Second Look: INDIANA JONES AND THE KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL
October 21st, 2008

Back in May I wrote in my review of INDIANA JONES AND THE KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL that “it’s not a perfect film, nor is it one that surpasses any of its predecessors, but it’s an INDIANA JONES film, one that’s exciting and adventurous, and that’s more than I could have hoped for” despite the fact that “ [you] know it’s an Indiana Jones film, you can see that it’s an Indiana Jones film, and it is an Indiana Jones film in a sense, but you never feel it’s an Indiana Jones film in the same way as the earlier ones. It stills works though because it’s an exciting film (one of the better action adventures I’ve seen in the last few years), and – more importantly – it’s a really really good imitation, which is why I can still say I loved the film and had a blast.”
Watching INDIANA JONES the second time now that it has hit DVD, I’m not sure I can stand behind those words anymore.
It’s not just some of the individual elements (prairie dogs, nuked fridges, Tarzan Mutt, and the ending) that are noticeably worse the second time around. It’s the fact that watching the movie this time there’s just a prevalent sense that this isn’t how Indiana Jones should be. It no longer feels – as I wrote previously – like a really really good imitation of Indiana Jones, but instead of NATIONAL TREASURE. Yes, there are flourishes where the old Indiana Jones returns (the two car chase sequences, the quicksand scene), but those are buried deeply under an inconsistent tone, an unexciting search for an incredibly stupid MacGuffin that fuels into an even worse ending, too many deadweight characters (except Karen Allen … sort of), a lousy useless villain, and ludicrous action events that exceed even Indiana Jones standards of suspension of disbelief.
This all makes it sound like I hated INDIANA JONES AND THE KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL the second time around. I didn’t really, it’s just that its flaws became more noticeable, most of all its greatest one: it doesn’t live up to its predecessors. I’ve seen RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARC and INDIANA JONES AND THE LAST CRUSADE probably around 100 times, and I’d argue as a result I know what an Indy movie should be like, and this ain’t it. What’s more, those films hold up no matter how many times I see them, and yet CRYSTAL SKULL can’t even squeeze by a second time. How I feel now about it compared to when I saw it in theatres makes me realize I wrote the review I did because I so desperately wanted to like it for being INDIANA JONES. Instead I see now – with great disappointment – CRYSTAL SKULL is a solid, fluffy action flick, and little more.














Linda B. Says:
October 22nd, 2008 at 8:26 am
I don’t know how you stood behind those words the first time.
After watching this film months ago at the theatre I asked myself if it would be one I would want to watch over and over again. The 1st and 3rd installments I have seen numerous times. This one, sad to say, I have no desire to watch again. There weren’t any memorable scenes or lines that would make me want to see it again.
I liked your comparison to National Treasure. I thought the 1st NT was much better than this and somewhat on par w/ what this film should have been - an enjoyable ride. Unfortunately this film makes me sad that this is what they came up w/ for an action adventure hero who we all wanted to enjoy that ride w/ again.