Indiana Jones? Disappointing.
*** BIG FAT SPOILER WARNING! ***
So we got a chance to see it last night. Met up with Big Dan and hit the theatre.
And here’s my thinking overall:
Disappointing. Like, even given what I’ve heard about it, pretty disappointing.
If you haven’t seen Iron Man or Indiana Jones yet, go see Iron Man. Dead easy choice.
I was trying to articulate with Jackie and Dan what it was that didn’t click for me, and I think it was a combination of a bunch of things. In no particular order:
- I found the lighting distracting for the first maybe fifth or quarter of it, while everything in the story’s getting set up. It was too harsh on some characters (almost kind of gilding them) and too lax around them, as though the characters were being highlighted to stand out, but it didn’t look at all natural. Compare that to the first film (the one I recall the best), where the lighting was gorgeously done - it looked far more natural - and you’ll see what I mean. Am I a production snob? To a degree, yes. But for my money, anything that distracts the audience from getting into a story is a bad thing, and that lighting took me out of it a few times. In those scenes, it was just bad.
- The fridge thing. On the one hand, I get that they’re aging Indy and showing how the world around him is changing. Fine. On the other hand, having him survive a nuclear blast by hiding in a lead-lined fridge, while amusing, went out of the bounds it feels they set for what Indy movies are about: more mysteries and adventuring and outwitting his opponents, not deadly threats he accidentally stumbles across that aren’t part of the plot. Silly and pointless.
- The soda shop scene where Indy and Mutt talk felt utterly contrived. There was nothing natural about how that looked. Again, take a look at the cafe scenes in the first movie: both scenes are written and planned and choreographed, yet the cafe scenes feel natural and realistic, while the background characters in the soda shop (again, with its sometimes distracting lighting) felt totally fabricated, preventing me from getting into the storyline.
- The alien stuff shouldn’t have been taken to the level it was. I would never - not ever - have thought that they’d have Indiana Jones watching a UFO take off. That was far more X-Files than I think an Indy movie should ever have gotten. Dan and I agreed that there’s something inherently acceptable about the believability and appropriate feel of religious aspects to Indy movies (the Ark, the Holy Grail) than spacemen. Why one feels more proper than the other is, again, hard to articulate. Just a deep-set feeling that one works and the other really (really, really) doesn’t.
- The bad guys didn’t have anywhere near the same menacing feel to them that those in the earlier movies (again, particularly those in the first) did. They felt more cardboard cutout bad guys than ones with much dimension to them. Even when Indy’s friend Mac turns on him, did I care? Not in the least. You stick a new character in a movie series, tell me their history (which is a big no-no in movies: show the audience, don’t tell them), and I’m expected to care about him, or if he’s a turncoat?
Having Sean Connery in the second film was better handled because at least we saw him adventuring with Indy (whereas Mac didn’t do much of anything) while quipping about their family’s past for humourous effect. But Mac? Didn’t care about him at all. At all. He’s a friend of Indy’s, and they’ve been through all this stuff together? Sure. Oh, he turned on him? Alright. Oh, now he’s turned again and was with Indy the whole time? Fine. Oh, now he’s really, really against him? Ok. Now Indy wants to save him and he chooses to die? Whatever.
- City kid Mutt pulling a Tarzan and swinging on the vines like a natural with the monkey hordes (which totally get his vibe and attack the bad guys). Good lord.
- Jumping the duckmobile off the cliff onto the tree to ease into the water at the bottom. There are levels of believability that the Indy movies have set up. Yes, extraordinarily things happen, but within a world with boundaries which have been necessarily been established. Like some other things, the duck over the cliff thing stepped over that line for me.
- The waterfalls. See above. You’re falling down two 80-foot+ drops in an open vehicle and everyone’s still there and climbing back in at the bottom? Just a bit wet and coughing on the water, eh? Yep.
- More stuff happens to Indy than his being proactive. He’s kidnapped and taken to the Nevada site. He escapes but then almost gets caught. Luckily, this rocketsled accidentally launches just in time and helps him escape again, and he’s almost nuked, barely escaping that, too. Mutt finds him and tells him about this problem. It’s Mutt’s switchblade that get them untied to turn the tables when they’re trapped on the truck. While Indy’s helping Irina solve the riddle of where to look on the map (and what was with that? I guess with her kinda mind-meld he didn’t know what he was doing? Otherwise, why would he not grab the map and make a break for it to solve it himself later?) Mutt’s the one who steps in and tries to make a break for freedom. Ox turns out to be alive, and - let’s face it - is the one the others are following for most of the key elements of exploration and solving the mystery. In the other movies, Indy pieces together the mystery and puts himself at risk to follow it through to its conclusion. Here, he was far more passenger to the events happening than the hero he’s been in the past. Not cool, and not particularly interesting.
- Jackie pointed out there were almost none of the quippy one-liners that have added to the flavour of the past movies.
All in all, I found it an alright distraction - in truth, I’m glad I saw it, as otherwise I always would’ve been wondering how it was - but was hands down my least favourite of the series. Like, in a totally different league. To the point where they should’ve just left the series alone as it stood, when it was something to be proud of. Honestly. And not only would I not want to see LaBoeuf take up the jacket, whip (switchblade?) and fedora as the next Indy (Harrison Ford is Indiana Jones, period - if he’s not doing any more movies, let the series die with some dignity), but if this is a sample of the production values and writing of where the new spinoff series would be headed, it would be poorly done anyway.
I’ll not give it a rating, but if I were to, it would be head-shakingly, unexpectedly low.
3 Comments so far
Leave a reply
My feelings about it were no where near as negative as yours. Must say, I didn’t notice the issue with the lighting as you did - I understand what you are saying, but it certainly didn’t take me out of the movie, at all. I thought the fridge was a little silly, but given the Pulp convention of keep adding one more problem to propel the plot forward, it didn’t bother me that much. I thought that Shia LaBoeuf’s character was weak when they were in the US in general, what with the taking offense to everything and wanting to fight, etc. That played into the soda shop scene, which I agree was very poor.
The stunts were more pretty over the top, but honestly, the waterfall scenes were no worse to me than the scene in the second movie involving jumping out of an airplane and using a life raft to break your fall, sliding down a mountain, falling again into a river, and still being okay.
I agree that the alien stuff didn’t feel right - I know what Lucas was trying to do (the first movies were patterned on the pulp films of the 40’s, where this was more based on the Sci-Fi films of the 50’s) but I think it was a bad creative choice.
I think you are giving Indy’s proactivity too much credit - after all, during the climactic scene of the first movie, he is tied to a stake while the scene unfolds. Captured for the second or third time in the movie. He gets the antidote in the second movie by chance, and again is actually taken over mentally, only to be acted on by outside forces. Indy is a survivor, but not entirely on his own strengths. The rocketsled is no different than the prop of the plane when fighting the german mechanic in the first movie (remember the whole series of coincidental activities that set that up?), or the rock crusher when fighting the big slaver in the second.
Overall, I think you may be comparing this movie to an idealized version of the earlier films you have in your head, and it is coming out worse. Or, alternately, something about it irritated you enough that you became super sensitive to the other things you saw as flaws.
Personally, I enjoyed the movie, though not as much as Raiders of the Lost Ark. If the alien thing had been downplayed, this movie could be right up there with the second and third for me, though.
I enjoyed the movie. It didn’t deviate from my idea of what Indiana Jones is.
Alex, you may have a point with idealizing the earlier movies. Time may’ve smoothed over the rougher parts of them for me, and I guess may also make this one less disappointing. I guess I just had a very different idea of how the movie would leave me feeling than it did, though my issues with it remain.
Jorge, you’re one crazy brown man.