulled underneath some cloth that the skull was under.

I can't stand it when a movie can't even decide upon a set of rules to operate under and this movie failed magnificently in that regard.

One other thing was at the tail end of the aforementioned lame jungle chase, Cate Blanchett's character tries to run the jeep with Indy and the professor in it off the edge of a cliff. This happens even though a few moments earlier she had to keep Indy alive to interpret for the professor once they got to the temple. Now she all of a sudden doesn't need them anymore? Huh?

I won't even get into the lame Shia and the monkeys' swinging through the jungle sequence. I think that turd speaks for itself.

(*END OF SPOILERS*)

It is just sad that the movie doesn't hold up under any sort of scrutiny. The other movies do... Why couldn't this one?

I don't expect a movie like this to have a bulletproof plot, but this movie has so many holes in it that comparing it to swiss cheese would be an insult to the cheese.

It had a lot of other flaws, but I won't get into them now. If anyone wants me to, I will be glad to go into greater detail.

Have movies gotten so bad that we now accept dreck like this as being rousing entertainment?

I usually don't rag on George Lucas (I do like the prequels after all), but it is hard to think that this rotten egg can be laid squarely on the shoulders of Steven Spielberg. The heavy reliance on CGI is the obvious giveaway that Lucas' fingerprints are all over this thing. Maybe Harrison's age was more of a limitation than they've let on. The result is pretty bland though.

Spielberg doesn't make crap, but that's exactly what this movie is.

[CronoTriggerfan]

Sure, it had more plot holes than swiss cheese, but I just tried not to take it very seriously. In fact, I didn't take it seriously at all.

The 1UP Yours podcast had a pretty interesting take on this in saying that the reason it's such a shoddy movie is that they tried to pull too many elements from video games and put them in the movie, like the platforming, Indie's supposed invincibility, that warehouse scene that could've been stripped straight out of Assassin's Creed, and the overall sense of just moving in a linear sense, never really grasping onto exactly what's going on, and always ending up in the right place despite going in seemingly random directions. They backed this up by stating that Lucas has a history of this kind of behavior, saying that the gear-hopping, lava-scaling scenes Padme had to endure in Episode II were pulled "straight out of Mega Man".

Now I'm not saying I agree with any of these statements, but I found the analogy very interesting. It hit on just about every one of your complaints, jones, and gave it an unexpected justification for them, albeit a critical one.

[jones]

Sure, it had more plot holes than swiss cheese, but I just tried not to take it very seriously. In fact, I didn't take it seriously at all.

The 1UP Yours podcast had a pretty interesting take on this in saying that the reason it's such a shoddy movie is that they tried to pull too many elements from video games and put them in the movie, like the platforming, Indie's supposed invincibility, that warehouse scene that could've been stripped straight out of Assassin's Creed, and the overall sense of just moving in a linear sense, never really grasping onto exactly what's going on, and always ending up in the right place despite going in seemingly random directions. They backed this up by stating that Lucas has a history of this kind of behavior, saying that the gear-hopping, lava-scaling scenes Padme had to endure in Episode II were pulled "straight out of Mega Man".

Now I'm not saying I agree with any of these statements, but I found the analogy very interesting. It hit on just about every one of your complaints, jones, and gave it an unexpected justification for them, albeit a critical one.

I tried not to take it too seriously either, but when a movie insults my intelligence so blatantly I take exception with it.

By the sounds of your description of the 1up podcast, what they failed to grasp is that in those games there was a plot and the action served the plot. In Indy 4 the action didn't really do much of anything other than get old fast.

Watching the movie it becomes very apparent that this was a film that was in development hell for almost two decades. It is a mish mash of ideas with no strong center holding those ideas together.

Even taking away the fact that it is an Indiana Jones movie and looking at it as a film on its own terms doesn't help. It just fails in so many ways.

I have to say that I was shocked by the end result. I expected, at the very least, a well crafted film but we didn't even get that. It reminded me a lot of the second Pirates movie (although not nearly as bad). That movie looked like it was made by a committee sitting around in a room brainstorming ideas. Then filming all of them and slapping them together into a two and a half hour movie.

Now Indy 4 wasn't as bad as Pirates 2, but it shared a lot of the same issues. Out of the "Too Late Sequels" (Rambo, Rocky Balboa, Die Hard 4, T3, etc.) Indy 4 is easily the worst of them all. It is sad too, because it had the best talent pool and the most beloved of all those franchises to draw from.

I never thought I would have said it beforehand, but I think the movie may have been better if it would have focused on Shia and shoved Indy to the background. Harrison didn't do much of anything (other than look bored) for most of this movie anyway.

Supposedly Lucas has an idea for a fifth movie that would do just that, so maybe we'll get a chance to see that. Not that I really care anymore, but that movie couldn't really have anywhere to go but up when following its predecessor.

[Negative_Creep]

I'd say Terminator 3 was hardly a "too late" sequel.

[jones]

I'd say Terminator 3 was hardly a "too late" sequel.

Don't get me wrong. I loved T3 (Probably my favorite of the 3 actually).

The point I was making is that there have been these long dormant franchises being resurrected lately. "Too Late" was probably the wrong terminology, but that's what I came up with to describe franchises that have been brought back to life after seemingly being done for more than a decade.

All of the movies I mentioned fall into that category. T3 is the only one that managed to justify its existence out of all of them. DH4, Rocky Balboa, and Rambo were all decent, but didn't really do anything to demonstrate any reason for their being made other than to cash in on nostalgia.

Indy 4? Well, I think I've said what needs to be said about that.

[CronoTriggerfan]

I would agree that this is one of the weakest "too late" sequels, but you'd put it worse than the PG-13 rated Die Hard crapstorm? That's walking a fine line, man.

[benheck]

I only saw the R rated Die Hard 4 on DVD, but I can't imagine the PG-13 being much different, sans some language.

And yeah, I'd put Indy below that even, because Die Hard 4 entertained me and at least I wasn't bored. Also PG-13 or not it still felt like a Die Hard movie, whereas Indy 4 DIDN"T HAVE A SINGLE BOOBY TRAP unless you count the spike pit.

My theory is there were no booby traps because at any given time at least 2 if not 4 people were running around in a group doing stuff. Kind of hard to get 4 people past a trap! Well, with some creative writing it could be great, like the crushing spike thing in "Temple of Doom", where each added person made the situation worse and worse, but of course nothing in Indy 4 is creative so oh well.

My late sequel ratings, best to worst:

Terminator 3, Rocky Balboa, Die Hard 4, Rambo, Indy 4

[Negative_Creep]

Bruce Willis is still jakked to copulate in Die Hard 4, and he's in his early 50s haha

[lifeisbetterwithketchup]

So... Indy 4... Well me being the lame person I am didn't see it until today. I wasn't expecting much, as EVERYONE at school today who saw it said it was crap. All in all, I'd say it was mediocre, not deserving of the Indiana Jones brand, and just didn't work.

Watching the movie it becomes very apparent that this was a film that was in development hell for almost two decades. It is a mish mash of ideas with no strong center holding those ideas together.

I agree on this point. The whole movie just seemed to not focus around anything. Stuff just sort of came and went.

SPOILERS AHEAD!!!

Indy 4 DIDN"T HAVE A SINGLE BOOBY TRAP

That really pissed me off. I was waiting for some booby trap to appear in several places in the movie, and it didn't happen. Especially when Indy said "Don't touch anything!" it made it sound like one was imminent. Ugh, it's just frustrating, as that's one of the things in Indiana Jones that has such appeal to me.

I'd also like to ask the question... When did Indiana Jones become invincible? At the very beginning he falls through the cab of a large truck and manages to not get injured in any way. Then in the nuclear blast he is in a fridge that is hurtled who knows how far and he walks away from it?!?!? I can only suspend my disbelief so far. In the other movies Indy got beat up and suffered through the effects of those beatings. It made for good drama, but here he has apparently become Superman. Lame!

Yeah I mean seriously, WTF was up with the nuclear explosion refrigerator thing? He's not even hurt at all, after he's been thrown hundreds of feet in a refrigerator by a nuclear blast!

And what the HELL was with that scene with Shia (I don't even remember his character's name) and the monkeys swinging on the vines? That has got to be one of the most random, unnecessary scene in any movie I've ever seen! And the dumb CGI prairie dogs at the beginning?

END SPOILERS!!!

So, it was pretty bad, but worth watching I'd say. Very underwhelming. Harrison Ford seemed just uninterested the whole movie and I'm no huge fan of Shia Whatshisface. Not worth being called Indiana Jones or having Spielberg's name attached to it, but watchable.

In conclusion, WHY must Hollywood bring back old franchises for unneeded and lousy sequels? Are they really that desperate for new ideas?

[gamecube6]

I heard it was given comments by critics, calling it the "dull skull"