I'll have to wait and answer that around October when it releases on DVD...I have to cherry-pick my theater films a little more carefully for movie budget reasons...
Do plan on seeing the 3 THE'S over the next few weeks..."The Strangers," "The Happening," and "The Incredible Hulk"
I can suspend my disbelief, but only when you tell me. I can accept the heart pull scene because (as DFM points out) they said it was magic. Fine. The monkey swing scene was NOT magic or special powers or anything of the sort; it was just bad.
And it's not just that refrigerator that was launched during a nuclear explosion (that for some reason occurred at the same military base where they store strange and valuable artifacts like alien bodies and the freaking Ark that formerly held God wooden boxes) and he survived, but that he wasn't even slightly injured in the incident.
Here comes spin off movie series. I love Raiders of the Lost Arc and the Last Crusade. Temple of Doom was ok. This movie sucked.
The examples cited above were from Temple of Doom, that I feel was a crappy movie also. The Last Crusade was better than TOD, but Raiders is the only movie in the series that I feel is excellent. Raiders had some intense action sequences (dragged behind the truck), but Spielberg was sure to show that Indy was a regular fella susceptible to bumps and bruises (remember the scene on the freighter with Marion?). All the movies after that, I feel, really "jumped the shark".
I don't mind unbelievable stuff when the director makes it clear that we are entering the world of the supernatural. For instance, if Indy had been holding magic pebbles or the Holy Grail or had crawled inside the Lost Ark before the nuclear explosion, I probably wouldn't have minded so much, but they tried to pass that refrigerator crap off as something that could plausibly happen without supernatural interference and that is what I found to be ridiculous. And yes, the TOD scene where they survive a fall from a plane in an inflatable raft is also ridiculous. You'll not be able to defend Crystal Skull by citing examples from TOD with me. Oh, and I sure hope they're not thinking of cashing in on future movies by having Transformer-Boy rope swinging through the jungle like he's freaking Tarzan. I keep giving George Lucas chance after chance hoping and wishing that he can still be relevant, but if one were to keep score, he's made almost as many steaming dung heaps has he has brilliant movies, and if you were to look at his record the past 20 years -- sheesh.
it looks like there are two camps:
1. those that thought the earlier movies (or at least one of them) were great works of the silver screen, and
2. those that were simply entertained by the mix of adventure, fantasy, and humor in the first three and are looking for more of the same.
the first group is disappointed by the new movie, the second liked it (or at least didn't walk away from the theater angry). i guess i will just have to test this theory myself, since i belong decidedly to the second group.
Interesting theory, but I would put myself solidly in the second of the aforementioned categories, and I thought the new Indy was pretty pathetic. Maybe I didn't walk away from the theater "angry" per se, but I sure wasn't happy. I don't have a problem with suspension of disbelief, but the whole aliens in an ancient city thing just really lost my attention. It was not worth the price of admission if you ask me. Wait for DVD.
I still think you need to consider the source material of Indiana Jones and that's the pulp stories and serials of the 30's, 40's and 50's. The 50's were all about sci-fi and aliens. Just like Star Wars, people had almost 20 years to ramp up their expectations to the point that nothing will satisfy. I enjoyed the movie because it was fun. I get tired of movies needing to be plausible and have a message. I go to be entertained and suspend disbelief and have fun. In reality, can people survive in a truck going over several waterfalls? Nope. But in the movies anything is possible and if you could survive it, I bet it would be fun. I had a blast watching it and the whole scene with the quicksand had me laughing hysterically and the ants were creepy. I like Shia Labeouf. Check out Disturbia if you haven't seen it yet. He gets a lot of flack because in today's world of internet and cable news, he's everywhere. But, in my opinion, he's not your typical pretty boy and he can act. He just happens to do it in some pretty blockbuster type films.
I think I may have figured out part of the problem. The first three were released in 1981, 1984, and 1989 respectively. That is 27, 24, and 19 years ago. How old were we all when we saw those for the first time??? Perhaps our first and lasting impressions of these films were a little more biased in a positive fashion in our younger years. Seeing this one in all our old ages may not affect us like it did back then. Even though all were unbelievable, twenty something years ago it was a little easier for me to become positively and emotionally engaged in such. Then, of course, that childhood impression of Indiana Jones sticks with us.
Or maybe not...
I dont know I watched Raiders the other day and it was as good now as it was when I first watched it. I havent seen the new one yet, but the old ones are still good every time I watch them. Question: Indy and his dad drank from the cup of life, yet Indy is old and his dad dead. I thought the cup of life let you stay youthful, like the soldier guarding it. What is the deal?