My parent’s came up to visit for Memorial Day weekend and since we didn’t have any baseball this weekend, we decided to head out to a movie. Mom and Dad wanted to take the kids to see the new Indiana Jones movie. It seemed a good idea, and we were wanting to see it anyway, so we set out this morning to the theater. They started showing the movie at 10 am, but we went to the 11:15 showing instead.
I was very impressed with the movie on the whole. I don’t want to give it away to anyone who has yet to see the movie, so I won’t go into details. One of the main plot devices in the movie has been a problem with some viewers, but when we look back at the previous movies, is the current item any more unbelievable than the items in the predecessor movies? Holy fire melting Nazi’s when they find the Arc of the Covenant, Indian priest’s chanting a word and burrowing into your chest, a Nazi collaborator rapid-aging because he drank water from the wrong cup? Are any of those more “far-out” than axxxxnx?
So I didn’t have a problem with the plot device. The movie itself didn’t have any of the blockbuster scenes that the previous movies had. Yes, I know the wxxxxxxxx scene is there, but it doesn’t come close to the previous movies, especially with the cool scenes of the second and third movies.
Finally, the ending came, and I must admit that it wasn’t the “pass the legacy” ending I expected when I found out that Mutt was realy xxxxx xxxxx xxx. I expected this movie was going to contain more of a setup for the new adventure star to take over, and while it was to some extent, it wasn’t nearly as much as I expected.
One thing I was very happy about came after the credits. Yes, with the recent trend of putting a cool scene afte the end of the credits, we stayed for all of them to make sure we didn’t miss anything. I was overjoyed that Spielberg and Lucas didn’t put a special scene after the credits. Not that I have a problem with that method as such (I loved the one after Iron Man). And not really that I have a problem with Lucas/Spielberg doing it. It just seems to me that Indiana Jones wasn’t right for that kind of scene. So, I’m glad they didn’t do it.
Really there were only two problems I had with the movie. First, the opponent isn’t Nazi, it is Russian, and we aren’t pre- or during WWII, but during the cold war. To me, that just didn’t seem like Indy. Indy should be facing off against the Nazi’s. Second, during the scene where Indy was being interviewed, they refer to him as Colonel Jones. While it wasn’t a huge deal, I didn’t like that he was in the military in the war. Everyone is more than welcome to their own opinion of Indy, but I don’t see him (at least the movie version) as someone who would fit in well with the military. Now don’t get me wrong, I think he would fight the Nazi’s any and every way he could, but just not in the military.
One last thing. I read today that the Russians are upset that this movie is portraying Russians in a bad light. Well, I was very surprised that anyone would say this after seeing the movies. Granted, the “Cold War” era russians are the bad guys, but there is much more disparagement of the American McCarthy-ism. In fact, if it weren’t close to true, it would have been funny. But the bad portrayal of Russians pales in comparison to the light shed on our own ugly past.
Call for help: If you’ve seen the movie, I’m trying to remember the conclusion of the following quote:
“When academia descends into hysteria…” – If you remember it, please pass the info along (TIA).
CC
