spoilers: I just came back from Indiana Jones and the kingdom of the crystal skull

Page 1 of 2
#1
First off, this is a really good movie. It's not better than any of the first three but its still really good with good acting, and a good story. Here are some spoilers if you guys wanna know bits and pieces:

Shia aka mutt williams IS indy's son

the crystal skull has to do with aliens and an alien spaceship is seen in the movie

indy and marion get married in the movie

Im gonna give this movie three stars. Its better than iron man in my opinion but i dont consider this as classic as the first three indy's. Go see it though.
Life is a film, you the film maker
#4
Quote by Jackolas
Was it cheesy as hell?


Its no cheesier than the first 3....
Quote by guitarhero_764


Chuck Norris>Pokemon>Us>You>Your mom>diglett


Grundy 1 Cancer 0
#5
Not cheesy, i just found it weird for a "2008" type of movie. It was a little awkward but fun at the same time.
Life is a film, you the film maker
#6
I thought it was terrible.

Raiders of the Lost Ark was supposed to be a tribute to B-movies and action serials from the 40s and 50s, that Speilberg and Lucas grew up watching, but turned out to be better than anything that genre had ever produced. This one was just a B-movie.

I thought also it got more far-fetched than any of the other three. At least with Raiders and The Last Crusade, Indy was chasing an artifact that is known to exist. There's a suspension of disbelief, naturally, but there was at least some historical basis for the supernatural powers being shown; they all came out of Judeo-Christian mythology and legend. The flying saucers and aliens are pure science fiction (damn you, George Lucas!)

The bad guys were also less intimidating than the Nazis. Because it was very clear why the Nazis wanted the Ark and the Holy Grail. (It was also clear why the bad Indians wanted the stones, but The Temple of Doom wasn't that great either.) But here, it's less clear. There is Cate Blanchett's monologue about mind control, but I couldn't help but feel that the Russians' plan to get the skull and plan to use it weren't as clear and immediately scary as what the Nazis had planned. It also hurts that we were never in a shooting war with the Russians like we were with the Nazis, so they're less scary to begin with.

Then there were too many things that were just ridiculous. Mutt doing a Tarzan through the jungle? Russia's best secret agents being foiled by monkeys and ants? Indy surviving a nuclear explosion by hiding in a refrigerator? Come on, even for this series that's getting out there.

Too many coincidences and deus ex machinas also propelled the plot. I know Indy is a smart guy, knows his archaeology. But here he had the answer to everything. Part of Indy's charm is that he's very improvisational, that he doesn't know what he's doing. Here he was smart enough to evade the bad guys but inept enough to get caught. He doesn't fail impressively -- look at Raiders. He fails constantly through that movie. But it's always so damn flashy that we forgive him; I mean, he threatened to blow up the Ark of the Covenant with a grenade launcher. But here, his failures are not impressive, so he appears inept -- he gets followed far too easily even though he knows the followers are out there.

The special effects hurt the movie, I think. The other Indy movies had effects, no doubt, but they were basically small-scale; there were explosions and rolling balls and melting Nazis, but they were small. That meant they couldn't fall back on fancy visuals to keep the audience interested, so they had to make a compelling story with interesting characters. Here, though, it all looked so damn good that the characterization was paper-thin. The only one we really get is Indy, and that's just because we've seen him before. I know nothing about the main villain, Dr. Spalko, and that hurts the movie. I understand Belloch from Raiders, I understand Donovan and Scheider from The Last Crusade. Spalko I just don't get.

At times the movie gets too self-referential. Indy talks about getting old to assure the audience that yes, Harrison Ford is in fact older, we're not denying that, but he can still do this. The snake-rope in the quicksand was just there to bring out his fear of snakes, because you can't have and Indiana Jones movie without snakes. But no one would ever use a snake in that situation, because it wouldn't work. They're in a jungle, get a branch. The movie was winking at me, saying, "Hey -- it's INDIANA JONES you're watching." Although I did like the revelation of the Ark at the beginning. (And to counter arguments of the reference to Raiders in The Last Crusade, I think that works because it comes from the story; it's not just thrown in there by the filmmakers as a reference, completely outside the plot.)

I blame George Lucas for all of this. If he had let writer David Koepp write the script his way and Speilberg shoot it his way, it could have been good. Koepp and Speilberg made this movie a while back called Jurassic Park, and it was pretty good. But Lucas wanted aliens and Lucas wanted CGI, and Lucas killed the movie.

I think the order goes like this:

Raiders of the Lost Ark (by a hair)
Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (far behind)
Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (far behind that)
Can't stop the signal.
#8
i dont care if u spoil it, im not gna watch it, i got better things 2 do
SEX!

Now I have your attention, witness the awesomeness that is my sig
__________________

Quote by GuitarManDan15
win

__________________

Free Dean V To Loving Home
#9
u didnt think temple of doom was good? :[
dude, what about an actual solo in death metal instead of that poof from linkin park. Think of Pulse of the Maggots - Bed Of Razors


#1 MEMEBER OF THE OFFICIAL THRASH METAL FAN CLUB (PM URE FAV BANDS TO ME TO JOIN)
#10
Quote by search49
I thought it was terrible.

WoT

I think the order goes like this:

Raiders of the Lost Ark (by a hair)
Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (far behind)
Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (far behind that)

I agree with some of your points but some are ungrounded.

Just because the artifact in question doesn't have any biblical background doesn't mean it's not a good story. People have genuinely argued that aliens were responsible for the mayans advanced technology (Charting stars, predicting eclipses etc..) so why should this story have any less merit than when the "shaman" in ToD took the slaves heart out with him still alive.

So what wasn't clear about the Ruskies plan?

1.Get Skull
2.Find City
3.Exploit aliens
4.Use Powers to exploit world
5.???
6.PROFIT!
#11
Quote by HanPlaysBass

So what wasn't clear about the Ruskies plan?

1.Get Skull
2.Find City
3.Exploit aliens
4.Use Powers to exploit world
5.???
6.PROFIT!


its not so much that. The way it was laid out was just too disconnected. And the side character (the one whose with the bad guys, but only for greed: french guy in first one, the guy who ages to death in the third) wasn't presented well like the others.

As i told my friends walking out of the theaters, its like Lucas took the original scripts for E.T. 2, Indiana Jones 4, and Star Wars 7, put them in a box, pulled pages out and stapled them together to make the final cut. And then lost the script halfway through filming and just told Ford to improvise and Lebouf to make smartass comments. And threw money at industrial light and magic and told them to fill in the blanks.
#12
Quote by search49
I thought it was terrible.

Raiders of the Lost Ark was supposed to be a tribute to B-movies and action serials from the 40s and 50s, that Speilberg and Lucas grew up watching, but turned out to be better than anything that genre had ever produced. This one was just a B-movie.

I thought also it got more far-fetched than any of the other three. At least with Raiders and The Last Crusade, Indy was chasing an artifact that is known to exist. There's a suspension of disbelief, naturally, but there was at least some historical basis for the supernatural powers being shown; they all came out of Judeo-Christian mythology and legend. The flying saucers and aliens are pure science fiction (damn you, George Lucas!)

The bad guys were also less intimidating than the Nazis. Because it was very clear why the Nazis wanted the Ark and the Holy Grail. (It was also clear why the bad Indians wanted the stones, but The Temple of Doom wasn't that great either.) But here, it's less clear. There is Cate Blanchett's monologue about mind control, but I couldn't help but feel that the Russians' plan to get the skull and plan to use it weren't as clear and immediately scary as what the Nazis had planned. It also hurts that we were never in a shooting war with the Russians like we were with the Nazis, so they're less scary to begin with.

Then there were too many things that were just ridiculous. Mutt doing a Tarzan through the jungle? Russia's best secret agents being foiled by monkeys and ants? Indy surviving a nuclear explosion by hiding in a refrigerator? Come on, even for this series that's getting out there.

Too many coincidences and deus ex machinas also propelled the plot. I know Indy is a smart guy, knows his archaeology. But here he had the answer to everything. Part of Indy's charm is that he's very improvisational, that he doesn't know what he's doing. Here he was smart enough to evade the bad guys but inept enough to get caught. He doesn't fail impressively -- look at Raiders. He fails constantly through that movie. But it's always so damn flashy that we forgive him; I mean, he threatened to blow up the Ark of the Covenant with a grenade launcher. But here, his failures are not impressive, so he appears inept -- he gets followed far too easily even though he knows the followers are out there.

The special effects hurt the movie, I think. The other Indy movies had effects, no doubt, but they were basically small-scale; there were explosions and rolling balls and melting Nazis, but they were small. That meant they couldn't fall back on fancy visuals to keep the audience interested, so they had to make a compelling story with interesting characters. Here, though, it all looked so damn good that the characterization was paper-thin. The only one we really get is Indy, and that's just because we've seen him before. I know nothing about the main villain, Dr. Spalko, and that hurts the movie. I understand Belloch from Raiders, I understand Donovan and Scheider from The Last Crusade. Spalko I just don't get.

At times the movie gets too self-referential. Indy talks about getting old to assure the audience that yes, Harrison Ford is in fact older, we're not denying that, but he can still do this. The snake-rope in the quicksand was just there to bring out his fear of snakes, because you can't have and Indiana Jones movie without snakes. But no one would ever use a snake in that situation, because it wouldn't work. They're in a jungle, get a branch. The movie was winking at me, saying, "Hey -- it's INDIANA JONES you're watching." Although I did like the revelation of the Ark at the beginning. (And to counter arguments of the reference to Raiders in The Last Crusade, I think that works because it comes from the story; it's not just thrown in there by the filmmakers as a reference, completely outside the plot.)

I blame George Lucas for all of this. If he had let writer David Koepp write the script his way and Speilberg shoot it his way, it could have been good. Koepp and Speilberg made this movie a while back called Jurassic Park, and it was pretty good. But Lucas wanted aliens and Lucas wanted CGI, and Lucas killed the movie.

I think the order goes like this:

Raiders of the Lost Ark (by a hair)
Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (far behind)
Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (far behind that)



+1
I was not impressed at all with this movie, and I absolutely loved the first 3. I was ready to walk out of the theater after the refrigerator incident (seriously, I'm pretty sure Indy's body would have been completely thrashed after being thrown around like that).
I also didnt like how Indy kinda stayed behind that Ox guy the whole time. In the other films, Indiana was in charge, he acted like the protagonist, he made the decisions. In Crystal Skull, Ox was always in front, with Indy constantly asking "What now Ox? What should we do next Ox? Where did the aliens tell you to go Ox?"
This movie just seemed so fake to me, compared to the others, like when Marion drove the car off the cliff into the tree, or when they went over 3 waterfalls and managed to stay in the car/boat, or relatively near it.
I dont want to rant though.
I just extremely disliked this movie

EDIT: also, where was Indy's famous whip and pistol? I only remember seeing the whip twice, the first time being in the warehouse scene with an extremely over-dramatic sound effect.
Last edited by tsk84eva at May 24, 2008,
#13
ya saw it tonight i enjoyed it great chase scenes and action, a bit farfetched though esp when he survived a nuclear explosion by hiding in a fridge
#14
I thought it was good, but I was disappointed by the amount of special effects, George Lucas has a stupid addiction to special effects (like in the new Star Wars movies) and it ruined the plot of the movie, especially when mutt was swinging through the forest with the monkeys. It just seemed too fake, like the rest of you have said. I loved the action scenes (like the sword fight on top of the moving ducks ) but the story was disappointing
#15
He survived the bomb by hiding in the fridge which was lead lined. It's still very improbable that he would have survived still, but I just wanted to point that out.
Weekend Warrior
#16
I just watched it too, I thought it was good.

Quote by The2abraxis
signature:
dude, what about an actual solo in death metal instead of that poof from linkin park. Think of Pulse of the Maggots - Bed Of Razors


at a Slipknot song being death metal. And that solo is worse than a Slayer solo.
#18
the movie was ****
hands down
very dissapointing
"Never stop doing what you love" - Paul McCartney (Commercial lololol)
#19
Quote by HanPlaysBass
I agree with some of your points but some are ungrounded.

Just because the artifact in question doesn't have any biblical background doesn't mean it's not a good story. People have genuinely argued that aliens were responsible for the mayans advanced technology (Charting stars, predicting eclipses etc..) so why should this story have any less merit than when the "shaman" in ToD took the slaves heart out with him still alive.

So what wasn't clear about the Ruskies plan?

1.Get Skull
2.Find City
3.Exploit aliens
4.Use Powers to exploit world
5.???
6.PROFIT!


All his points were well grounded. I didn't understand the villains motive either. Plus Russians aren't as bad or scary as, lets say, Nazi's?

**** YOU GEORGE LUCAS!!
"Never stop doing what you love" - Paul McCartney (Commercial lololol)
#20
Indiana Jones and the UFO?

Yah, the ending was a total joke.

"Their treasure was knowledge!!!" (this message brought to you by the American Foundation of Education)

LAME
#21
i just saw it
it was very fake but was enjoyable
i think tho i am very forgiving when it comes to movies, if it keeps me entertained for 2 hours and is enjoyable i usually say its good (i thought speed racer was great...)
my bro tho, who grew up with the first 3 movies, wanted to kill himself after watching it
someone needs to shoot george lucas before he makes more awful star wars spinoffs (clone wars) and mutt williams (shia) movies
makes me angry just thinking about it
#22
Quote by search49
I thought it was terrible.

Raiders of the Lost Ark was supposed to be a tribute to B-movies and action serials from the 40s and 50s, that Speilberg and Lucas grew up watching, but turned out to be better than anything that genre had ever produced. This one was just a B-movie.

I thought also it got more far-fetched than any of the other three. At least with Raiders and The Last Crusade, Indy was chasing an artifact that is known to exist. There's a suspension of disbelief, naturally, but there was at least some historical basis for the supernatural powers being shown; they all came out of Judeo-Christian mythology and legend. The flying saucers and aliens are pure science fiction (damn you, George Lucas!)

The bad guys were also less intimidating than the Nazis. Because it was very clear why the Nazis wanted the Ark and the Holy Grail. (It was also clear why the bad Indians wanted the stones, but The Temple of Doom wasn't that great either.) But here, it's less clear. There is Cate Blanchett's monologue about mind control, but I couldn't help but feel that the Russians' plan to get the skull and plan to use it weren't as clear and immediately scary as what the Nazis had planned. It also hurts that we were never in a shooting war with the Russians like we were with the Nazis, so they're less scary to begin with.

Then there were too many things that were just ridiculous. Mutt doing a Tarzan through the jungle? Russia's best secret agents being foiled by monkeys and ants? Indy surviving a nuclear explosion by hiding in a refrigerator? Come on, even for this series that's getting out there.

Too many coincidences and deus ex machinas also propelled the plot. I know Indy is a smart guy, knows his archaeology. But here he had the answer to everything. Part of Indy's charm is that he's very improvisational, that he doesn't know what he's doing. Here he was smart enough to evade the bad guys but inept enough to get caught. He doesn't fail impressively -- look at Raiders. He fails constantly through that movie. But it's always so damn flashy that we forgive him; I mean, he threatened to blow up the Ark of the Covenant with a grenade launcher. But here, his failures are not impressive, so he appears inept -- he gets followed far too easily even though he knows the followers are out there.

The special effects hurt the movie, I think. The other Indy movies had effects, no doubt, but they were basically small-scale; there were explosions and rolling balls and melting Nazis, but they were small. That meant they couldn't fall back on fancy visuals to keep the audience interested, so they had to make a compelling story with interesting characters. Here, though, it all looked so damn good that the characterization was paper-thin. The only one we really get is Indy, and that's just because we've seen him before. I know nothing about the main villain, Dr. Spalko, and that hurts the movie. I understand Belloch from Raiders, I understand Donovan and Scheider from The Last Crusade. Spalko I just don't get.

At times the movie gets too self-referential. Indy talks about getting old to assure the audience that yes, Harrison Ford is in fact older, we're not denying that, but he can still do this. The snake-rope in the quicksand was just there to bring out his fear of snakes, because you can't have and Indiana Jones movie without snakes. But no one would ever use a snake in that situation, because it wouldn't work. They're in a jungle, get a branch. The movie was winking at me, saying, "Hey -- it's INDIANA JONES you're watching." Although I did like the revelation of the Ark at the beginning. (And to counter arguments of the reference to Raiders in The Last Crusade, I think that works because it comes from the story; it's not just thrown in there by the filmmakers as a reference, completely outside the plot.)

I blame George Lucas for all of this. If he had let writer David Koepp write the script his way and Speilberg shoot it his way, it could have been good. Koepp and Speilberg made this movie a while back called Jurassic Park, and it was pretty good. But Lucas wanted aliens and Lucas wanted CGI, and Lucas killed the movie.

I think the order goes like this:

Raiders of the Lost Ark (by a hair)
Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (far behind)
Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (far behind that)

-1, I'll break my questions/comments down by order of your paragraphs
1.For starters, Raiders was based on the 30s Serials
2.Um what proof is there of The Ark of the Covenant and Holy Grail existing? They're just myths, no more truthful then Greek Mythology
3. What, fear of complete Nuclear Annihilation wasn't scary enough for you? In terms of the movie, you really answered your own question. The Soviets wanted to take control of every1's mind and rule the world, pretty well explained and a pretty scary idea
4. Agreed on the Tarzan scene. Even so, you were able to deal with Henry Jones Sr taking out a Nazi plane by scaring pigeons into it (great scene by the way) or people surviving their heart being taken out? Just take it with a grain of salt and enjoy the movie
5. This wasn't that big a deal for me, but I can see where you're coming from
6. The CG was a little too over the top yes, but did you really need to know all that much about Spalko? It's an Indy movie, all we need to know is that she's evil and Indy is good
7. I actually agree about the snake, they should have found another way to show Indy's snake phobia. The whole time during that scene I was just thinking "wouldn't the snake just bite him?" and "wouldn't they rip the snake in half or something?"

For me its Last Crusade 10/10, Raiders 10/10, Kingdom 9/10, Temple 8.5/10
#23
i was really disappointed to be honest. it was about an hour and twenty minutes of totally stupidly over the top action, thirty minutes of awsome action and about ten of telling you what the **** was going on. it just became a joke after a bit, besides the special effects there was nothing there. take RofLA and take away the effects, you'd still have a good movie. here, without the effects you'd have nothing. and wtf, living through a nuke in a refrigarator?
The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents. We live on a placid island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was not meant that we should voyage far.
#25
Wholeheartedly agree with pretty much all the points raised by search49, although I prefer The Last Crusade to Raiders.
I play by my own rules. And I have one rule; There are no rules... but if there are, they're there to be broken. Even this one.


Confused? Good.

Quote by CrucialGutchman
Sigs are wastes of my precious screen space.

^ Irony

Quote by RevaM1ssP1ss
LET ME HUMP YOU DAMMIT
#26
It requires extreme suspension of logic and willingness to believe in the movie's world, which apparently has entirely different laws of physics than our own!

The acting was cheesy in spots (Indie's fling really sucked at acting), but I think Lucas' **** script writing talents were partly to blame.

Speaking of Lucas, I agree with a previous poster that its probable that he ruined the film (for me at least). All the cheesiest most vomit-inducing parts just reeked of his influence, like the wedding scene at the end and the whole 'treasure being knowledge' thing,


It was a good mindless action flick, but seriously felt like a low-budget production aside from the great special effects. Many scenes felt forced and it seems like they didn't know what to do with some so they just wrote some completely unbelievable crap to get out of it and on to the next idea.

It was ok, but older ones were way better. Damn you lucas!
#27
I hated it
He was doing ridcioulous stunts that he could have never done in his better years
The aliens pretty much sucked
marian cant act at all
and what really annoyed me was he worked the the ruskies. The old indy would have never ever helped them
#28
The worst movie I've seen in a LONG LONG TIME. 2/10, it's just ****ing terrible; aliens? monkeys helping kill the bad people? ants climbing on top of each other to reach the girl? I was nearly expecting zombies and dinosaurs to pop out for a minute. the special effects were terrible and george lucas should not have vetoed the other scripts because this one blew.
#29
gah.
i agree with most of you, I was crushed when i saw the movie.
it was ridiculous.
i was half expecting alien vs. predator 3 to show up
Quote by metabolicmaggot
Win. +1 cookie for hide the beer.

#30
I thought it was good.

Like someone said, take it with a grain of salt and enjoy the film.

It is a Indiana Jones film after all... just action packed and exciting... even though some parts were a bit unbelievable.
#31
this movie was VERY disappointing when compared to the previous 3. The first 3 in the trilogy actually felt like an Indiana Jones movie, whatever that may feel like. This one, however, seemed like an over-produced, money-making film that relied far too heavily on special effects. I LOVED the older Indy films but this one was just too over-the-top for me. There were a few good parts, and yes, the refrigerator part was unrealistic yet humorous.

In the end, it just didn't have the same feel as the previous ones. Even Harrison Ford didn't seem like the true Indiana Jones he portrayed way back. The supporting characters were fairly bland and I agree with someone else who wrote how Indy relied on Ox too much. And the entire Alien thing made me cringe as well. Cate Blanchett was awesome and Harrison Ford was good, but abad storyline and CGI killed this movie.
Fan of the Ottawa Senators

Quote by apak
My G string keeps slipping when i bend it.
Any suggestions?
#32
I raged when he nearly put on indies hat at the end. If they had done that, my popcorn would be going towards the screen with my drink.

It was still good, but the aliens part was just lame.

The order of awesomeness for the movies = 1,3,2,4
Currently attempting to learn: The Dissentience by Protest The Hero in it's entirety.
#33
Quote by search49


Then there were too many things that were just ridiculous. Mutt doing a Tarzan through the jungle? Russia's best secret agents being foiled by monkeys and ants? Indy surviving a nuclear explosion by hiding in a refrigerator? Come on, even for this series that's getting out there.
)


I agree with this, and I still liked the movie.

I think I was the only person in the theater that thought mutt was gonna be his son the whole time. When they revealed it everyone was like "GASP!" and I was like " "
#35
i thought it was a good film, the ending was a bit dodgy but i enjoyed it
Quote by FrenchyFungus


Awww, thanks Frenchy

Quote by Cobain_Is_King
I got a packet of Love Hearts when I was six and every one said 'You Have a Tiny Penis'




Hate humans? Click here
#36
Quote by DesertRockerX10

2.Um what proof is there of The Ark of the Covenant and Holy Grail existing? They're just myths, no more truthful then Greek Mythology


There's actually more truth to the skulls. They actually do exist. Also, there is a legend that there are 13 out there, scattered in the farthest corners of the Earth and in the most trying time, they will all be found to give the people of Earth the means and knowledge to survive their hardships. Like Indy said in the movie, they are theorettically impossible as there are no tool marks on them.


We learned about them in Archeology.
#37
If they had done this story as its own setting, it would've been fine, but this was not well suited for Indiana Jones. The whole Alien thing didn't really fit Indy too well IMO. In my mind, they only made 3 Indiana Jones'.
He's a freak of nature, but we love him so.

Quote by John Frusciante
Music isn't the Olympics. It's not about showing other people what you can do with a piece of wood in your hands that has strings on, it's about making sounds that are good.
#38
I was disappointed.

Sure it was a good move, worth watching, and slightly entertaining but it was soo overboard on somethings it wasn't like Indiana Jones.

I'll start from the beginning:
Right away when they get to teh warehouse everything looks so fake to me, the cars and house everything. Like they were trying way to hard to make it look old.

Then Indiana Jones is supposed tuo be older now and what not? So what does he do he whips around the ceiling acting like he's 20. Probably should of maybe had him use his head a bit more rather then running around like a kid. (That's my opinion)

Then he not only survives a nuclear bomb in a fridge...he also rolls out of it right away and gets up and starts walking. I'm sorry but if the whole town vaporizes I don't know what makes a fridge survive and if by some God granted chance it does there is no way you are just gonna get out and walk away.

Also, one does not simply learn to Tarzan through the jungle. I mean come on, think that one through a bit guys...

Then the aliens...ugh Indiana Jones does not find aliens!!
#39
i iked it until the aliens then it was like WTF
Quote by Mackawade
i was wondering what is some of the stuff you guys would consider better than WOW


Quote by last-1s-out
Getting kicked in the balls repeatedly


Primus Sucks
#40
I think alot of you are jumping on the bashing-band-wagon that is oh-so-popular to jump on these days.

As I said in one of the other Indy threads, you have to understand a little bit of the 50's culture. It was dominated by Communism and UFO's.

Now, on to new comments. The other Indy movies are WAY out there too. The Ark of the Covenant, now I believe that it existed, but I also believe that none of us will ever find it, provided it wasn't destroyed and not recorded. The Sankura Stones? I don't even think those are real. The Holy Grail? Catholic legend, I akin it to the idulgences that they once sold. I have found no evidence in the Bible of Jesus' blood being collected in a cup, or any of that other stuff. In KotCS, it's the same basic idea. Some kind of artifact clouded in mystery with a legend surrounding it, some bad guys, lots of fighting, alot of things that don't make much sense at all, and a happy ending with Indy still alive. I was talking with my older brother and dad about the movie and how it has been reviewed great my most critics, but reviewed horridly by fans of the series. We all concluded that just like with Star Wars, if you wait for nearly 20 years to make a new film, you're not going to please alot of the fans that have been around since the begining. There's more I would say, but I know someone is going to "tl;dr" me.
I'M IN THE FIGHT TO CURE CYSTIC FIBROSIS...MY LIFE DEPENDS ON IT!


Quote by JustRooster
I'm a straight man, but I'd put that surfcaster right in my mouth.



Quote by JD2k9
Well, life is like a penis.
Women make it hard.
Also, it's short but seems long when it gets hard.
Page 1 of 2