Monday, June 02, 2008

Indiana Jones 4

Well, what can you say about this movie? Like almost all recent Spielberg movies, Its only to see in theaters. I mean, if you see it this in your house, it will not be such a good experience. This is bad, since with the older Indiana Jones movies, it doesn't matter if we see them on the theater or on our TV screen, it's the same: cool entertainment. But I'm dispersing about this movie. With this I wanted to say it's a nice experience, like seeing Transformers or War of the Worlds: very nice on the theater screen, but I never want to see them again outside of it... So probably I will skip Indiana Jones 4 when its on TV on a Sunday afternoon.
Now about the movie itself, I though it was a weak plot. Yeah, with all Indiana Jones we have something esoteric happening, like the Ark of the Covenant releasing electricity, or some indian guy removing the heart with his bare hands, or a Crusader with 700 years old... Yeah, they all have these unreal stuff, but come on, it's like, 2% of the movie, not 20%. And I'm not including the nuclear explosion. In fact, that was the part I mostly liked in the film, since it had that cheesy connection to the Ark of the Covenant from the first movie. When I saw the warehouse in the theater, I almost though 'they want the ark...'. But returning to the subject, Aliens??? come on... surely Lucas could come up with something better... I mean, Indiana Jones is a arqeologist right. I know there exist lot's of speculation in people about aliens and the South American ancient cultures, but that's it, speculation. Surely they could come up with something different. The Indiana Jones I was expecting to see would have more to do with facts than fantasy.
Now, the rest of the film is very forced and predictable. Who had not though, when Shia LaBeouf refers to his mother, in Marion from the first movie? And the part when she says it was his son, come on, that was so predictable. I was really hoping for that not to happen, not that Shia LaBeouf wouldn't be a good successor, but due to the cliché!!! About the action, the movie has lots of action, and very viewable, but extremely unrealistic. Yeah, jumping from a plane in a rubber boat and surviving is not very realistic, or the several snakes scenes done in the first movie, but in this film, almost all the action is impossible. In a jungle, with almost no roads, have a sword fight on top of a vehicle going 50 km/h... And the shocks, crashes, etc. It's totally unrealistic. If the other movies where like that, this would not be negative... But the fighting scenes in the other movies are realistic. Even the famous scene with Harrison Ford going under the truck... It was filmed, there where no effects, and he had rib injures after that. This in fact is a problem of CGI, and particularly of the latest Spielberg/Lucas films (taking out the Munich). They have so much CGI available and they put it in almost every tough scene (...otherwise it would be difficult to shoot), that somewhere they've stopped asking: Is this possible? Could this really happen? Is this bullshit? (the other day I've made a post about Shoot'em Up with Clive Owen... this is the perfect example of a movie where they put the impossible and try to pass it like real).
To end, I heard there will be an Indiana Jones 5, which will also be the first double sequel to another well known set of films: Indiana Jones meets Starwars: the raiders of the lost Lightsaber. Oh yeah, now you will be able to see Indiana learning the way's of the force with Yoda.

No comments: