User Score
5.3

Mixed or average reviews- based on 1047 Ratings

User score distribution:
Watch 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
  1. 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
  2. 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
  3. 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!
  4. 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!
  5. Jan 12, 2014
    2
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I had to create an account just so I could review this atrocity! I honestly can't find one thing positive to say (It took me two attempts to even get through it!). Harrison Ford is as grouchy as ever and has no chemistry with anyone on screen. Karen Allen still can't act and Shia LeBeouf brings nothing to his role. Even Cate Blanchett seems to have nothing to do with her stereotypical role beyond her accent and atrocious wig. The plot is moronic and the third act may have actually cost me IQ points! Every chatty scene (and there are A LOT of them!) looks like it takes place on an indoor set and every action scene looks like it takes place in front of a green screen. Which may be on purpose but it's far more obtrusive than in previous installments. I could write full paragraphs on the stupidity of the refrigerator, Oxley, the monkeys, the quicksand/snake scene, the ants, the waterfalls, the aliens, the well as deus ex machina OR the fact that Mutt's real name is Henry Jones III, yet he somehow believes it's Henry Williams. OR a tenured professor who cannot pronounce the word "nuclear" correctly. Ugh. Expand
  6. Dec 21, 2013
    1
    There is a moment watching Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull when I realized that maybe seeing this film was a bad idea. That moment occurred less than 3 minutes in when way too much time and effort was spent focusing on a CG gopher, that did not look at all real. It added nothing to the plot and just looked bad. Someone, somewhere made a bad choice leaving that in. InThere is a moment watching Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull when I realized that maybe seeing this film was a bad idea. That moment occurred less than 3 minutes in when way too much time and effort was spent focusing on a CG gopher, that did not look at all real. It added nothing to the plot and just looked bad. Someone, somewhere made a bad choice leaving that in. In effect choosing cheap thrills over trying to make a good movie. There were a lot of things like that because it was the start of a long disappointing ride.
    My favorite moment in this film is when Indiana Jones rides out that nuclear blast in the lead lined fridge. He comes out the other side alive and in one piece. Sure he gets the awkward scrub-down after. But he`s not cooked hamburger, which is a testament to how ridiculous the film is as a whole.
    I don`t really remember much of the ``plot`` of the middle of the film. Something about not dead-dead people, a crazy friend and indies son played by actor Shia Labeouf. I get they were trying to go for an Indie 2.0 here. Maybe create a character likable enough for a spinoff franchise, or taking up Harrison Ford`s mantle. In this regard they failed badly. His character has all the swagger of Indiana at the end of the original trilogy, without having done anything to earn it. And it makes him extremely un-likable. They should have gone back to basics. Choosing an actor that more reflects Indiana at the start of the first film and show him growing up.
    Throw in all the extremely unlikely chase sequences (I know how ridiculous the original trilogy is in that regard, but the setup was better), the intermittent magnetism of the crystal skull, Harrison Ford being ``too old for this sh*t`` and capping it all off with that bizarre out of left field ending. And what you are left with is something so awful it does not deserve acknowledgement as an Indiana Jones film. This is a bad B movie with A list actors, an A list director, and a huge budget.

    If one good thing came of this film it is this. Scientists went back and examined the crystal skull`s in the museums, and found them all to be fraudulently passed off as historical relics, when they are more simply modern art.
    Expand
  7. Oct 8, 2013
    4
    They should've thought about this idea 10-15 years earlier, when Harrison Ford wasn't a senior citizen. Also, it should've stuck true to the original trilogy (Go away Shia LaBeouf) Second really big flaw is they gave us more of a 50s groove then a 30s charm. In Raiders of the Losr Ark, It was clear the villain was Belloq. In the Temple of Doom, Mola Ram and the Last Crusade was Donovan andThey should've thought about this idea 10-15 years earlier, when Harrison Ford wasn't a senior citizen. Also, it should've stuck true to the original trilogy (Go away Shia LaBeouf) Second really big flaw is they gave us more of a 50s groove then a 30s charm. In Raiders of the Losr Ark, It was clear the villain was Belloq. In the Temple of Doom, Mola Ram and the Last Crusade was Donovan and Schneider. Here, the only villains I see are Spielberg and Lucas Expand
  8. 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
  9. 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!
  10. Feb 23, 2012
    3
    This movie should have never been made. It is a discredit to the original trilogy, and it damages the series as a whole. Aliens should not have been included in an Indiana Jones film. Also, I know that there has always be an element of the ridiculous in the franchise, but seriously, some of the scenes in this film are downright ludicrous. Spielberg and Lucas need to learn that theirThis movie should have never been made. It is a discredit to the original trilogy, and it damages the series as a whole. Aliens should not have been included in an Indiana Jones film. Also, I know that there has always be an element of the ridiculous in the franchise, but seriously, some of the scenes in this film are downright ludicrous. Spielberg and Lucas need to learn that their classics should not be tampered with. A train wreck. Expand
  11. 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.
  12. 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.
  13. 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
  14. 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
  15. 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
  16. Sep 18, 2010
    2
    19 years to wait for the 4th movie of Indiana Jones and it a half disappointing
  17. 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
  18. Sam
    Jun 19, 2009
    4
    This movie was a dissapointment but it wasn't a complete failure. I found myself enjoying the first half of the movie but the 2nd half was awful. The CGI looked incredibly out of place and some of the later scenes were just stupid. The old Indie movies had scenes that were unbelieveable to be sure but at least they were fun and enjoyable to watch. The scene with Mutt swinging through This movie was a dissapointment but it wasn't a complete failure. I found myself enjoying the first half of the movie but the 2nd half was awful. The CGI looked incredibly out of place and some of the later scenes were just stupid. The old Indie movies had scenes that were unbelieveable to be sure but at least they were fun and enjoyable to watch. The scene with Mutt swinging through the trees with the monkeys was incredibly lame. The acting was decent but it couldn't save the movie from its awful plot. Expand
  19. KeenanS
    Jun 15, 2009
    4
    This film was such a disappointment, I will probably not be able to watch the old trilogy again for years after what this film left me with. It was one of the biggest disappointments ever and was a huge letdown. This film was ridiculous for all the wrong reasons and failed miserably. Why George Lucas? Do you insist on ruining every classic franchise you helped create? Bad CGI, bad acting, This film was such a disappointment, I will probably not be able to watch the old trilogy again for years after what this film left me with. It was one of the biggest disappointments ever and was a huge letdown. This film was ridiculous for all the wrong reasons and failed miserably. Why George Lucas? Do you insist on ruining every classic franchise you helped create? Bad CGI, bad acting, bad music, bad action scenes, this film screwed up in all the areas Indy should be succeeding in. Don't ever watch it. Expand
  20. AL
    May 3, 2009
    1
    One of the worst movies I've seen in a long time. Unbelievably bad. Startlingly implausible at every turn, Wildly illogical and improbable occurrences in almost every scene. Embarrassing dialog throughout, as if it were written by a child. And this is the first ILM film (assuming they did the FX) I've seen with anything other than impressive and innovative visual effects... in One of the worst movies I've seen in a long time. Unbelievably bad. Startlingly implausible at every turn, Wildly illogical and improbable occurrences in almost every scene. Embarrassing dialog throughout, as if it were written by a child. And this is the first ILM film (assuming they did the FX) I've seen with anything other than impressive and innovative visual effects... in fact, they were shockingly substandard. The CGI on this film looked about like the quality of what you'd see on a, say, a Sci Fi channel original film... which is to say not very good. It seems as if they decided to rush a new Indy flick to the theaters; it seems to be cobbled together hastily with no attention to even the most basic points of physics and logic, maybe to meet some contractual obligation... or maybe just to squeeze one last drop out of the Indiana Jones series before Harrison Ford gets too old to be believable in the role. Expand
  21. 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. Collapse
  22. nige
    Jan 4, 2009
    1
    What i really don't get is why have CGI gophers, monkeys, scorpions and ants, but then use a rubber snake for Indy's biggest phobia? Silly, silly film. Some unintentionally funny lines though 'Not space.......the space between space' ??!?? John Hurt must have cringed all the way to the bank.
  23. RonaldB.
    Jan 4, 2009
    3
    Replete with anachronisms ("same-old, same-old" which could be used as an overall comment) and acting on-the-cob, "Crystal Skull" was one of the few Spielberg efforts that found its way back to the slipcase ere the ending.
  24. 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
  25. Anonymous
    Dec 11, 2008
    1
    Simply wretched from beginning to end ... and the middle kinda sucks too.
  26. 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.
  27. Daniel
    Dec 8, 2008
    0
    This movie was a horrible experience, and for people who appreciated the good movies of the series (1st and 3rd), it is also an insult. 10 minutes into it i was already trying to figure out what the hell spielberg and lucas were thinking when they made this. The movie barely makes any sense on it's own terms, let alone ours. I mean god, i gotta ask this, can you really survive a This movie was a horrible experience, and for people who appreciated the good movies of the series (1st and 3rd), it is also an insult. 10 minutes into it i was already trying to figure out what the hell spielberg and lucas were thinking when they made this. The movie barely makes any sense on it's own terms, let alone ours. I mean god, i gotta ask this, can you really survive a nuclear blast by HIDING IN A FRIDGE? Questions like these are the ones you'll find yourselves asking throughout this movie. And it's such a boring experience, whereas in previous movies, you felt excited and some emotion as to the things that we're being discussed and found (ark or the cup of christ), here they don't even bother with any of that, it's just a 200 mile per second experience where nothing is really analized or explored, and nothing makes sense. Avoid this movie at all costs, it is not indiana jones by any means, it's a waste of money and time. Expand
  28. 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
  29. 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.
  30. 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
  31. 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.
  32. SeanC.
    Oct 30, 2008
    2
    A disgusting display of Lucas' CGI. His answer to every problem in filmmaking seems to be, let's just do it in post with computer graphics. Spielberg's motive's for making this film are unbeknowst to me, the acting was lousy and the story, weird and disconnected (Even for an Indiana Jones Movie) and the effects were even worse. I wouldn't mind another Indiana A disgusting display of Lucas' CGI. His answer to every problem in filmmaking seems to be, let's just do it in post with computer graphics. Spielberg's motive's for making this film are unbeknowst to me, the acting was lousy and the story, weird and disconnected (Even for an Indiana Jones Movie) and the effects were even worse. I wouldn't mind another Indiana Jones, just don't let Lucas get his mits on it and let Harrison Ford take a seat. I enjoy sequels that are done in appreciation of the previous films, this was not the case. I will not be buying this unholy mess on DVD and I don't recommend it to anyone. Expand
  33. 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
  34. 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
  35. 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.
  36. TomN.
    Oct 18, 2008
    3
    Horrible, the plot is whack. Everything is sloppy. Too many plot holes. Ridiculous. Action is also stupid, retarded, and contrived. Skull is maagnetic, but only when they throw the gun powder into the air does the powder then floats and follows? Nuclear warhead? Aliens, did they explain anything about it? Aliens, seriously?
  37. GrahamM.r
    Oct 17, 2008
    0
    Harrison Ford is my favorite movie star and he can't save this sad, sad excuse for a movie. Lucas...please go away and stop ruining all the franchises that made our childhoods great. Nothing in this movie makes sense or is entertaining. The special effects are awful as well. As for the end.....It's a joke this movie made so much money.
  38. 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
  39. 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.
  40. JamesL.
    Oct 12, 2008
    2
    I'm sorry. Indiana Jones defeats the aliens after he survives a 'nukular' blast. They write in a double agent that Indiana lets follow them around just to stir things up. I really have to wonder if all of these reviewers weren't paid off by Lucas.
  41. P.J.S.
    Oct 6, 2008
    1
    This is the worst kind of Hollywood drivel. The whole film looks like a Saturday morning kid show shot on a badly dressed sound stage. Other Indy movies were fun and action filled. This movie tries too hard to be fun, so it'd nothing but forced humor that's never funny, and it comes off as just plain dumb. If I had not been in the theater with other people, I would have walked out.
  42. HenryJ.
    Oct 3, 2008
    1
    So bad, you'll be angry.
  43. KevinG.
    Sep 30, 2008
    1
    Terrible movie. Anyone who gave this movie a positive review is a complete moron. Fake looking sets,like everything was flimed on a sound stage.Bad acting,Talking and talking and talking to eat up time and about things that don't advance the plot. I put this movie on the same level of howard the Duck and death to smoochy.
  44. 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
  45. JamesB.
    Sep 5, 2008
    1
    Proof that George Lucas needs to be sterilized for the good of humanity!
  46. JoMama
    Sep 3, 2008
    0
    Disgrace to Indiana Jones. I laughed through it it was so bad.
  47. JayD.
    Aug 30, 2008
    2
    Best way to describe it? Another George Lucas cash-grab. Ford is too old and creaky for the role now, and it's obvious each scene he's in. Karen Allen is another who hasn't aged well, leaving the love aspect between the two akin to watching your grandparents makeout. Ech. And why why why why why does Speilberg say Shia LeBouf is the next Tom Hanks? From his deep, riveting Best way to describe it? Another George Lucas cash-grab. Ford is too old and creaky for the role now, and it's obvious each scene he's in. Karen Allen is another who hasn't aged well, leaving the love aspect between the two akin to watching your grandparents makeout. Ech. And why why why why why does Speilberg say Shia LeBouf is the next Tom Hanks? From his deep, riveting roles in Transformers & this stinker? I doubt he's ever read from a script not written by a 12 year-old. Great, another wonderful trilogy from my childhood marred by George Lucas' lust for a 12th home in the Carribean. On the contrary, the only cool part was the aliens. Didn't think I'd ever say it, but Indiana Jones could have used more aliens in it. Ouch. Expand
  48. SuperMarioSuperMario
    Aug 17, 2008
    4
    -I loved the original trilogy, but I didn't like this movie. Don't tell me that I'm being biased or small-minded or unfair: I wanted to like this movie as much as the others (why would I pay money otherwise?), but it wasn't me who failed, it was Lucas and Spielberg. I loved the charm and magic and energy and humour of the old films, and even the fact that they were -I loved the original trilogy, but I didn't like this movie. Don't tell me that I'm being biased or small-minded or unfair: I wanted to like this movie as much as the others (why would I pay money otherwise?), but it wasn't me who failed, it was Lucas and Spielberg. I loved the charm and magic and energy and humour of the old films, and even the fact that they were unbelievable (with the Biblical or Indian artifacts), but this movie lacks a lot of the charm, humour, grace, and magic of the original (not that it's entirely missing). It didn't feel like an Indy movie: how come we didn't laugh as much as with the originals? But really, the aliens did ruin it. It pushes fantasy into the absurd: dealing with aliens works for Fox and Scully, not Indiana Jones. -I thought the Cold War and Russians as the antagonists worked (since Indy IS older), but what totally ruins this movie is (besides the aliens) how Indy is now a father. This is a freaken horrible cliche that every movie seems to take after: the main character ages, and surprisingly, we find out he has a son; the two don't usually get along and they have to work things out and by the end father and son are united. Kiss my ass Lucas! That's the stupidest, lamest plot (next to aliens, of course) that I've ever seen. The biggest problem with this is (I'm sure any Indy fan would agree with me here): it takes the focus off Indy. Now the focus is divided between Indy and his annoying son. We all love the Indiana Jones movies because they're about Indiana Jones/Harrison Ford, who's the soul of the movie (funny, charming, accidental), but his son/Shia, takes away from what the audience wants. He's really annoying: they try to make him funny and charming like Indy, but he's really not. -The original movies are about Indiana Jones and his love interests; the only reason that Crusade worked with Indiana Jones' father is because Lucas and Spielberg still had the imagination to make it work. Also, Connery was HILARIOUS and charming. -And I didn't like the fact that there's so much explaining done in this movie: they spent so much time at the start by having Indy LECTURING to Shia about Eldorado and the Crystal Skulls so the audience can "get what the movie is about." -So bad a movie, you'd think that Shia had his head up Ford's a**, Ford has his head up Spielberg's a**, and everyone had their heads up Lucas' a**. Expand
  49. DominicM.
    Aug 16, 2008
    4
    It was alright, but it didnt have that Indiana Jones feel to it. I think George Lucas should stick to Star Wars.
  50. TerryF.
    Aug 12, 2008
    0
    Again, Lucas, just like in the Star Wars series, fails to captivate us with a good story.
  51. JohnM.
    Aug 4, 2008
    2
    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
  52. 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.
  53. JoshB.
    Jul 19, 2008
    4
    Thanks George Lucas for making another digital movie that looks like a cartoon. Maybe a commercial success, but the art of movie making is lost on you. He'd rather contract out the whole movie making process to people with apple computers. Lest I forget, the script was terrible as well. Don't see this movie, don't buy it, don't rent it.
  54. 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.
  55. JoshuaL.
    Jul 14, 2008
    4
    Movie got boring early on, and the story concept was really unoriginal. Not what I expected from an Indiana Jones movie.
  56. Dominic
    Jul 14, 2008
    2
    If the filmmaker tried to make this story or movie funny, it's not funny at all! One of the worst movies of all time!
  57. LouF.
    Jul 11, 2008
    2
    This was a terrible and disappointing movie. The plot was non-existant. It was just a stream of cgi and unbelievable special effects. George Lucas tarnishes yet another classic trilogy. Thanks George!
  58. Brad
    Jul 11, 2008
    4
    As a stand-alone action movie, this would have been decent. If it was named something different and the characters were named something other than Jones, it would have been decent. However, it just doesn't seem to feel like an Indiana Jones movie. With the Indiana Jones movies you expect unrealistic things, but this movie seemed to go well beyond that.
  59. K.Ward
    Jul 11, 2008
    2
    What a stinker, the wink, wink, nod, nod (I'm Indiana Jones) performance from Harrison ford wasn't the worst of the film. side bar roles that you wanted to care about but didn't Overly long and boring chase scenes, and the story was just a mess. Aliens, fricken aliens... you've got to be kidding. Even in the end they presented it like it was a mystery... maybe for a What a stinker, the wink, wink, nod, nod (I'm Indiana Jones) performance from Harrison ford wasn't the worst of the film. side bar roles that you wanted to care about but didn't Overly long and boring chase scenes, and the story was just a mess. Aliens, fricken aliens... you've got to be kidding. Even in the end they presented it like it was a mystery... maybe for a child. Boo. Expand
  60. 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.
  61. 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.
  62. LevS.
    Jun 26, 2008
    1
    Yes, it's meant to be a big, fun, blockbuster, but then again, so were National Treasure and Pirates of the Caribbean. What I'm sure everyone loved about the Indy movies was the charm and sense of adventure that are completely lacking in this one. Completely out of touch with the originals and sadly, poorly executed in all fields. Just another money-turner.
  63. AlexAlex
    Jun 25, 2008
    1
    Horridly Overdone ! I was watching awful acting preformed on a Disney ride. Well at least some theme park has a stunt show. Might as well have donated $10+popcorn to the senior home for 90's actors. Can you put more special effects in a movie? Might as well have been animated. Not just: "Thumbs down", Thumbs cut-off. The 1 pt is for getting it to the movie theater in time (Unfortunately).
  64. RajeevG.
    Jun 25, 2008
    4
    Story line was too fantasy-oriented; many/most events were very improbable. This is throwback to the adventure movies of the 70s but such plots seem too quaint in modern times. While some suspension of disbelief if required for this genre, the events must still have some plausibility. Not so for this movie. It was too tongue-in-cheek, even to the point where it felt that the joke was on Story line was too fantasy-oriented; many/most events were very improbable. This is throwback to the adventure movies of the 70s but such plots seem too quaint in modern times. While some suspension of disbelief if required for this genre, the events must still have some plausibility. Not so for this movie. It was too tongue-in-cheek, even to the point where it felt that the joke was on the audience, as if the filmmakers are taking use for a ride. Expand
  65. RonimusPrime
    Jun 23, 2008
    4
    Thoroughly disappointing. Didn't care what happened to anyone on screen. The acting was stilted and unemotional. Does not compare to any of the originals
  66. 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.
  67. 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.
  68. AndrewC.
    Jun 19, 2008
    3
    Mystique and script is lacking in new Indiana Jones.
  69. 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.
  70. 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.
  71. 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
  72. DavidC.
    Jun 17, 2008
    0
    Shia ruined this movie! Way over hyped.
  73. GaryB
    Jun 17, 2008
    1
    The funny thing is that Lucas refuses to let anyone see his infamous "Star Wars Holiday Special" from 1977. That was far more entertaining than this piece of garbage. Face it, he's a con man.
  74. 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.
  75. dave
    Jun 16, 2008
    1
    terrible acting, karen allen should've stayed home, Harrison Ford seemed all hunched over when he walked and if they think Shia Labeouf will be the next indy for years to come, this will be very disappointing
  76. DD.
    Jun 15, 2008
    1
    The plot was awful. Not worth the money.
  77. 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.
  78. Lesley
    Jun 14, 2008
    4
    A convoluted story where the "bad guys" always seem to be just one step behind the "good guys", even when impossible to do so. And the whole story was such a yawn that I was checking my watch after only an hour (which actually felt like two). I just kept thinking "poor Harrison Ford...that must hurt to run and jump like that at his age". And a pummeling from a man twice his size and half A convoluted story where the "bad guys" always seem to be just one step behind the "good guys", even when impossible to do so. And the whole story was such a yawn that I was checking my watch after only an hour (which actually felt like two). I just kept thinking "poor Harrison Ford...that must hurt to run and jump like that at his age". And a pummeling from a man twice his size and half his age left him with only a bloody lip? Come on. I just felt that the movie was a bore. I would not watch it again, even when it comes to The Movie Network where I could watch it for free. Once was quite enough. Expand
  79. gloria
    Jun 14, 2008
    0
    B-a-d. in e-v-e-r-y way. acting sucked, how could it not with such a l-a-m-e, shoddy script? the script had to suck because the story was written by a jack ass, yep that would be geoge - obviously all he was doing was looking to replentish his bank account with all us poor believers out here. i will never go to another movie with his or spielbergs name on it. this movie is a total joke, a B-a-d. in e-v-e-r-y way. acting sucked, how could it not with such a l-a-m-e, shoddy script? the script had to suck because the story was written by a jack ass, yep that would be geoge - obviously all he was doing was looking to replentish his bank account with all us poor believers out here. i will never go to another movie with his or spielbergs name on it. this movie is a total joke, a really bad joke. Expand
  80. 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
  81. charlesg
    Jun 13, 2008
    2
    Wow. This was a mess. The only guy who followed this storyline was the author of the last 2 Pirates of the Caribbean flicks. Never good for your essay grade when your concluding logic depends on dudes from outer space.
  82. 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!
  83. Droog
    Jun 12, 2008
    2
    Please don't see this movie -- it's awful. The first three Indy movies stand perfectly well on their own, so don't tarnish their memory by watching this boondoggle. Many people have said Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is too absurd, but that's not quite it. It's just lazy. The dialogue is poor, the acting is tired, and the predictable storyline about aliens have Please don't see this movie -- it's awful. The first three Indy movies stand perfectly well on their own, so don't tarnish their memory by watching this boondoggle. Many people have said Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is too absurd, but that's not quite it. It's just lazy. The dialogue is poor, the acting is tired, and the predictable storyline about aliens have been done far better in other films. Previous Indiana Jones movies have dealt with the supernatural before, but at least they were original. In contrast, there's isn't a single original idea in Crystal Skull. I feel everyone involved in this movie just showed up to get paid and then to go home. It's a shame, and we shouldn't support this kind of poor movie-making. Expand
  84. JonF.
    Jun 12, 2008
    3
    I am frankly shocked that a poll of film critics would give this ludicrous mess a favorable review. Could Joel Schumaker teamed with Michael Bay do any worse? Can't wait for the next Indy film set in the 1960s, he'll probably surf into Earth's atmosphere on space debris (a la DARKSTAR) after the heat shield on his Mercury spacecraft fails.
  85. DavidH.
    Jun 8, 2008
    0
    I went in with low expectations because of word of mouth and found it to be shockingly bad. Horrible special effects, terrible over-dubbing early on and rediculous plot. Do not see this movie.
  86. ES
    Jun 8, 2008
    4
    This is not the exciting, rip-roaring adventure that we were promised. It does have two good parts that come kinda/sorta close to capturing that old Indy feeling but the rest comes off as pale and lacking. And give me a break--there's no way that a guy would be wearing the same costume as he did 20 years ago (apparently Indiana hasn't grown that much since we last saw him). Ford This is not the exciting, rip-roaring adventure that we were promised. It does have two good parts that come kinda/sorta close to capturing that old Indy feeling but the rest comes off as pale and lacking. And give me a break--there's no way that a guy would be wearing the same costume as he did 20 years ago (apparently Indiana hasn't grown that much since we last saw him). Ford is always a treat but the attempts to make him look like a spry action figure seem a little too forced. And it's great to see Karen Allen again, but the whole "crystal skull" thing is just plain silly. This film is about ten years late. Expand
  87. GuyH.
    Jun 8, 2008
    0
    Did they just make this movie just to scam us out of money ill never watch a nether Lucas movie ever again.
  88. MarkoJ.
    Jun 7, 2008
    4
    I hate to say it, but this movie was just stupid. Similar to the second Indiana Jones movie, in that it is stupid. There were some exciting moments, but too many stupid things happened. I am not say it is bad, just stupid. Getting the idea yet? Don't expect much and you won't be too disapointed. Oh, Harrison Ford was good in the part.
  89. GrantS.
    Jun 7, 2008
    0
    What a complete waste of time and money! Not one ounce of creativity or fun. From the first lame sceen with the groundhogs (Caddyshack?) to the last third rate SFX water flume ride this movie was a complete disappointment and both Spielberg and Lucas should be ashamed.
  90. Michel
    Jun 6, 2008
    0
    I went into this expecting very little and I got even less. Lucas needs to admit he's past his glory days and stop trying to revisit them and Spielberg shouldn't indulge him. With hardly any real plot, no sense of urgency during any of the action scenes and their lousy CGI infused effects, and no truly great Indy moments that were memorable this film should be avoided by all but I went into this expecting very little and I got even less. Lucas needs to admit he's past his glory days and stop trying to revisit them and Spielberg shouldn't indulge him. With hardly any real plot, no sense of urgency during any of the action scenes and their lousy CGI infused effects, and no truly great Indy moments that were memorable this film should be avoided by all but the hardcore Indy fans. Expand
  91. JimJ.
    Jun 5, 2008
    2
    yes truly, this film is a crime against cinema. Given the time that was supposedly spent on getting the story right and the 3 great films preceeding it , to come up with this rubbish is unforgiveable. The problem is its Indiana Jones and you feel compelled to see it no matter how bad the reviews and heresay. If you are a fan of the previous films try your best not to fall into this cynical trap.
  92. 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.
  93. MikeS
    Jun 4, 2008
    0
    This movie was NOT good. I had such high expectations. It was a disappointment.
  94. 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.
  95. RickyQ.
    Jun 4, 2008
    4
    The two things I
  96. SteveB.
    Jun 3, 2008
    3
    Couldn't wait for it to end. So cheesy, such a rehash of the previous. It's as if they sat around and said, "OK, need to have lot's of cobwebs, skulls, skeletons, chase scene in military vehicles...Let's write a story around that." There's just no life in this one.
  97. MargaretT.
    Jun 2, 2008
    2
    Overrated. What a waste of time. The critics must love anything Lucas, Spielberg & Ford make regardless of the quality. Horrid acting, dull dialogue, nothing new to show us.
  98. TonyP
    Jun 2, 2008
    2
    Got borred within the first 30 minutes and it never got better.
  99. KyleD.
    Jun 1, 2008
    4
    I'll give the film some credit. Cut off the first 20 and last 30 minutes of the movie, and it actually drew me in. Good cinematography and decent action made me forget about the film's shoddy intro. And... that's about all I can say positively about it. The film started from an absolute crawl, and the absolute absurdity of the ending drew me to try and pull my hair out. I'll give the film some credit. Cut off the first 20 and last 30 minutes of the movie, and it actually drew me in. Good cinematography and decent action made me forget about the film's shoddy intro. And... that's about all I can say positively about it. The film started from an absolute crawl, and the absolute absurdity of the ending drew me to try and pull my hair out. Scenes were thrown in for the sake of sensationalism, dialogue was poor as is usual from Lucas' works, the movie destroys any sense of mystery by explaining every detail to the viewer, and most visual effects were thrown in for the sake of showing off ILM's latest developments. Avoid. Expand
  100. DennisL.
    Jun 1, 2008
    3
    Wow....what a sad disappointment. Spielberg and Lucas took a wonderful franchise and threw it away with this movie. Considering the theme I kept waiting for ET to show up.
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.