(![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
cactuswatcher May. 29th, 2008 09:16 am)
cactuswatcher May. 29th, 2008 09:16 am)My impression on leaving the theater was, "Yes, it was good enough. But..." and it certainly was not the best of the series. I'm sure, I'll buy the DVD, and eventually I'll watch it more than any of the second series of Star Wars movies. I liked it, but I have no great urge to see it again right away.
The movie has a mish-mash of images from the 1950's, just as the other films no doubt had a mish-mash from the 30's. For instance the Red Scare was largely over by 1954 when Marlon Brando's The Wild One came out. Mud's motorcycle outfit screams Brando. Mud's hair-do belongs more to James Dean, though I couldn't tell you which movie he had that one in. Once James Dean and his hair became popular, the cap from Brando's motorcycle outfit went out-of-style fast. Now, all of that hair primping, which Mud does, looks weird without a duck-tail hair-do (which Dean and Sal Mineo popularized in Rebel Without a Cause, I think). Certainly by the end of the 1950's guys hair primping and duck-tails went together like salt and pepper.
Crystal Skull is going to fall into the same category as Temple of Doom. There really isn't any plot to it other than to get to the far end of the movie. There are interesting themes there - Indy becoming more like his father, Indy learning to be like a father himself, and Mud being like both his father and his mother. I think the most interesting theme was the rekindled love between Indy and Marian. But none of the themes were well developed here. The other films all had some semblance of a strong religious/moral theme. There is none of that here save lip service. Together these incomplete and missing themes make Crystal Skull an obviously weaker movie than Raiders or Last Crusade."
I think John Hurt's performance as "Ox" was every bit as impressive as Sean Connery's Henry, Sr. But Ox is a minor character. So the lack of a second, forceful, good figure is noticeable. Marian was that figure in Raiders But Karen Allen isn't that person in Crystal Skull. Despite the escapade with the amphibious duck (a great prop for the 1950's!) her natural mannerisms are of a woman who has become a mother and learned to take extra precautions for herself, to be sure she'll be there for her child. Call it intended, bad direction or whatever, Marian mostly acts like an old lady not an adventurer. In itself that's not fatal. The old Marian is back every time she smiles, and there is no question Indy would be as attracted to her as ever. But that leaves Mud as the foil for Indiana. But Mud is too erratic to be more than a grownup Short Round or a less whiny Willie, and Temple of Doom wasn't that satisfying.
The movie has a mish-mash of images from the 1950's, just as the other films no doubt had a mish-mash from the 30's. For instance the Red Scare was largely over by 1954 when Marlon Brando's The Wild One came out. Mud's motorcycle outfit screams Brando. Mud's hair-do belongs more to James Dean, though I couldn't tell you which movie he had that one in. Once James Dean and his hair became popular, the cap from Brando's motorcycle outfit went out-of-style fast. Now, all of that hair primping, which Mud does, looks weird without a duck-tail hair-do (which Dean and Sal Mineo popularized in Rebel Without a Cause, I think). Certainly by the end of the 1950's guys hair primping and duck-tails went together like salt and pepper.
Crystal Skull is going to fall into the same category as Temple of Doom. There really isn't any plot to it other than to get to the far end of the movie. There are interesting themes there - Indy becoming more like his father, Indy learning to be like a father himself, and Mud being like both his father and his mother. I think the most interesting theme was the rekindled love between Indy and Marian. But none of the themes were well developed here. The other films all had some semblance of a strong religious/moral theme. There is none of that here save lip service. Together these incomplete and missing themes make Crystal Skull an obviously weaker movie than Raiders or Last Crusade."
I think John Hurt's performance as "Ox" was every bit as impressive as Sean Connery's Henry, Sr. But Ox is a minor character. So the lack of a second, forceful, good figure is noticeable. Marian was that figure in Raiders But Karen Allen isn't that person in Crystal Skull. Despite the escapade with the amphibious duck (a great prop for the 1950's!) her natural mannerisms are of a woman who has become a mother and learned to take extra precautions for herself, to be sure she'll be there for her child. Call it intended, bad direction or whatever, Marian mostly acts like an old lady not an adventurer. In itself that's not fatal. The old Marian is back every time she smiles, and there is no question Indy would be as attracted to her as ever. But that leaves Mud as the foil for Indiana. But Mud is too erratic to be more than a grownup Short Round or a less whiny Willie, and Temple of Doom wasn't that satisfying.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
From:
no subject
They're the same. The only difference is the buttons.
So the most part, I pretty much agree with your assessment. Good enough, but not great. Lacked depth.
From:
no subject
*hand waves*