ROTTEN TOMATOES: Cannes 2008: Review - Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull Comments

Cannes 2008: Review - Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull

by Joe Utichi | May 18, 2008

Summary

The early RT verdict on the fourth chapter in the Indy franchise. Is it more Phantom Menace than A New Hope? Back to Article

(21-40 of 50 posts) | Reply

Floor Man writes:
on May 18 2008 01:26 PM

:( Oh, well. I'm still going to see it on its opening weekend. To me, Indy's Indy. I just think that the total mindset of film-making is inherently different now, and therefore, the approach to the whole process affects the final film. Consequently, I really don't think anyone could ever make a movie now that possesses the same style and creative texture that was abundant (even baseline) in Hollywood production 20-30 years ago.... :|

Hmmm...this makes me think that either The Dark Knight (or even Iron Man?) might end up taking this year's box office crown.

Prince Caspian isn't doing so well, and will certainly end up with less than the final gross of its predecessor....

I have a feeling that Iron Man is going to be the "Transformers" of this summer: the movie that people knew was going to do well, but didn't know it was going to do *so* well. :) I could see it barely pushing past $300 million near the end, as I also predict The Dark Knight will.

Additionally and lastly, I really hope The Incredible Hulk does well...this version looks so much better than Lee's, and I haven't seen anything that Edward Norton's been in that I haven't liked.

Woo! Summer, here we go!

(Reply to this)

whiskeyriver writes:
on May 18 2008 01:38 PM

Naaah...the original three were just as absurd and just as unbelievable. Some of these critics seem to forget that...that they are expecting a completely different film than they SHOULD be expecting...one that is just good fun. After all, they ARE based on old adventure serials that were at their heart, very absurd and escapist fun. If this one was any different, I'd be upset. And if this film DIDN'T use CGI, but rather old special effects techniques, people would have found it laughable and would have been just as upset. Bring it on, I say!

(Reply to this)

whiskeyriver writes:
on May 18 2008 01:43 PM

Here's ANOTHER fresh review:
http://www.tcpalm.com/news/2008/may/18/review-indiana-jones-and-kingdom-crystal-skull/

(Reply to this)

whiskeyriver writes:
on May 18 2008 01:44 PM

And ANOTHER fresh review:
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/blogs/content/shared-blogs/palmbeach/erstein/entries/2008/05/indiana_jones_a.html

(Reply to this)

arendr writes:
on May 18 2008 01:46 PM

This is one movie where I think I'll wait until I see it myself. I don't expect it to be the greatest movie ever, or even this year (thanks to Mr. Nolan) so I probably won't be let down.

(Reply to this)

Novastar. writes:
on May 18 2008 01:47 PM

It's a damn shame they didn't go with Drabonts script as that man knows to write a script as no other.

(Reply to this)

cloudparty writes:
on May 18 2008 01:58 PM

In reply to this comment (#1739231)
Just not true. "Temple of Doom" is bad Indy and a bad movie. Just sayin'.

(Reply to this)

sunsaz writes:
on May 18 2008 02:16 PM

A couple more things to put this into perspective:
-Remember that this is Spielberg's first big budget popcorn film since "Jurassic Park" 15 years ago. Since then, he's only done dramas or sci-fi films with subliminal themes.
-As much as most of us loved the ILM models and effects growing up, CGI is here to stay and there's no going back. It's a hard fact, but a fact nonetheless.
-It'll be better than "Postal."

(Reply to this)

jokerboy1991 writes:
on May 18 2008 02:28 PM

In reply to this comment (#1739768)
What "Temple Of Doom" is a bad movie? Are you NUTS!!! All Indy flicks were great... My order of best indy flicks #1-Raiders, #2-Last Crusade, #3- Temple... I think The Chrystal Skull will be better then Temple though.

(Reply to this)

kodie131 writes:
on May 18 2008 02:31 PM

I hope Jar-Jar makes a cameo in Crystal Skull

(Reply to this)

arendr writes:
on May 18 2008 02:36 PM

I have read such varying opinions on this movie, and it's just been premiered! Reviews I've read have said a lot of opposite things to this one, such as the CG aspect. One said that it's very minimal compared to most summer blockbusters.

And Temple of Doom is not a bad movie. It's not the best Indy, but it's a great movie. Capshaw is the only real problem I have with that one.

(Reply to this)

Xavier Telouran writes:
on May 18 2008 02:49 PM

On a slightly related/unrelated note, who thinks the South Park episode with George Lucas and Steven Spielberg will be re-airing this week?

(Reply to this)

CallMeBakes writes:
on May 18 2008 03:00 PM

Many people have wanted to see this movie fail from the beginning. I just don't understand it. I love Indy and expect this one to be really fun and exciting. Will it be as good as the others? Probably not, but that's just because the others are pure classics. Raiders basically redefined the action movie.
There's a double standard here. The review above is an example. If the movie had spent a lot of time on the other actors to develop them, they would complain that not enough time was spent on Indy. If they spend most time on Indy, they complain not enough time was spent on the other actors. It's lose-lose for Spielberg and Lucas.
I'll go see it though and enjoy it.

(Reply to this)

lateralus2 writes:
on May 18 2008 03:25 PM

Well as much as I liked the Indy films as a kid, I can honestly say that this film has always had a ? over it. Its like the rolling stones doing a tour in wheel chairs. Why did they need to make it?

Saying that I'll still go to see it in the first week, cause spielberg always makes good movies.

But to all those who think it will be box office champ for the year, think again. The winner is THE DARK KNIGHT!!!! Heath R.I.P

(Reply to this)

Voice Over Guy writes:
on May 18 2008 03:29 PM

If you're paying attention to all of the reviews pouring in from Cannes, most are very favorable, so I wouldn't worry too much about Joe Utichi's review.

(Reply to this)

smi1ey writes:
on May 18 2008 03:35 PM

not real peril? they do know that the original Indy movies used special effects too, don't they? personally ive immensly enjoyed all the new star wars films, so I'm not worried about some bad reviews. its Indy. it'll be cheesy, unbelievable, and quite entertaining. even if its not technically sound as it should be!

(Reply to this)

Some guy you dont know writes:
on May 18 2008 03:51 PM

In reply to this comment (#1739768)
Here's one of the 4 people who still doesn't like Temple of Doom.

(Reply to this)

Some guy you dont know writes:
on May 18 2008 03:56 PM

Roger Ebert just gave Indy 4 three and a half stars.

Nuff said.

(Reply to this)

splatterscribe writes:
on May 18 2008 04:03 PM

This review is terrible. I mean the waffling is ridiculous: It begins with "it confirms the worst" then ends up at "there's a lot to love here." I don't hold the RT critics in particularly high regard and this sort of indirect, vague writing is why.

Look, I don't care if the film gets trashed here or not. I'm gonna see it opening night and decide for myself anyway (though it's worth mentioning that the majority seems to favor it at the moment)- but the only clear opinion I took from this review was that the author didn't like the Star Wars prequels (???). If the critic is gonna play the angry fanboy lashing out because Unca George didn't give him the Star Wars treat that he had concocted in his mind with the prequels, maybe he shouldn't be the one assigned to review a film in another series Lucas is involved with. As it is, I'm a lot more skeptical about the open mindedness of the author of this piece when he went into the film than I am about the quality of IJ&TKOTC.

(Reply to this)

barnaby Jones writes:
on May 18 2008 04:59 PM

Most of the reviews coming in are postive, Ebert gave it 3.5/4

(Reply to this)

Related Links

Cannes Film Festival 2008

Related Articles

Most Discussed

Latest News

Latest Interviews

Latest Features

Sponsored Links