There is an old film standby where at the end of the film the hero rides off into the sunset. It conveys a sense of conclusion without necessarily writing off the character. And while it may be seen nowadays as being a bit cliche, it is tried and true, but most importantly it works.The Indiana Jones movies of the 1980s are adventure classics. Hailing back to the days of the old action serials of the 1930 and 40s, they are a great time at the movies with broad appeal. Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade was the final installment of the trilogy for nearly two decades and it very appropriately ended with Indiana Jones, his father and two good friends Marcus Brody and Sallah riding off into the sunset. It is a great trilogy with a great ending, not to mention that "The Last Crusade" is a fitting title for a final movie.
A few years back the rumblings really started to gain strength that creators George Lucas and Steven Spielberg, along with star Harrison Ford, were interested in revisiting the series. As soon as I heard the idea, I didn't want it to happen. Why? Because I new that after nearly 20 years, the magic would not be recaptured. Besides, the series had a nice tidy trilogy package with a fitting end. Nothing more was needed. Even so, the aforementioned trio pressed on and made a fourth installment.
What the hell is wrong with Hollywood?! Why do they suddenly feel the need to go back and revisit franchises from 20 plus years ago? Rocky Balboa (VI), Rambo IV, Terminator 3 (and now 4, 5 and 6 on the way)... they don't really need to be revisited and what we ultimately end up with are movies that don't live up, feel unnecessary and stories that feel tired. Apparently the aging baby-boomer generations obsession with nostalgia combined with a lack of originality in Hollywood is destined to flood us with these types of films... and for no good reason at all it would seem. I knew Indiana Jones 4 was a bad idea... and it turns out I was right.
Leading up to the release of Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skulls, much speculation centered around Harrison Ford (now 62) and his ability to reprise his role as Indy, the globetrotting archaeologist who found the lost Ark of the Covenant, defeated the Thuggee cult in India, recovering the Shakra Stones and found the legendary Holy Grail. Countless jokes about his age were made, but I figured Ford would pull it off and he did. Ford was not the problem with this film.
The problem with this film is that it was unnecessary, wholly and completely. Fast forward about twenty years from Indy's last adventure in the 1930s (fighting Nazis) and we find Indy in the 1950s fighting Cold War Russians. Like the Nazis before them, they are interested in finding an item that will provide them with an unbeatable weapon - a mind weapon. A small team of Russians has captured Indy and WWII buddy "Mac" and infiltrated a secret government facility in the New Mexico desert. The facility as it turns out is a nod to the final shot of the first film, when we saw the Ark of the Covenant being put into storage in a vast, anonymous warehouse. We know this because during the warehouse we catch a glimpse of the ark in a crate that has been broken open. But the Russians are there not for the Ark, but for a highly magnetic artifact... a skull of unknown origin.
The Russians get the skull but Indy manages a dramatic escape into the desert. Shortly thereafter he finds himself wandering into a town which it turns out is a set for an atomic test site. He hears the countdown and quite alertly jumps into a lead lined refrigerator in one of the fake homes and rides out the atomic blast, escaping to live another day. I could go on and on about why that is quite possibly the single most ridiculous scene in film history, but I will refrain and simply say that it unquestionably defied the suspension of disbelief and was completely absurd in ever way imaginable.
Perhaps the only high point for me in the film was the next scene wherein Indy is debriefed by government agents and we learn that he was an OSS operative during WWII and rose to the rank of Colonel. I thought that was nice touch and fitting seeing as he had already fought plenty of Nazis in the 1930s. In fact, a film about his time in the war probably would have been a hell of a lot more interesting and rewarding than what we got.
Indy returns to his teaching at Marshall college only to find out that he has been fired due to political pressures. We also learn that his father Henry Jones, Sr. and close friend Marcus Brody have both recently died. Indy finds himself in a dark, lonely place. Soon, however, he is approached by a rebellious young man named "Mutt" Williams (Shia LaBeouf) who tells Indy that he knows his mother from years before and he needs his help in South America. With nowhere else to go and the Russians once again hot on his tail, Indy joins Mutt and they head to Peru.
In a nutshell here is what happens. Indy learns that the Russians have captured an old friend of his (Henry "Ox" Oxley) in the hopes that he will lead them to a lost temple housing Crystal Skulls that will give them the power to control the minds of their Western enemies in America and Europe. It turns out that Mutt's mother is none other than Marion Ravenwood from Raiders of the Lost Ark (Karen Allen). Its a game of cat and mouse with the Russians in the thick jungle and eventually they come across a long lost temple which houses the other crystal skulls, which it turns out are of extra-terrestrial origin.
Ok, not just extra-terrestrial origin, but inter-dimensional origin and the aliens are themselves archaeologists who came to Earth to study ancient human civilizations. And after swinging through the jungle canopy a la Tarzan, riding over waterfalls, racing through the jungle on military equipment and escaping giant man-eating ants, the gang finds themselves in this alien temple only to escape as it collapses around them revealing a giant flying saucer that flies off with the aliens inside. None of this felt like Indiana Jones, hold the chase scene, and the Tarzan sequence (along with the nuke sequence) felt completely uninspired and lame. Even the Russians prove to be completely unremarkable and totally forgettable bad guys (and gal). But on top of all that, this film made me feel like George Lucas, much like his reasoning for going back and altering the original Star Wars films, felt that Indiana Jones required closure with regards to Marion and finding out he has a son. Honestly, it was all unnecessary. We didn't need it at all. As a result, this film felt forced, clumsy and uninspired... and quite frankly out of its element.
Jacob, occasional contributor to this site, shared with me some thoughts that I find insightful. He felt that at least some of the purpose behind this film was to show Indiana Jones as a man out of his time; a relic that was no longer necessary in the new Cold War world. I think that is a very valid point. He also noted that during the wedding scene at the end of the film, Ox makes a comment that might be directed more to the audience. He says, "So much of life is lost in waiting" in reference to Indy and Marion finally tying the knot after so many years apart.... but it also accurately speaks to Lucas/Spielberg/Ford's return to the franchise after being away for far too long. Again, I think the point is very well made.
Another thing that really didn't work with me is the alien stuff. Indiana Jones has always been about searching for historical and religious artifacts and putting some interesting twist on those items rather than straight up science fiction. The plots were always more mystical and mythical than the science of A-Bombs and little green men. Frankly, it didn't work. I recall from a few years back reading a rumor that Frank Darabont had written and submitted a script that dealt with aliens and it had been rejected because of it. If that was indeed true then, what the hell changed with the script that George Lucas and Jeff Nathanson wrote?
The bottom line with Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skulls is that it doesn't work as a stand alone film because it makes far too many references tying it to its predecessors from the 1980s but it also doesn't work within the framework established by those films, on top of the fact that it is a completely unnecessary installment. A more appropriate title would be Indiana Jones and the Reunion Tour, because that's exactly what it is, for Lucas/Spielberg/Ford, for Indy and Marion and for Indy and the audience. And while this film is getting generally favorable reviews, I think that it is mostly due to the same phenomenon that had people excited for Star Wars: The Phantom Menace in 1999. They are excited because Indiana Jones is back, but with time the excitement will fade and people will see the film for what it really is - mediocre at best. 5/10
