Now before you jump me, I'm not defending it as a masterpiece. But I do enjoy it, and the vitriol against it is strange. People act like aliens are too "out there" as if Raiders is entirely based in realism. Plus, like it or not, many archaeological discoveries have alien-related theories.
shareOther than the fridge scene and the end, it is an OK movie. A few other moments were irksome but passable. A decent Indy movie were it not ruined by those two big things, though. About the same as Last Crusade to me as I had a big problem with it too.
I1:A++
I2:B+
I3:B-
I4:C+
Firstly, the aliens weren't a bad idea or out of character for the stories. Clearly, the first one and Temple of Doom directly showed that magic is real. So, if magic is real, then why not aliens, as aliens are actually more grounded in reality.
However, when skull came out MANY people were very excited. That's because the previous movies were largely seen as being serious adventure movies with SOME humor, fitting of the situation, and SOME fantasy elements that were acceptable. I don't think fans of the films wanted more humor or fantasy stuff, they wanted Indiana Jones personality in complex difficult situations.
What we got was too much humor and the story focusing a lot on his kid. The actor playing the kid looked nothing like his father or mother, and was annoying with an annoying name, Mutt. At one point, he swings like Tarzan through trees when he has no reason to be able to do that. So, the movie was part Indiana Jones, because Ford was good, but then part comedy and part cartoon.
It's a typical example of George Lucas kind of work where he makes everything stupid.
I think it would have been OK if it didn't really so much on crappy CGI. I thought most of the acting was fine with the exception of Blanchett and Hurt who were terrible. The story was fine imo; just way to reliant on over the top CGI.
Since Disney is buying everything, we will now get a whole new trilogy. Hopefully it ends up being good.
The fact that Indy survived a nuclear blast by jumping into a refrigerator is enough to make this one of the worst movies ever made. The rest of it was the bitter icing on the crap cake.
That said, tastes are subjective. You just happen to be in the very small minority. That's not to say you shouldn't enjoy the movie. To each their own.
I never had a problem with the alien plot it just had too many silly looking over the top action scenes.
shareYou miss the point if you think people criticize the alien plot because it's too out there. As you say, the other movies are not realistic either. What people criticize about the aliens is:
1) They don't fit. Indiana Jones is about pulp adventures and the search for archeological artifacts with mythological/magical properties. It's not about UFOs. Even though both of those things are fantastical, that doesn't mean that anything goes. Even fictional worlds with magic need their own internal coherence and rules. Otherwise Indy could get out of his next problem by developing Superman-style superpowers. It just doesn't fit.
2) The plot didn't make much sense. Why did they need to return the skull? So that the aliens could leave? Why hadn't they left centuries ago, before Orellana took the skull?
The aliens thing never bothered me. I get that Lucas wanted to model this entry after 50s sci-fi schlock.
I guess the old computer game, Fate of Atlantis, prepared me for a more sci-fi twist. While that game doesn't explicitly state the Atlanteans were aliens, the look/feel of those parts of the game definitely suggest an alien influence....
never saw it
share