ViewGuide

Created May 23, 2008 04:00AM PST • Edited May 23, 2008 04:00AM PST

1. Quality

2. Summary

   Great 4.0

   I didn’t think that “Kingdom of the Crystal Skull” could be as entertaining, engrossing or satisfying. Not the best of the bunch but deserving of its place amongst the other films.

4. Acting

   Great 4.0

   The acting here is pretty brilliant, especially considering the talent on display. The co-stars are many in number however, and this does detract from their performances, with such actors as John Hurt and Jim Broadbent given small roles, hardly befitting of their acting prowess.

5. Male Stars Really Great 4.5

   Harrison Ford resurrects (no old age pun intended) the character of Indiana Jones here as if he had never been gone, and is a large part of why the film was so surprisingly good. He seems to just fall back into the role, albeit as an older, wiser, creakier Dr. Jones, which is totally befitting of the character’s portrayal.

6. Female Stars Great 4.0

   Cate Blanchett plays the weirdest villain yet, an icy Russian agent who seeks the eponymous Crystal Skull. Having such a famous actress as such a bizarre villain was off-putting at times, but she hams it up and makes the performance sinister enough to register as evil here.

7. Female Costars Very Good 3.5

   The only other female character, Marion (from the first film) pops up with almost a cameo performance, and is used to push forward the plot with some revealing truths. However, some of the spark between her and Jones can be seen, evoking “Raiders” and reminding the viewer of what came before.

8. Male Costars Great 4.0

   Shia LaBoeuf, John Hurt and Ray Winstone are the supporting male actors in this film – that’s how good it is. LaBouef’s character Mutt Williams completely apes Marlon Brando’s character from “On The Waterfront”, right down to the swagger and self-assurance, and the rumours about his character…well, I’ll let you see for yourself! He manages to contend with Ford very well here, showing that he is becoming a very good young actor. John Hurt plays an insane professor with knowledge of the skulls, and so has very little to do but appear mad. Winstone is Mac, Jones’ war buddy, and his motivations and actions do create a little intrigue, but in all honesty he is wasted a bit here too.

10. Film

    Great 4.0

    The film looks good and sounds amazing, which was to be expected from Steven Spielberg. AT many points however the CGI does distract, and in a series which always relied on the practical, it’s a shame to be able to spot so many computer effects.

11. Direction Great 4.0

    This strangely didn’t feel like a Spielberg film to me, but then I guess that he’s changed in his approach to filmmaking over time. The quips, crazy action and parental complexes still remina though, so you can see glimpses of him in there. What worries me is that the dirty fingerprints of George Lucas can be seen throughout this film; Spielberg doesn’t have as much power as he used to!

12. Play Great 4.0

    The dialogue is almost as good as before, particularly when concerned with the professor’s age, his “allegiance” to America and his profession itself. What it really does however is remind you of the other films. There is a lot of exposition to be made, and this sometimes takes too much of the dialogue away from situations where comedy would have perhaps been more appropriate.

13. Music Really Great 4.5

    What can I say but “Raiders March”? You know from the off that the music will be awesome, and it doesn’t disappoint. Whenever that particular motif began, you could feel the audience in the cinema smiling and the anticipation increasing. John Williams seems to have that power through his fantastic compositions, and the “Ark Theme” pops up, again maintaining that link between the films.

14. Visuals Very Good 3.5

    The visuals were my main (and probably only) problem with the film. The over-reliance on CGI really took away from a lot of the action, and the insistence that a lot of it was still physical and real is a lie, really. The conclusion to the film is the only part when CGI is not only totally necessary (when you watch it, you WILL understand) but appears better than at any other point. And what is wrong with getting real prairie dogs, scorpions, monkeys and ants?! CGI animals used when the real alternative created much of the tension in the past films makes absolutely no sense whatsoever, and again I sense Luca’s digital obsession seeping through.

15. Content

16. Edge

    Tame 1.3

    The film has no profanity; it’s an Indiana Jones movie. There’s no sex at all, just the joking about it, as per usual. There is plenty of violence however, as Jones fights his way out of every single encounter, the audience feeling the punches more when he gets hit now than before!

17. Sex Innocent 1.0

18. Violence Fierce 1.9

19. Rudeness Polite 1.0

21. Reality

    Fantasy 5.0

    The Indiana Jones films always begin in total realism, but as anyone who has seen any of them can clearly recall, the Ark of the Covenant, Sankara Stones and the Holy Grail are not only fantastical relics, but fantastical relics that have fantastical powers. The crystal skull is no different, only that the focus shifts from religious to extraterrestrial, which will disarm many people. What allowed me to move past this was that the film is set at the time in which extraterrestrial life and UFO’s were looming large in the public conciousness, and so in allowing yourself to suspend disbelief again, this plot device will appear perfectly in keeping with the other films.

22. Circumstantial Fantasy 5.0

23. Biological Fantasy 5.0

24. Physical Fantasy 5.0