Comments: Rumors to the contrary....

I saw Indy this weekend. "Soulless" is exactly right.

I blame George Lucas, and I saw in it one of the same problems I saw in the new Star Wars series -- the effects detract from the film. The problem with them is that they simply mock the laws of physics and the eye knows this, so instead of making the stunts look super, they make them all frankly unbelievable. Cartoonish. I never thought Indy and company were in any real danger. Contrast that with the first Indiana Jones movie's great scenes (the rolling ball, the snakes, the fight with the big Nazi by the plane, or the fights on the truck) and the sense of danger that was added there and there is no comparison -- the cheaper film was far better and the cheap effects were far more realistic.

Plus, there was zero character development. Cate Blanchett was wooden. Shia LeBouef was just annoying. And Karen Allen looked fidgety throughout the whole thing. Add to that that she and Harrison Ford are like, 65, and it just made me uncomfortable. It really detracted from the fight scenes -- no one wants to see grandma and grandpa get hurt.

It wasn't awful, but I doubt I'd ever pop it into the DVD player in the future. I'd rate it as marginally better than the Temple of Doom, but nowhere near Indy I and Indy III in terms of quality.

Posted by The Abbot at May 28, 2008 10:25 AM