User Score
5.3

Mixed or average reviews- based on 1114 Ratings

User score distribution:

Where To Watch

Stream On
Stream On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling

User Reviews

  1. JonK.
    Oct 22, 2008
    3
    Very disappointing. Right off the bat, the lighting was noticeably bad - artificial and fake. Awkward and fake pretty much sums it all up for the rest of the show. I could suspend belief enough to really enjoy Independence Day but this show was rather insulting.
  2. RayH.
    Oct 22, 2008
    1
    This movie is absolutely pathetic! It represents everything that is wrong with movies today. They are ruined by trying to appeal to everyone and in doing so, they don't please anyone. Shia L. was obviously added to appeal to the teeny boppers. The CGI gophers and the monkeys that "befriend" Shia L.'s character within a matter of seconds were added to appeal to the kiddies. The This movie is absolutely pathetic! It represents everything that is wrong with movies today. They are ruined by trying to appeal to everyone and in doing so, they don't please anyone. Shia L. was obviously added to appeal to the teeny boppers. The CGI gophers and the monkeys that "befriend" Shia L.'s character within a matter of seconds were added to appeal to the kiddies. The fake ants, the sword fight between two moving vehicles while Shia's character is hit with branches in his most private area, not to mention that the main characters were bullet proof, makes me want to vomit. Top it off with falling down three waterfalls without a scratch and Indiana Jones surviving a direct Nuclear blast because he was inside of a "lead fridge" and then thrown for a country mile unscratched makes this film completely useless to society. Anyone that is giving it a good review is doing so because they are one of the previously mentioned groups or because their kids laughed. This movie is pathetic! Expand
  3. ScottE.
    May 22, 2008
    3
    Being a big fan of the series this movie actually had me angry. Right from the opening dialogue it seems harrison is phoning this one in. I don't blame him though, not much else you can do with what he's been given. I almost walked out at the "Tarzan" scene.
  4. CN
    May 23, 2008
    2
    If you expect a quality picture and an amazing gripping story like in the first three, you will definitely not find it in number 4. You would think great film giants such as George Lucas and Steven Spielberg would consider ending their career on a high note; unfortunately, this movie was very disappointing borderline awful.
  5. ChanciusD.
    May 23, 2008
    3
    Worst Spielberg movie I have ever seen. The screen play is atrocious. All of the principle actor really enjoy their parts, but do to the plot their performances lack. All of the other Indy films have instances where the viewer needs to suspend disbelief, but the outlandish situations in this one leave only a feeling of awkwardness.
  6. KyleB.
    May 24, 2008
    0
    This was the biggest piece of sh*t I've seen in years. It was even more disappointing than The Phantom Menace. Imagine watching a fan film made in an all new Indiana Jones theme park ride. Who wants to be Indy? How 'bout you Grandpa! The writing sucks, the acting sucks, the special effects really suck, even the lighting sucks! I could have forgiven it all its other faults if This was the biggest piece of sh*t I've seen in years. It was even more disappointing than The Phantom Menace. Imagine watching a fan film made in an all new Indiana Jones theme park ride. Who wants to be Indy? How 'bout you Grandpa! The writing sucks, the acting sucks, the special effects really suck, even the lighting sucks! I could have forgiven it all its other faults if only Harrison Ford hadn't looked so sedated and completely uninterested in what was happening. My eight dollars should be worth at least one scene with some dramatic tension. Expand
  7. JamesG.
    May 24, 2008
    2
    This is one of the worst films I have ever seen. It is a disgrace to the Indiana Jones franchise and should never be seen by anyone.
  8. jackS.
    May 24, 2008
    0
    [***SPOILER***] Aliens. Are you kidding me. Aliens. You guys are rating this too high. When did Aliens ever cross a Indiana Jones movie. This movie was just a pass the torch movie to Shia. Lucas is crazy. He screwed up the Star Wars series and now this. HE HAD 10 YEARS TO WRITE THIS. It's unbelievable how bad this movie was. I would write more but I don't want to miss the Aliens [***SPOILER***] Aliens. Are you kidding me. Aliens. You guys are rating this too high. When did Aliens ever cross a Indiana Jones movie. This movie was just a pass the torch movie to Shia. Lucas is crazy. He screwed up the Star Wars series and now this. HE HAD 10 YEARS TO WRITE THIS. It's unbelievable how bad this movie was. I would write more but I don't want to miss the Aliens landing on my front lawn. - OUT! Expand
  9. shawnc.
    May 24, 2008
    3
    Wow. What a silly, uninvolving disappointment. Spielberg is done.
  10. DimitreR.
    May 24, 2008
    1
    I'm an Indy fanboy; I grew up with the original three movies and loved every single one of them (even Temple of Doom). I was of course, extremely excited to see this one. The first 45 minutes were good but then the movie morphed into a distasteful combination of X-files, National Treasure, and Tarzan... The magic's simply gone and ultimately there was no reason whatsoever for I'm an Indy fanboy; I grew up with the original three movies and loved every single one of them (even Temple of Doom). I was of course, extremely excited to see this one. The first 45 minutes were good but then the movie morphed into a distasteful combination of X-files, National Treasure, and Tarzan... The magic's simply gone and ultimately there was no reason whatsoever for this film to be made... well okay, I guess it was for the money... Speilburg, Lucas; how far the mighty have fallen. Expand
  11. Nate
    May 24, 2008
    0
    This shallow, pathetic effort defiles and insults the legacy of "Raiders of the Lost Ark," and raises major questions about the ongoing viability of Speilberg as a legitimate creative force. Much as we may fondly remember the mastery that was "Raiders," this film is simply a cheap and insulting exuse to exploit nostalgia for the original films to get people into the theater. Yes. It is This shallow, pathetic effort defiles and insults the legacy of "Raiders of the Lost Ark," and raises major questions about the ongoing viability of Speilberg as a legitimate creative force. Much as we may fondly remember the mastery that was "Raiders," this film is simply a cheap and insulting exuse to exploit nostalgia for the original films to get people into the theater. Yes. It is that bad. The dialogue consists of little more than lame one-liners, the plot is overstuffed and underdeveloped, the acting (especially Indy himself) is wooden and embarrasing, character development is non-existent, and even the action sequences themselves are unoriginal and uninspired. This is an offensivley bad film. Expand
  12. peter
    May 25, 2008
    3
    We already seen the great car chaches on a cliff, secret temples hidden in the rocks, and incredible non-human made objects that can change the world. This movie was just like a remake of all the different Indiana-Jones movies put together! this movie was disaproving!
  13. whydidtheymakethis??
    May 25, 2008
    3
    A big disappointment. This film is a caricature of the original trilogy, almost completely devoid of any heart or character development.. and don't even get me started on the plot, starting out of nowhere, quickly becoming tedious, and ending preposterously. I feel cheated as I disregarded the negative press and watched this film based on my love of the original three. I guess I A big disappointment. This film is a caricature of the original trilogy, almost completely devoid of any heart or character development.. and don't even get me started on the plot, starting out of nowhere, quickly becoming tedious, and ending preposterously. I feel cheated as I disregarded the negative press and watched this film based on my love of the original three. I guess I should have realised what was coming when the cinema screened an advert for a Indy 4 toy just before the film started- a movie designed around merchandising bah. Expand
  14. MichelleS
    May 25, 2008
    3
    I will admit I have never seen any of the Indiana Jones movies all the way through except this one. I hear they are really good, but if I were to base my decision to watch them off this installment, I would not waste my $1.99 rental fee or gas to drive to the video store to get them. This movie sucked, bad. I gave it a 3 because it had it's moments that were mildly entertaining but I will admit I have never seen any of the Indiana Jones movies all the way through except this one. I hear they are really good, but if I were to base my decision to watch them off this installment, I would not waste my $1.99 rental fee or gas to drive to the video store to get them. This movie sucked, bad. I gave it a 3 because it had it's moments that were mildly entertaining but the entire movie looked like it had been shot in front of a green screen (was it??). At the end of it all the best part of this movie was the snow caps I ate during it. My boyfriend is officially banned from picking the movies we see after this. It was his third strike after Cloverfield and No Country For Old Men! Expand
  15. BrandonH.
    May 25, 2008
    3
    Replace Ford with a character like Mr. Bean, and this movie would have been hilarious. Sadly, it just comes off as depressing and poorly written and directed (seriously Steve, lay off the soft focus).
  16. Paul
    May 26, 2008
    1
    The film starts with a bad CGI gopher, and really goes downhill from there. Bad plot, too many wooden and supporting actors and Indy rarley shines or has good lines - and dont even get me started on the ending! It seems that special effects and turning the action meter up to 11 were more important that good scripting and pacing or making this feel like an indiana jones movie. I avoided The film starts with a bad CGI gopher, and really goes downhill from there. Bad plot, too many wooden and supporting actors and Indy rarley shines or has good lines - and dont even get me started on the ending! It seems that special effects and turning the action meter up to 11 were more important that good scripting and pacing or making this feel like an indiana jones movie. I avoided seeing trailers and reading reviews and hoped for the best - what a dissapointment. It's a real pity that even if you read this review,I know your going to go and watch this anyway. If like me you grew up with the trilogy, and can possibly steel you nerves - avoid this insult to the original films. Expand
  17. MarkR.
    May 26, 2008
    3
    Booorrrinngg.. Saw this with 6 of my friends.. two of us pained through it while the rest slept.
  18. DonS.
    May 26, 2008
    2
    Terrible dissapointment. I felt used and decieved. What a waste.
  19. JosephS
    May 26, 2008
    0
    Of kafka, broghes asked if a man could be so great as to influence not only all that follows, but also all that has proceeded him. If the revrse applies, and a work could be so offensive and ludicrous as to harm its predecessors, to cast doubt upon speilberg, Lucas, and koep, as artists, as men, as indices hollywood, and of what is to come, the kingdom of the crystals skull is it. The Of kafka, broghes asked if a man could be so great as to influence not only all that follows, but also all that has proceeded him. If the revrse applies, and a work could be so offensive and ludicrous as to harm its predecessors, to cast doubt upon speilberg, Lucas, and koep, as artists, as men, as indices hollywood, and of what is to come, the kingdom of the crystals skull is it. The economic forces and hollywood lobbyist have clearly turned the responsible film criticism into a retelling of the emperors new clothes. The choice of whethe to see this film is one between a responsible and principled boycott or a ride into an off-screen heart of darkness. Expand
  20. Beefalo
    May 27, 2008
    3
    Don't bother with this one. It's all redux, with Harrison Ford taking the backseat to everyone and everything, including aliens with typically elongated skulls. Please. This film wasn't worthy of the name Indiana Jones.
  21. Maurice
    May 27, 2008
    0
    A big, resounding BOMB!
  22. ErrolL.
    May 27, 2008
    0
    Why does George Lucas insist on destroying everything he did that was good? There are so many unbelievable things about this movie and too many inconsistencies. I can't believe that anyone would write any of this and think it was a good idea. With this movie everyone is a loser except Sean Connery. [***SPOILER***] The movie sucked thats the spoiler. The heat from the atomic blast Why does George Lucas insist on destroying everything he did that was good? There are so many unbelievable things about this movie and too many inconsistencies. I can't believe that anyone would write any of this and think it was a good idea. With this movie everyone is a loser except Sean Connery. [***SPOILER***] The movie sucked thats the spoiler. The heat from the atomic blast won't bake a body inside a fridge and the flying far enough away from the blast and landing won't break any bones. Blowing up the road making machine and then having a chase scene on very clear roads through the jungle is very believable. The stairs suck into the wall but the bad guys can still catch up very very quickly. Monkeys in the trees with the kid from Holes swinging on vines to catch up to the cars. Aliens. Collapse
  23. AndrewS.
    May 27, 2008
    1
    The plot was bad, the direction aimless, casting misguidedl overall, the worst movie in Spielberg's career. My biggest disappointment - how did any critic, albeit there were just a few, give this one a pass. Truly horrid fiilmmaking!
  24. SeanD.
    May 27, 2008
    3
    A terrible story that includes the new brand of George Lucas dialog - stilted and completely unconvincing - even Harrison Ford can't make it work - though it seems he tries hard enough. The initial motorcycle chase and dialog was amusing - but was the best the film had to offer... Perhaps worth renting - not worth the admission in the theatre though.
  25. PatricioJ.
    May 28, 2008
    3
    Bad film, the end is good for E.T. But you won't be bored
  26. IanC
    May 29, 2008
    0
    This is precisely why I hate 21st Century cinema. I can see the focus group of Indy fans now, being asked what they'd most like to see, and the video games developers being asked what bits could go into the movie that would make decent levels. Complete c**p, barely a coherent story, zero effort in the acting (I loved the way the team ambled their way through the traps, and NO that This is precisely why I hate 21st Century cinema. I can see the focus group of Indy fans now, being asked what they'd most like to see, and the video games developers being asked what bits could go into the movie that would make decent levels. Complete c**p, barely a coherent story, zero effort in the acting (I loved the way the team ambled their way through the traps, and NO that had nothing to do with the relative age of them all, it just looked like they couldn't be bothered), pretty dreaful effects here and there, continuity errors abound... george Lucas should be stopped from destroying any more of the good memories, just leave it alone! Expand
  27. SharonC.
    May 29, 2008
    3
    A ridiculously poorly conceived movie where the plot makes no sense and nothing affects the characters or motivates them to move forward.. "but Indy why do YOU have to return the skull?"...because Lucas told him too.
  28. BrandonD.
    Jun 1, 2008
    2
    This movie is an embarrassing pile of sh*t. If you replaced Harrison with Rowan Atkinson from Mr. Bean, it would be f*cking hilarious. Spielberg has managed to stoop down to Lucas' level in being a money grubbing whore that knows what art can be, but just doesn't give a shit anymore.
  29. ChrisL.
    Jun 19, 2008
    1
    Nothing in the film looked dangerous. Indy, a old man, a fat guy, Marion, and Mudd were all getting past the traps without even a scratch. You might as well throw in a kid in a wheelchair passing up Indy. The effects were bad, the action was dull, and Indy was out of character. I almost walked out of the theatre. Avoid this one and fondly remember the others.
  30. Tavo
    Jun 23, 2008
    0
    George Lucas needs to walk himself into ongoing traffic for this one.....it ruined the legacy that is Indiana Jones.
  31. BillB.
    Jun 29, 2008
    2
    This film insults the audience. You really get the strong sense the producers smugly knew they could throw together this utterly mediocre effort and it would still be propped up by critics and fan boys. Either that, or it's a really lame attempt by those involved, who undoubtedly had their heyday back in the 80 and 90s, to prove they can still hack it.
  32. ShaneD.
    Jun 4, 2008
    0
    5 minutes in and my heart was already sinking. The scenery looked fake, the acting seemed unsure and the tone of the whole thing was all off. This film doesn't know what it wants to be and ends up being nothing. No tension, no laughs, no excitement and no entertainment. Avoid.
  33. MikeS
    Jun 4, 2008
    0
    This movie was NOT good. I had such high expectations. It was a disappointment.
  34. HalB.
    Jun 4, 2008
    0
    I am embarrassed for everyone involved in this movie. Worst flick I've seen in the theatre since Battlefield Earth.
  35. ShortRound
    Jul 15, 2008
    0
    This movie was terrible. The only good part was the motorcycle chase in the town, everything else was absolutely garbage.
  36. TerryF.
    Aug 12, 2008
    0
    Again, Lucas, just like in the Star Wars series, fails to captivate us with a good story.
  37. JonB.
    Aug 3, 2008
    2
    Some of the adventure remains from the original trilogy, but being on the bench too long has led to atrophy of this classic series.
  38. RussellJ
    Jun 27, 2009
    1
    This is dire. Saw it at the pictures and it was like having my childlike self ripped apart. The equivalent of finding Santa on xmas morning wanking onto your mince pies you left him. The story was shit. There was no suspense or mystery. The action was laughable and full of cgi. The acting was atrocious even Harrison Ford couldn't pull it off he's too old for the role. To be fair This is dire. Saw it at the pictures and it was like having my childlike self ripped apart. The equivalent of finding Santa on xmas morning wanking onto your mince pies you left him. The story was shit. There was no suspense or mystery. The action was laughable and full of cgi. The acting was atrocious even Harrison Ford couldn't pull it off he's too old for the role. To be fair it maintained itself with a certain sense of disbelief all the way to the Amazon scenes and the film just gave up. So many bad scenes in a row. Mutt swinging from vine to vine like Tarzan. The giant (cgi) ants. Three waterfalls. Kill me now. The worst is left to the end of the movie. Spielberg do you really think we'll buy this shit with the aliens as lightheated fun. Raiders worked because it was mythological but aliens shouldn't be in this type of movie. Especially in a close encounters style. Oh Indy I still like you in the trilogy without jowls. Expand
  39. NC.
    Nov 12, 2008
    2
    From it's opening green screen madness (it's everywhere, but totally replicable by set and just done by choice by mr lazy bum himself)... it is clear, and eventually undeniable, that this film has been savaged by the now soulless wonder who made one of my all-time favourite childhood gems. I speak of George Lucas, who, allowed to go near the charcters and, oh dear God no, the From it's opening green screen madness (it's everywhere, but totally replicable by set and just done by choice by mr lazy bum himself)... it is clear, and eventually undeniable, that this film has been savaged by the now soulless wonder who made one of my all-time favourite childhood gems. I speak of George Lucas, who, allowed to go near the charcters and, oh dear God no, the STORY, has made the most blasphemous, ridiculous, endless yawnfest of unreailstic set-pieces (No, NO, NO! That is NOT what the series is based on and NOT what it has traditionally espoused at all Roger Ebert... I LOVED the other films, especially Raiders of the Lost Ark (But I HATED this dredge))... Back to film school Roger you hack. It's full of unconvincing acting or acting hammed up to the eyeballs (cos they knew it was crap, it's written all over the more astute actors' visages). It is childish, uses poor cgi to make animals that are cute but totally beside the point - totally (except to george, the retarded kidult), has balls been hit repeatedly etc (oh, hahahahahahaha, yeah, aweeeesome bro...)... and I would definitely rate this as the MOST disappointing movie I have seen since the turn of the century.... and I have watched PLENTY.... I have passed stools smarter than this film. Shame on you Geroge, get out of the game buddy, stop 'revisiting' (ie., ruining) classics and trying to make new ones when you have 100% lost it - artistically and intellectually... you are too old, let go... and as for you Mr two thumbs up Ebert, unless you want me to take your job and give it to one of the chimps from the film, learn to respect the difference between timeless classics with daring stunts as compared with mashed-up, hodge-podge, technically-obsessed (this film is full of machines and lasers and aliens, even though it is the 50s, nice one George, you f'ing iiiiiiiiiiidddiot) garbage with ridiculous transporter part 29 stunts that don't rase a heartbeat because they are George Lucas' yawny, dreamy, boring wet dreams about s*** that never happens and no one gets off on unless they are idiots or are 4 years old or both. The movie was total, utter, unmitigated GARBAGE. Go back to the ranch George, and FO. U ruined a classic series, ruined it. I am simply not counting it. It never happened. It's like a Crow sequel... WHAT crow sequels? That's what I say, and now I say, "What Indy 4? Stop talking nonsense." Hang your head in shame buddy.... and you Steven, how'd you let him do it!? Appalling..... Need an example? Girl drives car off cliff with everyone on board and onto a tree that bends over all the way to the bottom of the canyon (pefectly, with not a bump, hundreds of metres below) and they drive gently off.... cos who wouldn't? It's totally unrelaistic and also uncool.... wow!! Idiots....... I should give it 1/10, but it was the first blu-ray I watched on my new system and so I give it 1 more for looking awesome (and, I might add, awesome enough to see they barely used one set in the WHOLE film..... lazy scum). Expand
  40. CraigG
    Nov 27, 2008
    0
    Worst movie in the entire film industry. What a piece of S**t. Horrible acting, direction, screenplay, writing, etc. Shia is a terrible actor. Ford looked like he didn't want to be there. I would rather take a dump in my hand than watch this one again. Spielberg should be ashamed of himself. My pet turtle could have made a better movie than this c**p. He was my favorite movie maker, Worst movie in the entire film industry. What a piece of S**t. Horrible acting, direction, screenplay, writing, etc. Shia is a terrible actor. Ford looked like he didn't want to be there. I would rather take a dump in my hand than watch this one again. Spielberg should be ashamed of himself. My pet turtle could have made a better movie than this c**p. He was my favorite movie maker, but now the worst. Expand
  41. Lauranda
    Oct 14, 2008
    3
    Shia is not all that, contrary to Spielberg's obsession for him. And Lucas needs to go back to his glory days and take examples from that. This 4th chapter is just plain bad. Aliens? come on!! Blanchett was the only reason I didn't give this a 1.
  42. Ginny
    Oct 17, 2008
    0
    Definition of stupid Space aliens "interdimensional space aliens": 1. who are archeologists who destroy everything they've collected 2. blow someone up as a "thank you" and drive others insane 3. Sit around as skeletons for hundreds of years but fail to die 4. Have a hive mind for absolutely no reason. 5. Form back into said live space alien before wisking themselves away in a ship Definition of stupid Space aliens "interdimensional space aliens": 1. who are archeologists who destroy everything they've collected 2. blow someone up as a "thank you" and drive others insane 3. Sit around as skeletons for hundreds of years but fail to die 4. Have a hive mind for absolutely no reason. 5. Form back into said live space alien before wisking themselves away in a ship without a trace 6. Forget to take all the other space alien bodies with them that apparently couldn't survive for hundreds of years 7. Have a movie with absolutely no plot other than "return my skull" and you will get a reward (to be blown up). 8. And let us not forget...they have magnetic bones cause it's such an inventive plot device. Lame, very lame. Don't waste this much of your life. I'm pretty sure space aliens took over the writer of this film to make it so unappealing so no one would ever want to find them. Expand
  43. ManuelB.
    Nov 8, 2008
    1
    There is no depth to this movie. It is definitely not the continuation of a legend. Its boring and the plot is downright ridiculous. I don't understand how an actor with the backgroud of H. Ford agree to do this retarded show.
  44. BC
    Dec 11, 2008
    1
    this movie was completely cartoonish. I haven't seen this much randomly sprayed automatic weapons fire since the A-Team. The CGI quality of the chase scene thru the Jungle was laughably bad. Don't waste your time, please, you'll thank me.
  45. DarrenS
    Oct 28, 2008
    3
    Also disappointed. Awkward is a great way to describe the movie. If you're a hardcore Indy fan, you probably won't like it. If you hate corny-ness or terrible cliches, you probably won't like it. If you're not okay with extremely unbelievable situations you won't like it. Sure, the old movies had some pretty far - fetched stunts or situations, but they were Also disappointed. Awkward is a great way to describe the movie. If you're a hardcore Indy fan, you probably won't like it. If you hate corny-ness or terrible cliches, you probably won't like it. If you're not okay with extremely unbelievable situations you won't like it. Sure, the old movies had some pretty far - fetched stunts or situations, but they were somewhat believable, and in my opinion this movie pushed it way too far. I liked some stuff: an older Indy was interesting, Soviets as the bad guys was a good idea, and some of the scenes were pretty fun. Unfortunately, the ending left such a bad taste in my mouth that I spent the next day watching all three Indy movies trying to forget Crystal Skull. Maybe you'll like it, but most likely you won't. Expand
  46. MarkT.
    May 23, 2008
    0
    Worst of all of them. So ridiculous. If I wanted Sci-Fi and ancient archeology I would watch Stargate. Get your Sci-Fi out of my Indy movie!
  47. INCForest
    May 23, 2008
    0
    Hey Dude. This movie is a real piece of SH*T!, Just a Dirt kingdom of dust.
  48. JackW.
    May 23, 2008
    3
    This was an extreme let down. There was not a single scene which I remember as being worth viewing. The story was sporadic and muddled, the acting flat(especially harrison- it seemed like he didnt want to be there), the set pieces unexciting, the finale rushed and confusing. Unlike the other indiana films, kotcs did not make me forget I was sitting in a cinema. The beauty of the old films This was an extreme let down. There was not a single scene which I remember as being worth viewing. The story was sporadic and muddled, the acting flat(especially harrison- it seemed like he didnt want to be there), the set pieces unexciting, the finale rushed and confusing. Unlike the other indiana films, kotcs did not make me forget I was sitting in a cinema. The beauty of the old films (as well as all great movies of this genre) lay in their ability to draw you in so that time seems to stand still outside the screen- you become so absorbed you forget where you are. Here though, from the very start I was continually made aware I was in fact watching a very poor production with hammy acting and a diabolical script. CGI can, in some films be used to great effect, but this was just not the case here. The effects took away from the rawness and authenticity of the previous films. This was purely a money making scheme at the cost of sullying an otherwise seminal cinematic franchise. Expand
  49. MiguelVerde
    May 23, 2008
    1
    I walked out in the first 15 minutes. It was that bad. Lucas Jar Jar'd another one.
  50. Rob
    May 24, 2008
    2
    Same problems as Star Wars episodes 1-3 and all of the other shameless remakes currently being released: overcomplicated plot, excessive action, awkward dialog, miscast actors, obviously computer generated special effects - all tied together by reused quotes and plot devices from the earlier films. I loved Raiders, liked Temple, and really enjoyed the Last Crusade, but this film was Same problems as Star Wars episodes 1-3 and all of the other shameless remakes currently being released: overcomplicated plot, excessive action, awkward dialog, miscast actors, obviously computer generated special effects - all tied together by reused quotes and plot devices from the earlier films. I loved Raiders, liked Temple, and really enjoyed the Last Crusade, but this film was painful to watch. There were a few brief moments where it had potential, but then another blue-screen generated chase sequence would start. Expand
  51. AnnS.
    May 24, 2008
    0
    Idiotic drivel with amazingly flat, boring characters. Not like the old Indy.
  52. JOshrad
    May 24, 2008
    2
    Lucas ruins another saga. Wow, Steven is a sell out for letting this film be made.
  53. MargaretM.
    May 25, 2008
    1
    This is no indiana jones movie. what happened? would have been just as easy to make a decent movie now wouldn't it? Fools.
  54. MattS.
    May 25, 2008
    3
    Too over the top. Shia Lequeef sucked as usual.
  55. Mike
    May 25, 2008
    0
    Sadly, the worst movie of the series. It started out decently. But then it turned into one big bore. The CGI was everywhere, but it wasnt intresting. What this movie needed was a STORY! I guess 19years to think of one, isnt enough time.
  56. RachelM.
    May 25, 2008
    3
    Horrible. Even worse for being so disappointingly bad. Every line is cheese. The plot is pathetic. A traitor to the spirit of the original three.
  57. AdamF.
    May 26, 2008
    0
    This movie belongs in the pantheon of bad films. Move over "Young Einstein," "Ishtar," "Leonard Part 6," and "A Gnome Named Gnorm" - you've got company. If you liked this movie, you might be an idiot. Schedule a lobotomy. Stat.
  58. PeterN
    May 26, 2008
    3
    What can you say that others before have not already said.... This was a travesty. As previously said, Lucas and Spielberg are trying to grow another franchise for a new generation, and much like the new Star Wars movies, really missed the boat. From what I've read here, it seems that more and more people are getting sick of the extensive use of CG. It's fake, it's What can you say that others before have not already said.... This was a travesty. As previously said, Lucas and Spielberg are trying to grow another franchise for a new generation, and much like the new Star Wars movies, really missed the boat. From what I've read here, it seems that more and more people are getting sick of the extensive use of CG. It's fake, it's unbelieveable, and so overused. With Indiana Jones, the fans want more of the same thing. This isn't it! This is a cash grab using the Indiana Jones moniker. The first three were great (and as many have pointed out, Temple of Doom has newfound appeal in light of this). Not just the worst of the series, this is terrible compared with ALL movies. Further, if you are going to comment and rate films, don't rate it higher to change the average score!!! You're missing the point. Several reviewers rated this a 10 when they say they only felt it was worth a 7-8, because they felt it deserved more. You're cheating everybody. Expand
  59. DanH.
    May 26, 2008
    2
    I'm not a harsh critic, but goodness, this movie was head-slap horrible. Plot holes, incomplete explanations, predictable without fail and a script ripped straight from Chariot of the Gods. Kate is hot, but that kid they want to replace Jones with sure won't pull it off. (and I liked him in Transformers.)
  60. KasparH.
    May 27, 2008
    3
    Repackaged Lost Ark "plot" and "characters". Substitute Soviets for Nazis and Crystal Skull for Lost Ark. Very tired effort.
  61. dh
    May 27, 2008
    3
    I felt so empty when I came out of the cinema. I felt disapointed that Spielberg and Lucas relied so heavily on CGI, that the story was truly awful, the stunts were so unbelievable and most importantly of all it didn't feel like an indy movie. I was soooo looking forward to this film but Lucas and Spielberg decided to make this film like all the others these days-they didnt care I felt so empty when I came out of the cinema. I felt disapointed that Spielberg and Lucas relied so heavily on CGI, that the story was truly awful, the stunts were so unbelievable and most importantly of all it didn't feel like an indy movie. I was soooo looking forward to this film but Lucas and Spielberg decided to make this film like all the others these days-they didnt care about the film, they cared about the money! Real shame Expand
  62. PaulS.
    May 27, 2008
    0
    So many different ways to explain how this movie is bad.. The most obvious: Alien loving tandem Spielberg/Lucas aren't even rehashing the past in this movie, their rehashing other franchises that were created from their original efforts. Indy's son and wife reuniting with Indy, think the Mummy franchise. (But Only Worse) Hard to believe all that money was spent making it and So many different ways to explain how this movie is bad.. The most obvious: Alien loving tandem Spielberg/Lucas aren't even rehashing the past in this movie, their rehashing other franchises that were created from their original efforts. Indy's son and wife reuniting with Indy, think the Mummy franchise. (But Only Worse) Hard to believe all that money was spent making it and this was the product.. the saddest part, this movie is review-proof... Expand
  63. AramisG.
    May 27, 2008
    2
    CGI aliens, nukes and commies aside....this movie will deeply offend anyone who respects rationality and values their hard earned time and money. With all the plot holes and inconsistencies that occur, I was still offended at how irrational the ending was.
  64. EnaV.
    May 28, 2008
    3
    Pancho Villa spoke quechua with Indiana?? wasn't he Mexican? Quechua is from the Andes, Peru!!! Pancho Villa was never in Peru!!! That's like telling that George Washington was born in Russia!! It's as if no one in the production minded whether Peru or Mexico are in America or Asia!!! and the Russians were the one who came to steal treasures??? wasn't people from Pancho Villa spoke quechua with Indiana?? wasn't he Mexican? Quechua is from the Andes, Peru!!! Pancho Villa was never in Peru!!! That's like telling that George Washington was born in Russia!! It's as if no one in the production minded whether Peru or Mexico are in America or Asia!!! and the Russians were the one who came to steal treasures??? wasn't people from Yale??? Peru is still waiting to be given back lots of treasures that people from Yale took with them many years ago!! Next time: do your homework producers!!! Expand
  65. StanW.
    May 28, 2008
    0
    Horrible in every way. If i had a time machine, I'd go back and get my $11 back. Disappointing in the biggest way!
  66. JasperV.
    May 31, 2008
    2
    or, Indiana Jones and the Half-hearted Effort - The characters in this movie talk and talk and talk. Maybe an hour into it, we're finally out of the States, in the complex grave of a conquistador... where, IN THE GRAVE, the characters again bring the movie to a dead stop, to talk for another ten minutes. Is it a metaphor? The grave is a perfect place to leave this films weak energy or, Indiana Jones and the Half-hearted Effort - The characters in this movie talk and talk and talk. Maybe an hour into it, we're finally out of the States, in the complex grave of a conquistador... where, IN THE GRAVE, the characters again bring the movie to a dead stop, to talk for another ten minutes. Is it a metaphor? The grave is a perfect place to leave this films weak energy level. --- The script is structurally poor. It seems like it's composed of unrelated lesser scenes from the other movies. This movie has no pacing, whatsoever. It never develops a rhythm. It never reaches any level of intensity. The big climax arrived (after fits and starts), and my reaction was "Oh, I was supposed to care about that?... uhhh... oh that's what happens when you put the thirteenth skull of a dead alien crew back in place... something not very interesting happens. ...I guess that's an ending." --- Well yeah, of course the damned thing needed to come to life, because there's nothing else exciting in the damned movie, but that's all you have it do? Despite the work of a CGI team, the movie never achieves any inspired, large-scale moment. Another problem is that the film waits eons to advance a lackluster Chariots of the Gods/Stargate/2001 theory; that aliens affected human civilization. The movie is at least the 4th to venture into this territory - It's not exactly fresh material. Harrison Ford could look ten years younger if he stood up straight and stopped walking around like he just crapped his adult diapers. Bogging things down further, the movie has no sexual tension. --- For the final tease to work (LaBouef almost tries on Indy's hat) the movie has to have reached some of the heights of the previous ones, which would make us consider watching another set of Indy movies. It doesn't. --- Sean Connery turned down this script. He has taste. Expand
  67. AnthonyS.
    Jun 12, 2008
    0
    An utter disappointment. The critics must all be drinking Lucas Kool-aid. Honestly, other than the Wiley Coyote nuclear moment, the movie is totally bored me. Oh yeah, aliens and tomb raiding can't and should never be mixed!
  68. IngridS
    Jun 13, 2008
    0
    Do not waste your life on this movie. It reflects NOTHING of the Indian Jones I remember from Raiders of the Lost Ark. It is ridiculous what they wrote into the script: flying saucers, parallel dimensions, surviving a nuclear bomb while hiding in a refrigerator, mind control, Indians, lost cities, Roswell, the Soviet Union, HORRIBLE CGI, Tarzan's monkeys, falling down multiple Do not waste your life on this movie. It reflects NOTHING of the Indian Jones I remember from Raiders of the Lost Ark. It is ridiculous what they wrote into the script: flying saucers, parallel dimensions, surviving a nuclear bomb while hiding in a refrigerator, mind control, Indians, lost cities, Roswell, the Soviet Union, HORRIBLE CGI, Tarzan's monkeys, falling down multiple waterfalls without a scratch, Indy losing his hat, and the skull still in hand! WTF?? George Lucas needs to hang it up! Expand
  69. Josh
    Jun 15, 2008
    0
    This may have been the worst movie of all time. Impossibly bad in terms of acting, dialog, pacing, crummy CGI and logic. Not funny, nor exciting, this loathsome mess treats its audience like horse maneur.
  70. DD.
    Jun 15, 2008
    1
    The plot was awful. Not worth the money.
  71. JustinB
    Jun 16, 2008
    2
    I didn't think the acting was as bad as many who voted. But this movie was awful. Poorly written, predictable, and derivative. Even if it wasn't predictable, you just don't care enough either way.
  72. PhilH.
    Jun 18, 2008
    2
    How did this movie score only one genuinely negative review? This movie fails critically on three levels: 1) CGI saturation, especially when Spielberg promised otherwise. Seriously, could the producers not find a real gopher or army truck to film? 2) Ford's performance feels phoned in. Watch Raiders and then this one again. The Indy spark is gone. Well, I suppose that last statement How did this movie score only one genuinely negative review? This movie fails critically on three levels: 1) CGI saturation, especially when Spielberg promised otherwise. Seriously, could the producers not find a real gopher or army truck to film? 2) Ford's performance feels phoned in. Watch Raiders and then this one again. The Indy spark is gone. Well, I suppose that last statement applies to this movie on all levels, but even more so when you compare Ford's previous performances to this one. Before there was energy, passion, a sense of adventure. Now, nothing. Granted Indy is decades older now, but you'd think that would just mute his character traits a bit, not turn him into a grumpy old robot. 3) Aliens. The plot as a whole is messy and contrived, but the inclusion of aliens really brings it over the top. My suspension of disbelief as far as Indiana Jones goes is Biblical mythology. Arks, Grails, etc. Aliens and some cockamamie dimensional vortex belongs in Star Trek, not in the adventures of an archaeological professor. Also, the Russians being lame bad guys didn't help either. To sum it up, this movie is a giant waste of potential. Spielberg and Ford were just going through the motions, and Lucas was allowed to ruin another franchise with crap writing and CGI ad nauseum. Stick with the original trilogy and pretend this one never happened. Expand
  73. MatthieuR.
    Jun 18, 2008
    0
    Quite possibly the most disappointing film I have ever seen. This mess is the first movie that made me fall asleep in the theater... bravo! An unmitigated mess, horrible storyline, a geriatric "hero", etc. Lucas should never, ever be allowed to write again.
  74. AndrewC.
    Jun 19, 2008
    3
    Mystique and script is lacking in new Indiana Jones.
  75. HaroldW.
    Jun 19, 2008
    0
    God awful! What happened Harrison and Steven? Couldn't you have left well enough alone? It was slapstick that wasn't funny. Indy seemed hell bent on helping the Russians. What was Mutt's reason for not wanting Marion and Indy to kiss? They are his Parents! So putrid.
  76. PatrickF.
    Jun 27, 2008
    3
    A real stinker! Think it's 100% nostalgia for the older, better movies that has anyone liking this clunky & ridiculous movie.
  77. JohnM.
    Sep 26, 2008
    0
    This is such a bad film that I cannot believe Speilberg directed this. Is he actually happy with the end result?! The script is so overly cheesy, and what is it with Lucas and CGI, someone needs to teach him when and where it
  78. Antonyk.
    Jan 24, 2009
    0
    Lucas lured us into thinking that they can be trusted again, and we, unfortunately, believed him. While the first moments of the movie rang with all the epic ardor of the original trilogy, the film turned for worse the second Cate Blanchett showed up in an annoying hairstyle and plummeted to depths we all worried the franchise could fall years from now at the hands of a know-nothing Lucas lured us into thinking that they can be trusted again, and we, unfortunately, believed him. While the first moments of the movie rang with all the epic ardor of the original trilogy, the film turned for worse the second Cate Blanchett showed up in an annoying hairstyle and plummeted to depths we all worried the franchise could fall years from now at the hands of a know-nothing filmmaker banking on money coming in for an old favorite, now we know that Lucas himself, once again, who has the wrongs hands. Expand
  79. EvanS.
    Nov 23, 2008
    3
    What starts out as a worthy successor quickly turns into ridiculous silliness about the time Karen Allen shows up on the scene. It's a mess.
  80. Anonymous
    Dec 11, 2008
    1
    Simply wretched from beginning to end ... and the middle kinda sucks too.
  81. WaltS.
    Dec 19, 2008
    3
    Well, I'm not a die-hard Indiana Jones fan, nor a jaded hater off big motion pictures. All I wanted was a popcorn movie that could give me 2 hours of entertainment. The good news: the first 60-80 minutes of this movie are enjoyable. No, it's not on the level of Raiders of the Lost Ark by any means, but it gets the job done. The bad news: the last 40 minutes are absolutely Well, I'm not a die-hard Indiana Jones fan, nor a jaded hater off big motion pictures. All I wanted was a popcorn movie that could give me 2 hours of entertainment. The good news: the first 60-80 minutes of this movie are enjoyable. No, it's not on the level of Raiders of the Lost Ark by any means, but it gets the job done. The bad news: the last 40 minutes are absolutely horrible. The script is the real zero here: unquestionably wretched. The special effects make you want to do a double-take because they are so ridiculous. Literally, the last 40 or so minutes look like the product of Spielberg, Lucas, and whoever else throwing together patch-work ideas and other scenes borrowed from previous Indiana Jones movies and trying to make them stick. It is a little depressing that this movie is ranked in the Top 25 highest grossing movies of all time. Customers came looking for a great time and were cheated. Shame on everyone involved in the creation of this mess. Expand
  82. May 10, 2011
    1
    This episode of Indiana Jones takes place several years after the TV series ended, but to my mind is the best episode to date. The fact that they decided to not use Sean Patrick Flanery and instead Shiabelouff as the Young Indy is a fatal mistake, but doesn't stop the episode from being highly original and very, very entertaining. The story sees an bloated ageing Indiana Jones save theThis episode of Indiana Jones takes place several years after the TV series ended, but to my mind is the best episode to date. The fact that they decided to not use Sean Patrick Flanery and instead Shiabelouff as the Young Indy is a fatal mistake, but doesn't stop the episode from being highly original and very, very entertaining. The story sees an bloated ageing Indiana Jones save the world from Russian Nazi's by climbing inside a refrigerator and time traveling back to the 1930's where he meets his younger self, but now bizarrely modelled as James Dean in a gay hat for some reason. The use of monkeys and rubber snakes really works here though, as does the over-crowding of old people. Karen Allen's brilliantly observed portrait of senile dementia is right on the money, even though she looks about as attractive as your dead grandmother sucking off a horse. And John Hurt is brilliantly miscast as Sean Connery's incontient jibbering brother. Although not as good as Flanery (or Jaquin Phoenix for that matter) Shialeboufddff does prove a welcome asset to offet the stench of decay as the Young Indy to the gang of coffin dodgers, but at times is jarring considering the amount of dust falling off the old folks and filling the stale putrid air. I also don't know why at the end they had to have not one, but about twelve old farts running around the Aztec temple trying to save the world when Indiana Jones and his younger self would have sufficed. Oh well the stunts are as always well above anything else on TV and the high production values at times make it seem as though your watching an actual movie and not just some unnecessary bloated distraction to an otherwise perfect series of old school adventures. Expand
  83. May 20, 2011
    3
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Rather than me sit and whinge about how it wasn't as good as the others I will just give you the below...

    Blah blah blah, explosions, blah blah, I am your son, blah blah I am an enemy, blah blah I am your friend really, blah blah it was aliens, blah blah marriage, blah blah give me my hat.
    Expand
  84. Jul 21, 2015
    1
    This is a movie so bad that it tarnished a beloved franchise. The writing is and cinematography is beyond hackneyed; it disgraceful. If they character's name wasn't Indiana, it wouldn't have been made because no one would be willing to fund it. It's not even enjoyable for the it's idiocy like Sharknado because you can sense the serious effort and subconscious contempt for a classic. InThis is a movie so bad that it tarnished a beloved franchise. The writing is and cinematography is beyond hackneyed; it disgraceful. If they character's name wasn't Indiana, it wouldn't have been made because no one would be willing to fund it. It's not even enjoyable for the it's idiocy like Sharknado because you can sense the serious effort and subconscious contempt for a classic. In fact, if the character had not been Indiana Jones and just Harrison Ford screwing around fight communist sterotypes that were tired when the original Indiana Jones came out, it might be worth a laugh a zoning out while it's on in the background on TNT while you're cooking in the kitchen; much like The Postman. It's so terrible, the internet has coined a phrase to note when a series or franchise has destroyed itself. Look up "nuking the fridge" in google. This is literally the only movie I've asked for my money back after a full viewing. The manager, who is required to watch each new movie, actually gave me my money. Crystal Skull is so bad, the UN actually met in 2012 to consider the forced viewing of this movie a war crime. Admittedly, the last one is an exaggeration. The only reason I gave this movie a 1 rather than a zero is that I didn't physically vomit during the screening. This movie is so bad, I repressed the memory of watching it till I saw it in a 99 cent DVD bin and became enraged enough to write this review. Seven years after watching this movie, just seeing the box art for seconds ruined my day. That's how bad this movie is. Expand
  85. Nov 25, 2011
    1
    Steven Spielberg went full retard on this one. Sure, the other ones weren't believable either...but this one? Dr. Jones survives atomic bomb test in a refridgerator, survives thousand foot drop from waterfall, and then he brings in the aliens.
  86. Sep 4, 2011
    2
    For years there were rumors of the new Indiana Jones movie. Finally it was confirmed and we eagerly awaited the 4th love child of Steven Spielberg, George Lucas, and Harrison Ford. There were a lot of naysayers out there who thought Ford was too old, that Lucas/Spielberg ought to leave well enough alone, but they saw past all that and went for it. The result: Unbelievable Crap. LucasFor years there were rumors of the new Indiana Jones movie. Finally it was confirmed and we eagerly awaited the 4th love child of Steven Spielberg, George Lucas, and Harrison Ford. There were a lot of naysayers out there who thought Ford was too old, that Lucas/Spielberg ought to leave well enough alone, but they saw past all that and went for it. The result: Unbelievable Crap. Lucas explains to the AP: â Expand
  87. Feb 5, 2012
    3
    A movie of complexity that doesn't pay off. The story is so compounded, it seems like it was a combination of 20 different ideas. But it was one of those movies that was popular with the public, mainly because they can't tell a good movie from a bad movie.
  88. Mar 27, 2012
    1
    Was really looking forward to seeing this movie, unfortunately, it was dreadful, the first 3 are excellent films, this one is just the polar opposite, Ray Winstone is dreadful in it, so is Shia Lebeouf and Cate Blanchett is even worse! Harrison Fords comic timing and some strategically place Gophers make the opening 20 minutes enjoyable but after that it really is awful!
  89. Jul 7, 2013
    1
    As the credits rolled, I turned to my brother and said, "It's official: Temple of Doom is no longer the worst Indiana Jones film."

    Crystal Suck is one of the few movies I've ever seen that actually managed to insult me. South Park's parody of the film's reception where George Lucas and Steven Spielberg repeatedly rape Indy was just... well... to use a cliche'd term, it "resonated".
    As the credits rolled, I turned to my brother and said, "It's official: Temple of Doom is no longer the worst Indiana Jones film."

    Crystal Suck is one of the few movies I've ever seen that actually managed to insult me. South Park's parody of the film's reception where George Lucas and Steven Spielberg repeatedly rape Indy was just... well... to use a cliche'd term, it "resonated".

    It's the most cynical cash-in I've ever seen. I mean, even Blues Brothers 2000, train wreck through it was, believed in itself. Crystal Skull feels like George Lucas going "nyah nyah! You didn't like my Star Wars prequels so thanks for the ten bucks and screw you, jack!"

    p.s. Shia Lebeouf needs a serious beating.
    Expand
  90. Jul 24, 2014
    3
    'Kingdom of Crystal Skull's' action scenes are so effortlessly fake I instantly find a dislike for the movie. The action scenes lack the deadpan delivery of Harrison Ford, the CGI was horridly unnecessary, that it destroyed the classic tradition of Indian Jones, and Shia Labeouf was so conceited I wished he had gotten eaten by the ants (By the way, Siafu ants don't live in South America,'Kingdom of Crystal Skull's' action scenes are so effortlessly fake I instantly find a dislike for the movie. The action scenes lack the deadpan delivery of Harrison Ford, the CGI was horridly unnecessary, that it destroyed the classic tradition of Indian Jones, and Shia Labeouf was so conceited I wished he had gotten eaten by the ants (By the way, Siafu ants don't live in South America, George Lucas). This film should have been made in the mid 90's at the most, when this s**t CGI didn't exist. Expand
  91. Jun 25, 2014
    1
    Probably the worst film I have ever seen. Not only because of its reliance on incredibly bad CG effect, but also because of the shlock camp value and idiocy of the villains. No one should ever see this film!
  92. Feb 8, 2014
    0
    I'm so disappointed! The first three parts were excellent! And this part had some good actions because of the new technology compared to the technology of the previous ones. But when I saw that kid jumping with monkeys and many other stupid scene, I was very disappointed!
  93. Sep 10, 2014
    3
    Okay, fail. Just fail. I heard they were gonna do another Indiana Jones and I was really excited. It's hard to argue with the consistency of the other three films and their delivery. But what happened? Why??? There had to be hundreds of ideas they could have considered for the plot, but they had to pick one about aliens. And personally I am incredibly tired of alien movies. Of course theyOkay, fail. Just fail. I heard they were gonna do another Indiana Jones and I was really excited. It's hard to argue with the consistency of the other three films and their delivery. But what happened? Why??? There had to be hundreds of ideas they could have considered for the plot, but they had to pick one about aliens. And personally I am incredibly tired of alien movies. Of course they try to make it not seem like its about aliens by trying to twist the plot into seeming like it's about "alternate-dimensional beings" and not aliens. Even though they look just like aliens and travel in flying saucers. George Lucas...stop guy, just stop. You've already proven all you can do is make movies about space and milk it for all it's worth. Steven shouldn't have listened to you. I loved seeing Harrison Ford back in action but they threw him in an environment that made his character seem off-step and on the cheesier side. They had good elements and solid plot points to work with like Indy having a long lost son, but Shia was not a good cast for it, watering down any good momentum they had. The CGI seemed out of place and labored as well. I wanted to like this. But I just can't. Crystal Skull mortally wounded the Indiana Jones series. Expand
  94. Jul 4, 2015
    2
    I am pretty sure now that the effects budget and cross reference check budget was pocketed by LUCASBERG. These are guys that don't go out in public, live behind giant gates and walls on compounds and haven't had to really work from a creators point of reference for a very long time. It's all rehash and touch up. How can these guys be considered the cream of the crop. C'mon, what haveI am pretty sure now that the effects budget and cross reference check budget was pocketed by LUCASBERG. These are guys that don't go out in public, live behind giant gates and walls on compounds and haven't had to really work from a creators point of reference for a very long time. It's all rehash and touch up. How can these guys be considered the cream of the crop. C'mon, what have they done that shows any passion for their craft within nearly twenty years???including all Star Wars movies and Jurassic park with a vengeance. Will anyone say this in a publication with decent circulation? It has to be said. George Lucas doesn't even smile! I don't get it. They were good once. What happened? STOP GIVING THEM HUGE AMOUNTS OF CASH TO CRAP A STINKER WHILE NOT CARING. KNOWING THEY CAN COAST FOREVER ON "STAR WARS"ORIGINAL,AND "ET" JURASSIC "ORIGINAL"fan base will carry them for the duration. They will continue pocket obscene cash for tofu get in cheek turds. Another private beach somewhere away from reality... Bye bye once creative men. Expand
  95. Nov 26, 2015
    2
    Oh God...What happened? ! The past Indiana Jones showed actions at the lumit of the human spectrum ability. But this one is made of several consecutive stunts which are totally unrealistic and litterally massacred what could have been a good movie. The characters are more skilled that any navy seals and more lucky than a four leaves...Actors, budget and special effects are misused. WhyOh God...What happened? ! The past Indiana Jones showed actions at the lumit of the human spectrum ability. But this one is made of several consecutive stunts which are totally unrealistic and litterally massacred what could have been a good movie. The characters are more skilled that any navy seals and more lucky than a four leaves...Actors, budget and special effects are misused. Why don't the producers don't ask professional advices about what is humanly possible. This movie has nothing to do wirh the previous ones. It is a huge disappointment. That's the first time I was looking at my watch during an Indiana Jones... Expand
  96. Apr 11, 2016
    3
    So poor, failed attempt to recapture the classic trilogy. Harrison Ford is awesome once again as Indiana Jones, but... that's the only positive I can really say about this movie. Why Shia Labeoff????
  97. Apr 28, 2016
    0
    This movie made me lose faith in humanity. Immediately after watching it, I sank into a deep depression and almost tried to end my life.

    To this day, I refuse to acknowledge that this is an Indiana Jones movie.
  98. Jun 1, 2016
    2
    Goddamn it guys, you ruined a classic and great trilogy, which can no longer remain one of the best trilogies because now it has 4 parts and the 4th part is awful. Why would you bring in Shia Labeuof?
Metascore
65

Generally favorable reviews - based on 40 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 27 out of 40
  2. Negative: 1 out of 40
  1. Harrison Ford? Terrific -- and re-energized.
  2. Director Steven Spielberg seems intent on celebrating his entire early career here. Whatever the story there is, a vague journey to return a spectacular archeological find to its rightful home -- an unusual goal of the old grave-robber, you must admit -- gets swamped in a sea of stunts and CGI that are relentless as the scenes and character relationships are charmless.
  3. Reviewed by: Richard Corliss
    70
    There are scenes in the new movie that seem like stretching exercises at a retirement home; there are garrulous stretches, and even the title seems a few words too long. But once it gets going, Crystal Skull delivers smart, robust, familiar entertainment.