Paramount Pictures | Release Date: May 22, 2008
5.3
USER SCORE
Mixed or average reviews based on 1150 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
465
Mixed:
323
Negative:
362
WATCH NOW
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
2
JohnM.Aug 4, 2008
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
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
JamesL.Oct 12, 2008
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 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. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
EnriqueMay 22, 2008
R.I.P.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
2
BrittD.May 22, 2008
This movie was the biggest disappointment of all time. Absolutely terrible.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
2
CNMay 23, 2008
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 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. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
PurgueF.May 23, 2008
I've given the movie 2/10. Watching this movie I felt very disconnected due mostly to the bad acting, the plot holes, and inconceivable physics (Lucas made Gold magnetic). We all loved the originals but if you are on the fence about I've given the movie 2/10. Watching this movie I felt very disconnected due mostly to the bad acting, the plot holes, and inconceivable physics (Lucas made Gold magnetic). We all loved the originals but if you are on the fence about seeing this movie just think Star Wars Episode I. With worse acting. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
2
thedudeMay 24, 2008
It's really hard to figure out what happened here. Were they trying to make this as bad as possible? Lucas and Spielberg turn the cute and the camp up to eleven, and manage to make Temple of Doom look like a classic by comparison. It's really hard to figure out what happened here. Were they trying to make this as bad as possible? Lucas and Spielberg turn the cute and the camp up to eleven, and manage to make Temple of Doom look like a classic by comparison. Granted, it would have been hard for me to be satisfied with anything here, as Raiders of the Lost Ark is one of my all-time favorite films, but I went in expecting it to be around the quality of the Last Crusade, which wasn't too bad, or at worst Temple of Doom, which was bad but nowhere near this bad. I just can't think of anything worthwhile about this film. The more Lucas does now, the more he detracts from the excellent work he did in the late seventies and early eighties. I will be forever grateful to him for American Graffiti, Star Wars, Empire Strikes Back, Raiders of the Lost Ark, and Return of the Jedi, but everything since then is a disaster, and this film, unfortunately, just continues that trend. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
2
JamesG.May 24, 2008
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.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
DonS.May 26, 2008
Terrible dissapointment. I felt used and decieved. What a waste.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
A.NonymousMay 27, 2008
This is not the same calibrated campiness that is enjoyably found in the prior three films. No. This time around Lucas in his worsening senility has gone way outside the franchise's established universe to cook up pointless sequences This is not the same calibrated campiness that is enjoyably found in the prior three films. No. This time around Lucas in his worsening senility has gone way outside the franchise's established universe to cook up pointless sequences that can only be taken as insulting to one's intellect. Any one of the following phrases could, on it's own, summarize the disaster this film is: - CG prairie dogs - Nuclear blast-launched refrigerator ride with injury-free exit - CG monkeys with Tarzan sequence - Aliens - Psychic powers - Riding over falls of Niagara proportions (or even greater) multiple times with nary a scratch - Did I mention CG prairie dogs? I found myself wincing in the theater at the sheer funless, pointless, stupidity that these and many other portions of this film had to offer. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
2
SaraHMay 27, 2008
This is Indiana Jones scrubbed free of anything that made it remotely fun- Lucas was concerned about making it too violent, so he "toned it down." Translation: it is incredibly lame. Almost anything that was good in it is a rehash of the old This is Indiana Jones scrubbed free of anything that made it remotely fun- Lucas was concerned about making it too violent, so he "toned it down." Translation: it is incredibly lame. Almost anything that was good in it is a rehash of the old movies, which had grit and grime. The film quality is muddy because it was digitally filmed, and the ridiculous plot- complete with aliens and crystal skulls- is laughable. If the idea of a squeaky clean, murky looking video game with lame jokes is appealing to you, then run, don't walk. And bring your grandma. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
2
BrandonD.Jun 1, 2008
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 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. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
BillB.Jun 29, 2008
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 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. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
LouF.Jul 11, 2008
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!
0 of 1 users found this helpful
2
JonB.Aug 3, 2008
Some of the adventure remains from the original trilogy, but being on the bench too long has led to atrophy of this classic series.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
NC.Nov 12, 2008
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 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
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
DaveYMay 21, 2008
Huh, what the hell just happened? Just back from the Midnight premiere. Indiana Jones meets Mars Attack. Not to mention killer ants, sword fighting, and Shia LeBeauf swinging on vines with a gang of monkeys. I am extremely baffled. I really Huh, what the hell just happened? Just back from the Midnight premiere. Indiana Jones meets Mars Attack. Not to mention killer ants, sword fighting, and Shia LeBeauf swinging on vines with a gang of monkeys. I am extremely baffled. I really am. Aliens...really? C'mon Spielberg, lets try to keep Indiana Jones and E.T. seperate films. And please god don't let Shia become the heir to the throne. End this series now, before you make it worse...again. Expand
6 of 7 users found this helpful
2
crystaldullMay 22, 2008
George Lucas needs to be stopped. I could have come up with a better plot in about nineteen minutes, he had nineteen years... The film degenerates into a bunch of CGI nonsense - I mean, for god's sake George and Steven, we've all George Lucas needs to be stopped. I could have come up with a better plot in about nineteen minutes, he had nineteen years... The film degenerates into a bunch of CGI nonsense - I mean, for god's sake George and Steven, we've all seen this sub-Playstation stuff before. Close encounters of the third-rate. While Spielberg should be castigated for what amounts to a vanity project, the real failing of the film is the utterly nonsensical story (thanks, GL); this is quite an achievement given that the first films involved the Ark of the Covenant, the Holy Grail and Sankara stones, which let's face it looked like glow-in-the-dark potatoes. If the film had any saving grace, it was that Jar Jar Binks didn't feature; if he had, I wouldn't have been at all surprised. Yet another Darth Vader/Frankenstein 'Noooooooo' moment, which amounted to a ruination of fond childhood memories. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
2
RobMay 24, 2008
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 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
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
JOshradMay 24, 2008
Lucas ruins another saga. Wow, Steven is a sell out for letting this film be made.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
DanH.May 26, 2008
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 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.) Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
AramisG.May 27, 2008
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 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. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
JasperV.May 31, 2008
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 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
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
JustinBJun 16, 2008
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.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
PhilH.Jun 18, 2008
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 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
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
WWABTT123Sep 18, 2010
19 years to wait for the 4th movie of Indiana Jones and it a half disappointing
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
2
SpacePopeSep 4, 2011
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 wasFor 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
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
2
KevyBJan 12, 2014
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
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
2
MoviedoozieJul 4, 2015
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 aI 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
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
2
EC2015Nov 26, 2015
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 goodOh 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
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
2
powerhouse1996Jul 5, 2016
Whats Wrong With This Movie Everything This Movie Is A Disgrace To The Indiana Jones Trademark And Should Be Wiped Off This Planet ... Why The Hell Would You Put Shia lebuff as "JR" like WTF Were There Smoking 40kg Of Weed When Makeing ThisWhats Wrong With This Movie Everything This Movie Is A Disgrace To The Indiana Jones Trademark And Should Be Wiped Off This Planet ... Why The Hell Would You Put Shia lebuff as "JR" like WTF Were There Smoking 40kg Of Weed When Makeing This Movie... Nuff Said I Gotta Go Watch The Original 3 Movies Just To Compensate The Pain Of Reviewing This **** Pile Of **** Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
1
KirkM.May 27, 2008
As with all recycled forms of art and entertainment, there is a serious danger of losing something important in any later reincarnation of something so intangibly brilliant. Hence the relationship between this newest of Indiana Jones films As with all recycled forms of art and entertainment, there is a serious danger of losing something important in any later reincarnation of something so intangibly brilliant. Hence the relationship between this newest of Indiana Jones films and the incomparable first installment of the legendary trilogy. Artistically speaking, Spielberg and Lucas have sacrificed all integrity and craftsmanship in making this movie, and it sadly begs the question of arrogance, greed, and/or possible serious degradation of their once electrifying, even magical movie-making skills. This film is not only an insult to their previous work and its enduring audience, it embodies everything that is wrong with modern film production. What made such films as "Raiders" and "Star Wars" so compelling was their balance of superb acting, script, and plot, coupled with a measured employment of technology, thus delivering a movie that had a soul and a story to tell. Just as in modern music production, we're seeing less and less of that as the years go by. Just because we have CG doesn't mean it must be used rampantly, and just because a film has Indiana Jones contained in the title doesn't mean you don't have to try as hard to deliver on the fundamentals. Perhaps all concerned with this movie are laughing all the way to the bank, but it leaves one with a dejecting, inescapable question: are these really are the same people who brought us those iconic masterpieces of yesterday? Maybe so, but thankfully the works they made when they were hungry, innovative, and masterful will live on even if their ingenuity won't. Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful
1
daveJun 16, 2008
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
2 of 2 users found this helpful
1
HenryJ.Oct 3, 2008
So bad, you'll be angry.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
P.J.S.Oct 6, 2008
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 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. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
JamesC.May 18, 2008
He doesn't wear the fedora with quite the same jaunty angle, his bullwhip doesn't crack as smartly - and Harrison Ford looks all of his 65 years.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
1
GwenA.May 22, 2008
This is possibly the worst movie ever made. It only gets a 1 because it is entertaining in the sheer horrendousness of every aspect of this movie. If you like Indiana Jones, don't see this.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
1
kend.May 23, 2008
I have been a dedicated Indy fan for many years, and when you consider ticket prices these days, I think all Indy fans should have received a better plot for thier buck. The acting was great and it was nice to see an old friend.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
1
TimCMay 25, 2008
Cinematagrahy was the best part of this movie. There was no feeling of adventure or risk that the previous Indiana movies provided. The ending was a huge disappointment based on the time period and what happened. The sense of wonder about Cinematagrahy was the best part of this movie. There was no feeling of adventure or risk that the previous Indiana movies provided. The ending was a huge disappointment based on the time period and what happened. The sense of wonder about the crystal skull was a huge let down when the ending was revealed. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
JDMay 28, 2008
Ok, I'm really confused. Because some of you people actually seemed to like this film. I feel like I mistakenly wandered into the wrong one, because the "Indiana Jones" (and it hurts me to call it that) I saw was possibly the most Ok, I'm really confused. Because some of you people actually seemed to like this film. I feel like I mistakenly wandered into the wrong one, because the "Indiana Jones" (and it hurts me to call it that) I saw was possibly the most horrible, rambling, nonsensical, characterless piece of rubbish I've seen since Pirates 3. Someone needs to get George down from the ceiling fan and remind him of what used to make his stories good... simple plot, good characters (CG monkeys not the same thing), sense of humor, and just a dash of subtlety. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
GaryBJun 17, 2008
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.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
AlexAlexJun 25, 2008
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 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). Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
LevS.Jun 26, 2008
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 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. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
KevinG.Sep 30, 2008
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 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. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
JamesB.Sep 5, 2008
Proof that George Lucas needs to be sterilized for the good of humanity!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
nigeJan 4, 2009
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 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. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
ALMay 3, 2009
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 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
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
RayH.Oct 22, 2008
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 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
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
RobKMay 23, 2008
Read the Village Voice review, it is right on the money with its review. George Lucas had his directorial hands all over this movie. I couldn't get over how fake this movie looked. There was no authenticity at all. Not a single action Read the Village Voice review, it is right on the money with its review. George Lucas had his directorial hands all over this movie. I couldn't get over how fake this movie looked. There was no authenticity at all. Not a single action scene looked real. The dialogue was atrocious. Karen Allen looked scary with her plastic surgery face grinning creepily throughout. There was no joy or crispness to the plot. Aliens? Really 19 years and that's the script they used one involving aliens. Indy always was about mythology and history but never sci fi. Awfully disapointing in every way. Its a shame Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
1
DavidM.May 23, 2008
Seeing Harrison Ford was the only redeeming quality of this movie. It drifted so far from the origins of the series into a hard-to-believe concoction of failure.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
1
FrancescoC.May 23, 2008
Very bad. There aren't a story and the characters are awful.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
1
AkioC.May 24, 2008
CG gophers! Shia Tarzan Labuff! Alien Flying Saucers! George Lucas has completed his descent. Game over Georgie!
0 of 1 users found this helpful
1
DimitreR.May 24, 2008
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 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
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
PaulMay 26, 2008
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 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
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
AndrewS.May 27, 2008
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!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
ChrisL.Jun 19, 2008
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 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. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
RussellJJun 27, 2009
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 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
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
ManuelB.Nov 8, 2008
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.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
BCDec 11, 2008
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, 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. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
OwenP.May 22, 2008
Hmmm, let me think for just a moment....why did they make this movie? Better yet, how did they allow this script to get in the hands of Spielberg. Suppose they said,"The hell with it." I thought Temple of Doom was the weaker of the series, Hmmm, let me think for just a moment....why did they make this movie? Better yet, how did they allow this script to get in the hands of Spielberg. Suppose they said,"The hell with it." I thought Temple of Doom was the weaker of the series, but it's a masterpiece next to Crystal Skull. I wanted to like this movie, but the interest just gets tired as it progresses. Sorry to all fans, stick to the originals. Expand
3 of 4 users found this helpful
1
BethD.May 22, 2008
Worst movie I have ever seen. I'm sorry I stayed up late to watch the premiere. Absolutely terrible.
3 of 4 users found this helpful
1
MiguelVerdeMay 23, 2008
I walked out in the first 15 minutes. It was that bad. Lucas Jar Jar'd another one.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
MargaretM.May 25, 2008
This is no indiana jones movie. what happened? would have been just as easy to make a decent movie now wouldn't it? Fools.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
DD.Jun 15, 2008
The plot was awful. Not worth the money.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
AnonymousDec 11, 2008
Simply wretched from beginning to end ... and the middle kinda sucks too.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
dellamorteMay 10, 2011
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 fatalThis 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
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
1
RedfordstoJul 21, 2015
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 fundThis 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
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
1
mintloNov 25, 2011
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.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
1
mrjeffsirMar 27, 2012
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!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! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
1
Gamed2longDec 21, 2013
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 CGThere 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
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
1
jcasetnlJul 7, 2013
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
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
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
1
marcmyworksJun 25, 2014
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!
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
0
GrantS.Jun 7, 2008
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 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. Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful
0
JoMamaSep 3, 2008
Disgrace to Indiana Jones. I laughed through it it was so bad.
2 of 2 users found this helpful
0
indyfanMay 31, 2008
Worst film ever. Plot is non existant. SFX are poor. Pacing is aweful. Harrison Ford looks like he's wearing depends the entire film. George Lucas kills another franchise. Don't waster your time or money on this, you'll never Worst film ever. Plot is non existant. SFX are poor. Pacing is aweful. Harrison Ford looks like he's wearing depends the entire film. George Lucas kills another franchise. Don't waster your time or money on this, you'll never get it back Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful
0
JimB.Jun 1, 2008
Crap they mad this movie just to make money, sad sad day for movies.
1 of 1 users found this helpful
0
MichelJun 6, 2008
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 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
2 of 2 users found this helpful
0
DavidH.Jun 8, 2008
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.
2 of 2 users found this helpful
0
DanielDec 8, 2008
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 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
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
JohnVMay 22, 2008
Infuriatingly awful. Obviously a movie hijacked by George Lukas. Worst of all, it started turning into Stargate.
3 of 5 users found this helpful
0
RichardS.May 22, 2008
A cheesy addition to the Indiana Jones trilogy. Two hours of constant location changes, character introductions, and plot movements without much explanation at all. Spoilers: Being a fan of the original Indiana Jones movies I was really A cheesy addition to the Indiana Jones trilogy. Two hours of constant location changes, character introductions, and plot movements without much explanation at all. Spoilers: Being a fan of the original Indiana Jones movies I was really disappointed when the movie's main villain walked into view and we are greeted with a psychopathic feminist wielding a rapier. Furthermore, this movie takes a huge detour from the feel of the originals and explores a quazi-1950's the Fonz kind of feel, and then goes on a strange science-fiction plot track involving flying-saucers, aliens, and the Mayan race. This movie could have done with a lot more explanation and transitional periods because it barreled along as a rapid pace and while it did the plot holes began to mount up. Near the end you are left with little clue as to what they're exactly doing or why and a distinct lack of purpose behind the characters. For the characters you have Shia LaBeouf playing a young punk who acts almost exactly like the Fonz, Karen Allen whose role in the movie does more to tear down Indiana Jone's reputation than to augment him, and a very odd character played by Ray Winstone, who initially double-crosses Indiana, and then is welcomed by the Indiana family while they're running away from the Russians for no reason and without any sort of redemption. Indiana family? Yes. Mimicking the feel of a soap opera, the young punk who had been tagging along with Indiana is revealed to be Marion's son; but what's this?! He's Indiana's son also?! Out of wedlock? It's ridiculous and totally unneeded. Indiana's lack of utter compassion for the child makes it obvious that the actors didn't buy it either. Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful
0
SlumpsB.May 23, 2008
A film wholly unconnected to human intuition, though not without gratuitously empty references to the motifs of the 'Indy' installments that came before it. The film's vein attempts to flesh out its own credibility are as A film wholly unconnected to human intuition, though not without gratuitously empty references to the motifs of the 'Indy' installments that came before it. The film's vein attempts to flesh out its own credibility are as non-believable as the preposterous veil of Russian accented-speech provided by the train-wreck of a character displayed by Cate Blanchett. There is not a wide shot to be found in the movie entire, save for the distracting glow of CGI shots George Lucas clearly devised in a wet dream. Shia 'The Beef' LeBoeuf is in obvious Academy Award form, offering a plethora of hilarious one-liners and not a single reasonable excuse for his presence in the film. John Hurt's portrayal of the lovably-one-dimensional 'Ox' left me wondering if he was payed for his role or if he had merely gotten drunk and refused to leave the set. My only hope is that I will muster the courage to watch the original trilogy some day in the future. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
MichaelB.May 25, 2008
This is the worst Indiana Jones movie by such a wide margin it made me long to watch Temple of Doom again. The best thing I can say about Lucas' ridiculously bad script (he needed nearly 20 years to come up withthis??) is that there is This is the worst Indiana Jones movie by such a wide margin it made me long to watch Temple of Doom again. The best thing I can say about Lucas' ridiculously bad script (he needed nearly 20 years to come up withthis??) is that there is no Jar Jar Binks. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
FantasyMay 27, 2008
Exploitation of a once great character. REFUND!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
gloriaJun 14, 2008
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 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
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
DavidC.Jun 17, 2008
Shia ruined this movie! Way over hyped.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
NickB.Jun 1, 2008
This is the worst installment of the Indiana Jones movies. Within the first 10 minutes I wanted to walk out and get my money back. The acting was terrible and the storyline was just too much to handle
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
GuyH.Jun 8, 2008
Did they just make this movie just to scam us out of money ill never watch a nether Lucas movie ever again.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
GrahamM.rOct 17, 2008
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. 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. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
Tylerw.May 22, 2008
A complete piece of trash. we left after an hour. a pathetic self mockery that only exposed the old age of the lead and the lack of imagination of the crew responsible. george lucas makes a good first movie, and then spends the next four A complete piece of trash. we left after an hour. a pathetic self mockery that only exposed the old age of the lead and the lack of imagination of the crew responsible. george lucas makes a good first movie, and then spends the next four destroying the dignity of the first. they will certainly make money on it. the toys are already in the store. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful
0
SteveW.May 23, 2008
Horrible in all ways! Terrible acting, ugly visual effects, substandard direction, and worst of all, horrendous screen-writing. May rank as my most hated film of all time! Don't waste your money on seeing this trash.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
0
MikeR.May 23, 2008
That was the last movie I ever see that has any involvement of George Lucas. You sir ought to be ashamed of yourself. 20 years to get this movie right and this is the schlock you put out. I expect this kind of garbage from Michael Bay and That was the last movie I ever see that has any involvement of George Lucas. You sir ought to be ashamed of yourself. 20 years to get this movie right and this is the schlock you put out. I expect this kind of garbage from Michael Bay and Brendan Fraser - but come on....utterly disasterous. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
0
KyleB.May 24, 2008
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 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
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
jackS.May 24, 2008
[***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 [***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
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
NateMay 24, 2008
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 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
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
JosephSMay 26, 2008
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 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
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
MauriceMay 27, 2008
A big, resounding BOMB!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
NateBMay 27, 2008
The only thing that could've been worse is if it Indy was a snuff film starring my family.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
0
DionT.May 27, 2008
One of the worst movies ever!
0 of 1 users found this helpful
0
BassemH.May 27, 2008
The movie started out with a shatered ark lying on the ground. How very appropriate - everything in this movie distroyed the legacy of this franchise. Unwatchable, terrible acting, Ravonwood smiling like an idiot in every scene and The movie started out with a shatered ark lying on the ground. How very appropriate - everything in this movie distroyed the legacy of this franchise. Unwatchable, terrible acting, Ravonwood smiling like an idiot in every scene and unbelievably bad story development. All I can say is wow and beg Lucas and Spielberg to stop ruining my childhood memories - stop going for the cash and retire!!!! Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful