penfield | Indiana Jones and the Wrath of the Disenchanted Pants

"When you're safe at home you wish you were having an adventure; when you're having an adventure you wish you were safe at home"
- Thornton Wilder

It's not that "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" was bad, exactly. It's just that I wish I had never seen it.

[WARNING: The following analysis makes reference to this film and, indeed, the entire "Indiana Jones" canon, so for the dozen or so people who haven't seen the new movie yet and the exceedingly few individuals who have not seen the earlier films either, you might want to avoid the rest of this entry lest I spoil critical plot points.]

There was a lot to like about the movie. the action was first-rate, with a number of visually awesome set pieces that suspend your disbelief from dizzying hights. Harrison Ford was charming again, for the first time in a film since the last Indiana Jones movie. And the return of Karen Allen as Marian Ravenwood made for a perfect grace note.

But there was also a lot wrong with it, besides the stupid title. The plot is still a convoluted mystery to me, and even if I understood it I suspect it would be more viable in the Star Wars science ficton saga than a 1950's-era action romp. The film was totally Lucasized, from the CGI prarie dogs to the CGI ants to the entire final 15 minutes. And those awesome action scenes I mentioned? They are practically documentary compared to the patently ludicrous atomic bomb sequence (which, by the way, was mostly CGI).

In the name of popcorn-flavored fun I was willing to overlook these glaring flaws and go along with it. But what makes it so disappointing is that the third film, "Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade," was such a perfect ending. I mean, it's the Last Crusade, for goodness sake.

(And, by the way, I've never seen or heard this point addressed or adequately explained: in The Last Crusade, the film concludes with Indiana Jones and his father drinking from the holy grail, which is supposed to confer eternal life. And yet, in the fourth film, Indy's dad is dead and Jones himself is depicted as struggling to escape death on numerous ocassions. What the hell?

I went back to The Last Crusade and the conditional statement I could find was the crusty old knight's warning that "The grail cannot pass beyond the great seal; that is the boundary, and the price of immortality." As the heroes try to escape with the grail, a mythical earthquake wrecks the whole cave and the grail is swallowed into its abyss. I always just figured that the warning applied only to posession of the grail, not the benefit of its powers. But did that mean that the eternal life is only valid within the now inaccessible cave? That's a pretty crummy deal.)

The first film, "Raiders of the Lost Ark," is mostly a dim memory for me, although I do remember it being a lot of fun. Offhand I would agree with those who compare this new movie favorably to "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom," but that is certainly damning it with faint praise since the second film has always been considered the weakest, weirdest and creepiest of the initial trilogy.

Anyway, I wish they had just left it alone. Nice as it was to have Indiana Jones back on the big screen, the Skull movie turned out to be more of a caricature than a coda. Now there are rumors of a fifth movie, if all the principals can be lured back, presumably "Indiana Jones and the Family Vacation," with a guest appearance by Jar Jar Binks.