Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull

[penny]

I found the trailer of it when I went to check my emails and then found the official site: http://www.indianajones.com/site/index.html
Guess who’s in it….the guy from Transformers, Shia LaBeouf :D

Also came across this too: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=X7fux_fiXjE
Which is cute…aw!

Topic

[Ben Paddon]

Saw the trailer the day it became available, because one of my co-workers is an Indy Nut. It’s good to see Ford back in that costume.

[Andrew]

Anyone remember the Episode III Star Wars trailer? The music editing on that trailer was fucking awful, too.

I like a lot of what we’re seeing in that teaser. But I’ll need time to be comfortable with digital effects in Indy movies, and the greenscreen on the car chase had better be temporary…

[Al]

Its always right to be dubious with these new sequels, but so far Im pretty hopeful. Did anyone else notice the crate that was humming had Roswell 1947 written on the side of it? Thats all pretty cool, as long as if any aliens involved theyre mystical and Godlike, in keeping with the franchise. I cant wait to see more of the Raiders box warehouse. Oh and Andrew Im with you on the greenscreen!

[Nakrophile]

I have hard.

[Mr Flibble]

The music editing on that trailer was fucking awful, too.

Ditto the song at the beginning of the 27 Dresses trailer.

[pfm]

Personally I think it’s a crap trailer considering this has the potential to be one of the highest-grossing films in the last ten years. The only decent shot of the new material is Indy putting the hat on in silhouette. Oh, and when he says ‘part time’. Everything else is either dodgy unfinished effects shots or ridiculous whip work.

I KNOW it’s Indy but it’s barely acceptable that he smashes through the windscreen, manages to say a punchline without the two guys even reacting, then proceeds to take them out. It’s like a parody of a parody! This was never really going to be Raiders mk 2 but…I mean COME ON! (as said by that character in the Marc Wootten sketch show)

Also, the first half of the trailer makes it seem more like Schindler’s List than Indy. If you compare this to the masterful Dark Knight promotion it’s really really dire. It’s coming out in a couple of months and the plebs are only just realising. They’re absolutely crazy.

[Mr Flibble]

It was never going to be one of the highest grossing films of the last 10 years. IIRC it’s being predicted to do OK, but it’s not going to be the highest grossing of the year by a long way.

[Jonathan Capps]

> I mean COME ON! (as said by that character in the Marc Wootten sketch show)

Never do that again.

[pfm]

> Never do that again.

Red Dwarf, WHAT’S ALL THAT ABOUT?? I mean COME ON!! It’s funny ’cause it’s true!!!

*apologies*

[TheLeen]

In the trailer, I didn’t like the first half. Backflashes are so… fan-trailer like. Cheap.

But, oh, Dr. Jones, put on that hat. The silhouette of you. The sound of the whip. Rawr.

That’s all I care about.

[Ridley]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UsGaB52hfjc

Second trailer for those that don’t want to navigate Flash

[Andrew]

I like it when Marleen goes ‘rawr’…

Greenscreen stuff in the driving sequences still doesn’t look great, most CGI seems good if oddly ‘wrong’ for an Indy film (blame the nostalgia factor there, cos the actual FX in Last Crusade were sometimes VERY poor), and I still find Ford waaaaay too old. But yeah, it’s cool, I’m very much in.

Though I’d by lying if I didn’t admit that a half-dozen franchises were actually proving more enticing this summer.

[pfm]

> and I still find Ford waaaaay too old

But he’s carrying it off well considering he’s 65. As long as there aren’t TOO many old man jokes in the film (though you just know there will be some).

[ChrisM]

I saw a trailer for this briefly today on the TV. The shot at the end with all the people had a very Temple of Doom look to it, I thought.

I’m looking forward to this film a lot. Not too keen on the fact Shia La Bouef is in it, but that’s mainly because I found him a bit irritating in Transformers, (not that I disliked that film as a whole.) I don’t think it’s fair to judge a young actor on one film though, so I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt.

[Tanya Jones]

>> and I still find Ford waaaaay too old

> But he?s carrying it off well considering he?s 65. As long as there aren?t TOO many old man jokes in the film (though you just know there will be some).

Well, I still would.

[pfm]

Sadly, the first reviews are pretty negative. Nothing would stop me from seeing this though.

[Rad]

Have there been any reviews? I’ve not seen any myself yet.

[John Hoare]

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/36667

You may choose between:

a) Linking to AICN? I cannot believe I just did that.

b) Face it, the site’s crap, anyway anybody could have done it, I hate the lot of you, bollocks to you.

[Nakrophile]

Yes!

[ChrisM]

I agree, that second trailer did look slow.

I’m gonna keep an open mind though. There are a few shows critics (and even lots of members of the internet community) pan which I rather like.

There was one thing in the trailer I thought to be a rather major spoiler though. I think they should have left it out.

What bit? You want me to spoil it for you?

Ok, on your own head be it…
*****SPOILERS********************Sorry I noticed blank lines tend to be gobbled up.

The creatures you see in the temple. I think they should have be kept a surprise. Indy mentions “The skull is guarded by…” (note I’m keeping the spoilers minor) and then you see them lurching on screen. Part of the fun of these films is that the supernatural aspect doesn’t usually appear until the end of the film, and when it does it’s a surprise.

[Ridley]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=od38l7Kvikg

Trailer 3. More the same for the most part though.

And just for the Ellard http://raven.theraider.net/showthread.php?t=14191 >:D

[Andrew]

> And just for the Ellard http://raven.theraider.net/showthread.php?t=14191 >:D

This was a TV broadcast? Don’t recall the DVD edition being especially different, but they did do a few small clean ups.

Seems unlikely that it’s been CGI tampered, as opposed to the original elements being re-worked. More facts needed first.

But…why me?

[ChrisM]

Probably just me but… isn’t it a bit of a misnomer for a crystal skull to be made of gold?

[Andrew]

> Probably just me but? isn?t it a bit of a misnomer for a crystal skull to be made of gold?

Um…what?

[Danny Stephenson]

“The colour of gold is gold, that’s why it’s called gold. But what they have, if it has a name, is some ‘invisible’…”

[pfm]

Watched Temple of Doon on Sunday for the first time in a long while (in full fucking screen, no less, because the BBC is the UK’s premier broadcaster) and by the Christ-child it’s bad. Well…mostly. The action at the end saves it, along with a couple of darker moments that helped spawn the PG-13 rating, but aside from that it’s impossible to see this as being the follow-up to the amazing Raiders. In fact, you wonder what the hell happened to Spielberg after directing two flawless movies (Raiders and ET) that made him conjure the insanity of ‘Doom’. I suppose he wanted to do something more light-hearted. Maybe.

It defies sense why the Doom vs Crusade debate even exists. Crusade may have its flaws but it beats Doom hands down. I would hope Skull beats it too (although surely it can’t have as much action as Doom. Action is way more expensive now to pull off)

One thing I noticed that I’ve never seen before is Dan Aykroyd appearing near the beginning. They don’t really show his face but it’s clearly his voice. He’s the guy showing them to the plane. That’s such a random cameo.

[TheLeen]

> but aside from that it?s impossible to see this as being the follow-up to the amazing Raiders

Wel, Temple has this kinda nice scene where Indy and Kate Capshaw’s character bitch at each other. I like that. It’s vaguely got a rough “scoundrel dialogue” feel to it. Uhm.

> One thing I noticed that I?ve never seen before is Dan Aykroyd

Huh? What? Really? Voice? Are you sure? imdb knows nothing of it.
(I wouldn’t know, only ever seen the dubbed version which clearly didn’t have Dan Akroyd’s voice in it, hehe.)

[Pete Part Three]

There’s no decent close-ups of his face which doesn’t help, but he’s recognisable.

Personally, I think Temple gets a bad press it doesn’t deserve. I think the action sequences are better than Raiders, and there’s more of a beginning, middle and end to the plot (even if they do “fall” into it) rather than just a load of running around after an ark.

[TheLeen]

When I first saw the three films I hadn’t read any press. I just enjoyed Temple less than the other two.

[Andrew]

> I suppose he wanted to do something more light-hearted. Maybe.

When Temple of Doom is by far the darkest of the films? (Allegedly partly due to Lucas and is immediately post-divorce mood.)

> It defies sense why the Doom vs Crusade debate even exists.

I like Doom. The debate is reasonable and healthy. Crusade works too hard to imitate Raiders.

> Action is way more expensive now to pull off

It’s…what?

> That?s such a random cameo.

It’s actually a returned favour for Speilberg’s cameo in The Blues Brothers. But it’s shot in a wide because it’s not meant to steal your attention or be the point of the scene.

That said, the film was made to be shown in cinemas – at which point your view of the character’s face would have been significantly better.

[Andrew]

For anyone interested, Empire’s day by day build up to the release includes a lot of stuff on the topics that have just popped up:

http://www.empireonline.com/indy/

[Pete Part Three]

^The interview with the guys who remade Raiders is fascinating.

>When Temple of Doom is by far the darkest of the films? (Allegedly partly due to Lucas and is immediately post-divorce mood.)

What do you think makes it “dark” though? The “darkest” bit of the trilogy for me is the Nazis getting their comeuppance at the end of Raiders. Bound to cause a few more nightmares than Indy going bad or children being kidnapped.

[Andrew]

> The ?darkest? bit of the trilogy for me is the Nazis getting their comeuppance at the end of Raiders.

Well I specifically coming back at the suggestion that Doom is somehow more light-hearted than Raiders. But I do think it’s a film that spends a lot more time in harsher, grimmer places.

While the end of Raiders is certainly up there, it is, as you say, a moment of comeuppance. It’s scary imagery, but it’s also fairly brief, and it sets the world to rights. It defeats the villains. Ultimately, it’s reassuring as a message.

The kidnap and drugged slavery of children is more consistently grim – especially for a young audience who will identify with the kids being abused – and Indy, the definite hero, being rendered ‘bad’ leaves you helpless in a way Raiders never did. Add to that the impossible-to-defend-yourself-against ‘voodoo’, the pulling out of hearts, death by crocodiles…it’s more relentless overall.

Actually, it hangs its flag early – the early poisoning of the hero and the reveal of Lao-Che’s plane show is a story where Indy is even more subject to outside forces than he was in Raiders. It makes sense, and keeps him from being a superhero, but I think it leaves the outcome even more in doubt – which makes for a less reassuring experience for most of the runtime.

[Ridley]

But?why me?

I heard you liked greenscreen so… yeah.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=my-mnBbCI7g (ToD) Fair use? Really?

[Andrew]

> I heard you liked greenscreen

Erm…okay. That’s…odd.

> Fair use? Really?

And yeah, so’s that!

[Andrew]

> In the trailer Indy mentions a skull made of ?pure gold?.

No, he mentions a CITY made of pure gold.

[ChrisM]

Probably just me but? isn?t it a bit of a misnomer for a crystal skull to be made of gold?

Um?what?

In the trailer Indy mentions a skull made of ‘pure gold’. That’s what I was referring too.

Not a bigee, I guess it’s magical anyway.
*****
EDIT- OK Andrew, just caught your reply. I obviously need to clean out my ears.
*****

As for Temple of Doom, I remembered liking it a lot. Catching part of it again I found myself wincing a bit in places but overall it’s still a good film as long as it’s not analyzed to deeply.

The things that made me wince seemed to mainly be the way the indians were portrayed, particularly in the Thuggee ceremony. (Don’t get me wrong, the main sequence was wonderfully creepy and atmospheric all._ Not that all indians in the film are portrayed that way though, to be fair, but it made me a bit uncomfortable for some reason. I’m not so sure its the fault of the film though. It’s not as if all Indians in the film are portrayed that way. And historically the thuggees were very brutal at times (not that the British army wasn’t), although I don’t think their statues of Kali were usually that demonic.

Maybe it the modern notions of political correctness infecting me. (Again not that the main message of political correctness itself is bad.) I hope not.

So yeah, not a criticism of the film at all, but I find it interesting how one’s reaction to a film can differ from time to time.

Oh and the kid using a voodoo doll… bit of a mixing of cultures there I think…

Still a great film though. As I said, best not to analyze too deep.

[pfm]

I thought he meant the temple was made of gold, not the skull. If you’ve read any spoilers you’ll know the ‘crystal’ skull is in fact neither gold nor crystal…

Regarding the Doom debate, the ‘darkness’ of hearts being ripped out, Indy going bad, kids enslaved etc. all feels out of place in the middle of the comedy rollercoaster style of the rest of the movie. I hate the ‘comedy’ as well, with Kate Capshaw screaming and fainting. Whenever I’ve watched it I just want to skip to the temple part due to this.

The Lucas divorce thing is brought up as the reason for someone having their heart ripped out!

[ChrisM]

I found that guys aparent change to normality strange too. Well about as normal as you can get when your tied to a platform thing about to be sacrificed in the bowels of the earth…

After having his heart ripped out I mean. True, he was probably in shock, but even so…

[Ridley]

Regarding the Doom debate, the ?darkness? of hearts being ripped out, Indy going bad, kids enslaved etc. all feels out of place in the middle of the comedy rollercoaster style of the rest of the movie.

I believe it was actually made the other way round, with the comedy inserted balance the dark.

I’ve read that the banquet scene was supposed to be a joke whereby the Thuggee feed them what ignorant foreigners expect from an Indian. If it was, the execution on screen’s too subtle to the point of not being there, but it’s not that hard to assume they’re all supposed to be members of the cult.

The screenplay has Jones pointing out “Even if they were trying to scare us away, a devout Hindu would never touch meat.”

[Phil]

>If you?ve read any spoilers you?ll know the ?crystal? skull is in fact neither gold nor crystal?

And if you haven’t, you just have.

[Pete Part Three]

I’m not watching it now. I specifically wanted a CRYSTAL skull.

[pfm]

Well it’s crystal-looking. I should stop reading spoilers for EVERYTHING but I can’t help it. For god’s sake don’t read the BBFC’s 12A classification notes on the movie because they reveal too much. But oh yes it needs the 12A.

[Andrew]

> I?m not watching it now. I specifically wanted a CRYSTAL skull.

Also, the Ark spends a good part of the first film not being lost, the Temple of Doom turns out to be where Indy helps everyone escape, and there’s probably going to be another Crusade seeing as the grail isn’t actually recovered at the end.

[Dave]

>I should stop reading spoilers for EVERYTHING but I can?t help it

Could you stop writing them?

[Ridley]

I bet he’s a woman that bloke. No, you think it’s the future but it’s actually set in the past. It’s not Earth. It’s all a dream. They’re all clones. He’s his own brother. Everyone’s a ghost.

[Ben Paddon]

I hear there’s a twist in this film!

[peas_and_corn]

Yep- a twist of lemon in Indy’s drink

[Nakrophile]

Anyway I have always loved Temple of Doom. It gets such a bad rep, and although Kate Capshaw is pretty damn irritating at times Short Round is genius. I still cannot really decide which of the trilogy I like the best, but it’s fair to say that the last two films both have flaws and Raiders does that. That said they are all fantastic.

[pfm]

Even though Last Crusade has dodgy moments I think the opening 15 minutes of it are exactly what Indy should be about. And it also includes this choice moment –

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=-DGFuHC75aY

[Author]

Replies