HOLY SHIT! I saw Indiana Jones last night and I loved every moment of it. Its a very different Indiana Jones, but it’s still him all right.

spoiler warning: From hereonin, there will be a lot of spoilers.

The story starts in the 1950s. There was this feeling of ‘hmm, so this is how Back to the Future looks like if Spielberg directed it’. And just like Raiders, you don’t see Indy till about 3-4 minutes into the show. And from there onwards, the action accelerates. While previous Indy films had Dr. Jones chasing for other artifacts that are not really related with the show (the Idol, the Ashes, and the Cross of Coronado), this movie starts off with an artifact that is directly connected to the main story plot (I’ll get back to this later).

Indiana Jones is now a very much more matured character, more straight-to-the point, though his wisecracks are still intact. In the past, he would risk other people’s lives and wasn’t as compromising, but in the 18 years that has passed, his characterization changed. He’s now a decorated war hero, and frankly, very much more compromising than previously. He willingly succumbed to the Ruskies many times in the movie without a sign of defiance (though it could all be an act as he had spy training)

Instead, his youthful defiance and stance is now taken by Mutt Williams (who turned out to be his son, har har). There is an acute role reversal from this Indiana Jones and the Indiana Jones from the Last Crusade; which I think is a very fresh change for Indy. I must say that Lucas and Spielberg have updated this character very well. He’s aged gracefully, very much like wine. He’s still very likable, and impossible to hate. He had his flaws, but they’re mostly covered by his appearance of maturity.

This film deals with aging and responsibility very very well. Out of a sudden, the care-free Indiana Jones is piled on with a 18-year old responsibility that is his son, and that changed the whole dynamic of the character. He’s no longer Indiana Jones, do-as-I-wish adventurer; he’s now Indiana Jones, I-better-watch-what-I-do adventurer.

Another sign of Indy dealing with his aging is that he is largely called Henry in this movie. When a person moves on to constantly being called his real name, that is surely a sign of maturity.

You’ll notice I didn’t talk much about the skull, as it turns out, after digesting a while on the movie, that it IS indeed a MacGuffin (though it didn’t seem so). The whole theme of the movie is something that strikes close to my heart - knowledge. Irina Spalko even uses a line that I use myself, only too often - ‘I like to know things. And things I don’t know, I find out’. Irina was a very well fleshed out character. She has a personal greed for knowledge, and uses her Red association to get it. At times, I actually feel for her, as you know, I like to know things, and I like to find out everything about everything (which led to her final doom, bleh).

The cinematography in this film is nothing short of breathtaking. As Nigel puts it, its like Kaminski chanelling Slocombe (is he still alive?). But again, there was way too much lights in the show. Just like video games nowadays face the over-blooming problem, at times this movie faces it too. I chalk this up to a few factors: we use different lights in filming nowadays as compared to in the 80s, and the 1950s were arguably brighter than the 30s.

While this movie is a fun fun ride, its not without its criticisms. In the first movie, Indiana Jones had to dodge Belloq, and the natives; in Temple of Doom, Indy had to jump out of a plane on an inflatable raft; in the third, he had to escape an exploding ship. How to top that in Indiana Jones 4? Why, you let Indiana Jones be right in the middle of a nuclear bomb, and let him survive it! That was too much for me. I am willing to bet though, that sort of nuke testing must have been masterminded by someone like Hugh Everett.

Also, the movie felt like the filmmakers were trying to stuff too much story into the movie. Granted, this is actually an Indiana Jones with a more complex plot and subplots, but I feel like Spielberg and Lucas were trying to stuff too much. Maybe its the audience nowadays who demand more. But hey, the first Indiana Jones is still damn fun and still a bloody good watch.

And oh, speaking of Lucas and audiences… he really really needs to stop stuffing references to his own films. Wake up call for George: You’re not going to sell me the Young Indiana Jones series Indiana by telling Mutt (and by virtue of that, the audience), that he’s met Pancho Villa. You’re not going to sell me that series… because I already have it :p. Also, there were many references to the old film (you actually see the Ark of the Covenent!), which I feel, were unnecessary, and feels like its trying to impress on the audience that it’s still an Indiana Jones movie.

Also, there wasn’t enough tension in the film. Maybe its the way that mature Indy deals with the situation (he deals it very smoothly now), but the tension of the previous movie has gone a bit slack in this one. Speaking of tension, there also wasn’t enough sexual tension between Marion and Indy. It feels like they’ve known each other for ages. Marion still has bits of her old spunk, but that’s it.

All in all, this is an example of how old-school 3-act plots with properly fleshed out characters should actually be executed. While it is not as good as Raiders, or The Last Crusade, I put this on par with Temple of Doom (which was the film that stood out the most - and now it has a brother). 8.5/10 for me. Fun stuff. I’m watching it a third time today.

Cool? DiggDel.icio.usTechnoratiFeedsterFurl
RSS feed for comments on this post  |  TrackBack URI for this post