Indiana Jones and the Close Encounters of the Third Kind

So I saw the new Indy movie!

This is gonna contain some BIG-ASS spoilers, so turn back now if you want to stay surprised.

First, I want to make it clear that "Raiders of the Lost Ark" is my all-time favorite Steven Spielberg movie. Even though I myself am a dino freak, I still like "Raiders" more than "Jurassic Park." And even though I think "Jaws" is Spielberg's BEST popcorn flick, I find "Raiders" more entertaining on repeated viewings. And yes, Spielberg has made some truly great films that transcend entertainment with "Schindler's List" and "Private Ryan," but man, old Indy Jones just rocks so much.

Part of it is because, as many of you may know, my father is an archaeologist himself, so anything that makes my father's profession (and my association with it) look this COOL is good in my book. And the other reason is that as much as I love Han Solo to death ("Empire Strikes Back" is my all-time favorite movie, after all), I think that Harrison Ford is even more iconic as that guy with the hat and the whip.

So I was excited for "Kingdom of the Crystal Skull," but I was also a bit nervous. As your average film student will tell you, some of us generally think George Lucas has gone of the deep end with entertainment and is a lost cause (I still like the guy, but I agree he's lost much of his luster). Spielberg, on the other hand, has aged well and consistently made pretty good movies. However, his last popcorn-action flick, "War of Worlds," I found less than thrilling. So I was a bit anxious.

I had no worries that Ford would be fine, and indeed, he slips into the Indy role with ease. Much as Bruce Willis easily took up old John McClane, Ford easily returns as an older Indiana Jones. Both these actors were defined by these roles, and returning to them is no sweat. And many of the other cast members are great too. I am liking Shia LaBeouf more and more, although I think if he wants to really define his career as a high-quality actor, he should do a few more of these high-profile adventure movies, and then surprise us with something completely vulnerable and different. Karen Allen, whom I haven't seen in a movie in years, is tons of fun to see again. And I've always had a slight crush on Cate Blanchett, and I've always found icy Russians hot, so I liked Irina Spalko as the baddie, even if she was not given quite enough to do.

But there were a number of issues with Kingdom of the Crystal Skull that I took issue with. I was excited (but skeptical) when I read how Lucas and Spielberg were going to use "as little CG as possible" to pull off this movie. Yet in the first shot, we get a goofy CG prairie dog poking its head out of the hole! I wish I could take all CG technology and literally rip it out of the hands of Lucas and Spielberg and force them to really stick to their word and do things without computers, so we wouldn't have to deal with crap like Shia and a bunch of CG squirrel monkeys, for example. Because the sequences that were mostly practical, such as the jeep chase and the Area 51 opening scene, were tons of fun, even though the jeep chase itself was not as thrilling as the one in "Raiders," and it smacked a bit of "Return of the Jedi" speeder bikes.

And that, in itself, is another part of the problem, an issue that is not really Lucas or Spielberg's fault--Indiana Jones just isn't original anymore. There were a few times during KOTCS that I thought to myself "this reminds me of the Mummy movies." Of course, the "Mummy" films are complete Indy Jones rip-offs, but since movies such as it have been made in such abundance since the early Indy movies, now when Indy returns to the screen again, he does not surprise us as much as he used to.

I am also on the fence about the whole "alien" thing. Indy has faced the supernatural before; in "Raiders" he faces the Ark of the Covenant, in "Temple of Doom" it's some crazy cult that rips your heart out, and in "The Last Crusade" it's the Holy Grail. It makes sense for Indy in the 40s to be dealing with the supernatural in god-like form, since World War II was a very "Christian god-like" conflict, with the Allies vs. the pure evil Nazis (I sort of like to pretend that "Temple of Doom" doesn't exist).

Yet KOTCS takes place in the 50s, and so our bad guys have changed from the Nazis to the Commies...I'm cool with this. And as such, the supernatural element of the movie has changed to one that is more fitting--aliens from another world. The 50s were full of this sort of "alien-allegory" of invasion from another place. Just look at "Invasion of the Body Snatchers," for example. In the 50s, fear of aliens very much mirrored our fear of the communists. Having aliens be the mysterious element in an Indiana Jones movie is a departure from what we are used to, but it fits--to a degree.

The opening scenes of KOTCS handle the 50s decade pretty well. The Area 51 scene is lots of fun, and I'm fine with them giving us a tease of the alien corpse without fully revealing what it is. And of course, what fanboy didn't let out a little squeal of enjoyment when we saw The Ark hidden in there? I know I did.

Directly afterwards, we get the scene with Indy having to hide from an atomic bomb. This is a little over-the-top and unbelievable, but nuclear testing has its relevance in the 50s, so I was willing to forgive and accept.

This was sort of how I felt throughout the entire movie. There were little things that bothered me, but I was willing to more-or-less go along with the flow. For example, if I was Indy I would have pummeled Ray Winstone's character and gotten rid of him early on, instead of letting him tag along for the entire journey. The guy betrayed you multiple times, Indy, don't you get it? You're a smart dude! And I just felt sorry for John Hurt for being forced to babble like an idiot, because normally I love the guy.

And there are plenty of other bits that don't make sense. The sand pit scene, where Indy has to grab onto a snake to escape, is lots of fun, but dramatically the scene is out of place. Indy and co. escape, and are immediately captured afterwards. Why was the scene needed? Put it somewhere else in the movie, where it would fit better.

And what was the deal with those pygmies in the graveyard? The ones with the blow-darts and skeleton masks...who were they? Where did they come from? No explanation. I blame Lucas. The same holds true for the second group of natives that appear in the movie. They didn't add anything, and their presence only offered more questions (if you are going to include something like a race of indigenous people that have never been discovered before in the heart of the jungle, that's actually a pretty big mystery that deserves more of an answer!).

But I did like all the stuff where Indy and Shia actually do some "real" archaeological work, as they traced Prof. Oxley's steps (Indy gives one bit of advice about scorpions that I myself have given to friends of mine on several occasions...nice to know he has an understanding of natural history too!).

However, my one, HUGE beef with the movie is the climax, dealing with the aliens again. As I said, the alien thing surprised me, but I was willing to go along for the ride...to a point. But having Indiana Jones come face to face with a REAL LIVE ALIEN, and then a FLYING SAUCER is too much for me, especially in the way it was handled. I felt like he had tripped and fallen into the wrong movie. I was half expecting Agent Mulder to put a hand on his shoulder and whisper, "Don't worry, Dr. Jones. The truth is out there."

It's fine and good for Indy to track down ancient alien artifacts that may or may not be from extraterrestrial origins, and to even have those artifacts do something extraordinary that cannot be explained by known science--that's pretty cool if handled with the right amount of mysticism. But try as I can, I cannot swallow Indy actually existing in a world with live aliens and spaceships. It just does not work, and I think the franchise jumped the shark more than a bit at this point. I wish they had finished the movie off with something else.

A part of me is not surprised. Many people who disliked the movie will wail about how long the powers that be spent on the script, and how it should have been better. And I agree with them. Yet as much as I love Spielberg and Lucas (they are certainly a big part of the reason why I wound up going to film school), all filmmakers have their flaws. And Lucas and Spielberg both LOVE aliens. You can blame the scapegoat Lucas, but I think this could just as much have been Spielberg's doing--the guy can't get enough of aliens, and to him there is nothing wrong with Indy coexisting with one, as much as this particular fan (me) disagrees.

Even so, it's nice to know that Lucas and Spielberg do care about their audience. One fear that has been on every fan's mind is, "Will they replace Ford with Shia? They CAN'T! Could they...?", and the movie ends with a pretty good fakeout, when the fedora rolls to Shia's feet. Shia picks up the hat and gives it a look, at which point the entire audience practically gave a collective gasp. However Ford's hand immediately reached in to grab the hat away from Shia and place it on his own head. It was a nice little nod to say, "Yes, we like this new Mutt Williams character, but we know you fans, and we, too, know there can be only one Indiana Jones." From the bottom of my heart, thanks for admitting that one, guys.

"Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" is certainly not "Raiders" or "Last Crusade" material, but it is definitely better than "The Temple of Doom," and it was a fun time at the movies. It was more-or-less as good (and as slightly disappointing) as I was expecting it to be. I wouldn't mind seeing another Indy movie, but let's just try and keep it a bit more grounded in reality next time, shall we?