WORDSLINGER'S NOTE: This is a two-part review. Part 1 is my thoughts after my initial screening of the movie. Part 2 is after my second viewing. What a difference a day makes.

PART ONE - 5/22/08

Well, after months of writing about the new Indiana Jones movie, I have finally seen the film and am posting my review. Truth told ... I'm still processing it. It's been 19 years since 1989's last installment, Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade. Given nearly two decades of anticipation, expectations are so ridiculously high it would take a miracle to satisfy them. I told myself going in that as long as this was simply a good film, a worthy sequel (after all, no film could approach the brilliance of Raiders of the Lost Ark), I would be pleased.

So ... how is Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull? We'll get there. Just let me do it in my own way. When I said I'm still processing, I wasn't kidding. As of this writing, I'm equally thrilled and frustrated.

Even creator/producer George Lucas stated long before the film was released, "I know the critics are going to hate it. They already hate it. So there's nothing we can do about that. They've already made up their minds. The fans are all upset. They're always going to be upset. 'Why did he do it like this? And why didn't he do it like this?' They write their own movie, and then, if you don't do their movie, they get upset about it. So you just have to stand by for the bricks and the custard pies, because they're going to come flying your way."

George isn't clairvoyant - but Phantom Menace backlash has informed his thinking. Given the somewhat mixed reaction from critics and fans about Indy 4, perhaps he was onto something. What criticism has been leveled at this new film isn't entirely without merit, but having said that ... I still really enjoyed this movie. For those who have yet to see it, this review will be as SPOILER FREE as possible. (I already put too many spoilers in my Jonesing for Indy posts.)

Let's start with the good.

Harrison Ford is back! After years of being wasted in puerile fodder like Hollywood Homicide and Firewall (he hasn't made a great film since 1993's The Fugitive), our favorite archeologist/adventurer is once again on the screen in all his whip-snapping, fedora-donning, smirk-wearing, wise-cracking glory. He's old enough now to carry an AARP card, but for a man of 65, he can still pack a punch. He is in remarkable shape, both physically and mentally. His re-introduction here had me grinning like a little kid ... an expression that stayed on my face for much of this film. "Giddy as a schoolboy" if you will.

Minor spoilers ahead. Unless you've been living under a rock for the past few months, you know simply from the trailers that this film involves the Russians, Roswell, New Mexico, Area 51, the Mayans, mystical crystal skulls (duh), and ... aliens. Some have groaned at that last inclusion, but ... how is this any more fantastical than the Ark of the Covenant, Shankara stones, or the Holy Grail?

Set in 1957, the film opens in New Mexico at a mysterious (but verrrrrrry familiar) warehouse, where Russian baddies disguised as American soldiers have brought our kidnapped hero. They want Professor Henry Jones Junior to help them locate one crate (among seemingly millions), and are extremely persuasive in their coaxing.

Cate Blanchett is Irina Spalko, who with her Louise Brooks bob and tight grey uniform is sure to give many an adolescent boy a fantasy or two. Although her accent is straight out of Bullwinkle, she is dynamic, dangerous, and drop-dead gorgeous. She might not be the most threatening villain of the series, but she holds her own.

I will not spoil any more, but I will say this film opens with a great big BANG! It looks like Indiana Jones. It feels like Indiana Jones. By God, it IS Indiana Jones. His eventual escape from this situation (like you doubted it?) is one of the most exciting sequences of the entire series. It may strain credibility, but since when have any of these movies been accused of that?

Once Indy is back on his home turf, he is approached by a young greaser on a motorcycle (looking like he rode in from the set of The Wild One), who says his name is Mutt Williams. Mutt (Shia LaBeouf) has been sent by his mother to find Indy and ...

You know what? The plot (such as it is) is so complicated, I will let you decipher it for yourself. Though much negativity has been aimed at LaBeouf recently (damn you internet haters!), let me go on record as saying Shia more than holds his own here. In fact, next to the old man himself, he is the best thing about this movie. You may have heard rumors that he is actually the love child of Indy and Marion Ravenwood (you may have even read them here), but I will let you learn the truth on your own.

Karen Allen does return here as Indy's lost love, Marion, and she is just as much of a spitfire as she ever was. It is a huge pleasure to have her back, although, she is way underused. In fact ... this is where the problems begin.

Screenwriter David Koepp (Jurassic Park, Spider-Man, War of the Worlds) has cobbled together the best script he could from countless versions commissioned by Mr. Lucas over the past two decades. And sometimes the script feels like a patchwork of different artists. Massive action set pieces separated only by lengthy and confusing exposition regarding those titular glass noggins. I'll say there are two major problems here (the bad, if you will):

One - the action is so spectacular and OVER THE TOP! as to strain credibility like never before. A serious claim considering what series we're talking about.

Two - said action consistently overwhelms the all important emotional beats. When Indy and Marion are reunited after more than two decades, they almost immediately start arguing. We do eventually get to the truth and heart of the matter, but it is all done amidst bombast and chaos. Exciting bombast and chaos, but ... for God's sake, slow down and let us revel in seeing these two together again. Indy does deliver one line to Marion that strums those heart strings, but again, it is nearly drowned out by thrills. When Marion asks Indy if he's had a lot of women over the years, he tells her, "Yeah, but they all had the same problem." Suspiciously, Marion asks, "What was that?" With a tender smile, Indy replies, "They weren't you, honey." (Audience cheers and applauds.) Simply put, this movie could have benefited greatly from a whole lot more moments like that. Especially since ...

Raiders of the Lost Ark always reminded me of Casblanca - arguably the greatest film of all time. Given its Old Testament macguffin and epic Cecil B. DeMille finale, you could throw a healthy dash of The Ten Commandments in there, too. Its Nepal and Cairo locales serve this comparison, and no other actor reminds me of Humphrey Bogart as much as Harrison Ford. Indy and Marion were the closest thing to a modern day Rick and Ilsa that I've ever seen. Seeing this new film, I think I expected nothing less than a reunion between these two worthy of seeing Humphrey Bogart and Ingrid Bergman reunited decades after they said goodbye at that airport. Big expectations, I know. Alas, David Koepp's script does not fulfill this wish. I know ... how could it? The romantic finale smoothes this gripe a little bit, but by then the movie is over. I just wanted the script (and my favorite director) to dig a little deeper in this film's middle act, where it needed it the most.

Steven Spielberg does an admirable job at returning to a style of filmmaking he hasn't utilized since his early- to mid-career. I just wish he had taken as much care with the little moments as he did with the big. Much of the film is shot old-school, with physical sets and production design that are both jaw-dropping and eye-popping, to say the least. I'm sure Lucas was pushing for more CGI, but it has been used here to a minimum (at least until the end of the picture). Also, there are some nice, not-so-subtle nods to both Spielberg and Lucas films of the past - especially American Graffiti and Close Encounters. References are also made to the three previous Indy flicks, but these are few and will likely be noticed only by rabid fans (like me).

This film does strongly suggest that perhaps LaBeouf is being groomed to don the whip and fedora himself someday. Lucas has done more than just hint at this, saying, "I have an idea to make Shia the lead character next time and have Harrison come back like Sean Connery did in the last movie. I can see it working out. And it’s not like Harrison is even old. I mean, he’s 65 and he did everything in this movie. The old chemistry is there, and it’s not like he’s an old man. He’s incredibly agile; he looks even better than he did 20 years ago, if you ask me." If this film is successful enough to warrant another sequel (and to hush a quietly growing Phantom Menace-like backlash), I think Shia could eventually do a fine job. He is NOT the Jar-Jar Binks of this film. The finale makes it clear, however: Ford is not going quietly into that good night.

I realize it sounds like I didn't like this latest Indy installment. Nothing could be further from the truth. I can't remember the last film that literally made me feel like a little kid again in so many wonderful ways. One of my favorite heroes is back on the big screen, and he is as kick-ass as he ever was. Nostalgia (so popular these days - just ask Rocky, Rambo, and John McClane) is one of this movie's biggest strengths - and it is enough to cover a multitude of cinematic sins. All that, plus atomic blasts, jungle chases, sword duels on speeding jeeps, vine swinging, cars going over three-tiered waterfalls, man-eating ants, scorpions, snakes, and SPECTACLE, SPECTACLE, SPECTACLE!

So ... in fine, I was pleased and frustrated. Thrilled and disappointed. Giddy and grouchy. The very fact that this film got made and succeeds on as many different levels as it does, is a minor miracle. But a bevy of missed opportunities does put a damper on the proceedings. Or maybe that's just 19 years of impossible-to-satisfy anticipation talking. I think I need to see it again. Soon.

God help me ... I'm still Jonesing for Indy.

MOVIE GRADE - first viewing: B


PART TWO - 5/23/08

Just got back from my second view of the new Indy film, and ... for some reason, I was completely blown away this time. Go figure. I suspect now that this is a film that demands repeat viewings simply to overcome its biggest obstacle: 19 years of impossible-to-satisfy anticipation.

I still stand by everything I said in my first review (except for the final grade), but perhaps with adjusted expectations I saw anew all that was RIGHT with this movie. Spielberg has done the nigh impossible here, by bringing an iconic hero from the 80s into the new millennium. This film is fast, funny, and furious, with gargantuan amounts of spectacle and nostalgia.

I was surprised too by how many practical effects are in this film - the production design alone must have cost a fortune. Regarding the CGI effects that many have criticized ... I have no problem with any of it. It was extremely well done and convincing. (Why all this hate for anything CGI? If it's done well, it is visual eye candy that serves the story - and this does both.)

The photography by Janusz Kaminski does not quite match the style Douglas Slocombe used on the first three films, but to my mind is even more stunning - like pastel hued CinemaScope from the 50s. Perfect.

No, I still don't think it's as good as Raiders, but it fits nicely among the other sequels. In fact, after this second view, I hope audiences make this successful enough to warrant more - although next time I hope the film is a little smaller, more intimate.

I was even more impressed with Shia LaBeouf this time around - this kid has star quality, acting chops, and charisma to burn. The father/son vibe that Harrison and Sean Connery honed in Last Crusade is back here in spades with Ford and LaBeouf (make of that what you will).

I also saw Marion Ravenwood this time. On my first viewing, David Koepp's script gave her character so little to do, I didn't see Marion, I saw Karen Allen having a grand time reprising her beloved role. But upon another viewing, Marion was indeed there, one just has to pay attention.

Spielberg has my continued admiration for pulling this FEAT off with such style and humor. Yes, this film is too big and shiny at the expense of character (to put it mildly). But is an incredibly fun ride if you can suspend disbelief, lower emotional expectations, and understand this character had to be re-defined for a different era ... his and ours.

Go and enjoy it for what it is: an over-the-top, thrill-a-minute, hang-onto-your-fedora homage to 1950's sci-fi pictures. Go and revel in the company of an old and cherished friend.

I absolutely loved it.

Adventure has an old name ... and it is Indiana Jones.

MOVIE GRADE - second viewing: A-