Sorry to bring up an old thread, but I finally got around to seeing this last night, in Blu-Ray.

I was not impressed at all, and actually, a bit disappointed.

Like others said, I agree that the characters were rather weak this time around, and that includes Indy. Didn't like Shea's character at all...very irritating. Karen Allen looked terrible, but I actually did enjoy her role...one of the few highlights.

The FX were a huge disappointment for me.  Very few things looked real. Most scenes were so obviously shot on a set, and the backgrounds just didn't work.  I know this had a budget north of $185 Million, but I just have to wonder how much of that went to the star power vs. the actual effects.

It also had a "small" feel to most of it, even though there was a huge cast of extras and really big set pieces. I don't know what triggered this, but I felt it throughout.

Story was my biggest issue though. I really didn't even get it. It just seemed like these Russians were everywhere all of a sudden, searching for this crystal skull that didn't seem to really do much, when it was all said and done. I didn't have a problem with the alien angle at all, but the way it looped from set to set just didn't seem to work for me.

I actually found myself routinely looking at the run time, as I was bored and ready for it to end, which obviously is never a good thing.

Shea swinging through the vines was ridiculous, as was the entire jungle sword fight thing.  Going over 3 huge water falls with no damage was downright silly.  And, Indy getting blown to freedom in a fridge was comical (what happened to the other fridges in the fake city?).

I'm glad it did so well, but I think it would have no matter what the film looked like. I'm also sure adding Shea to the cast drew in many new fans, which was a smart move for sure.

Disappointing for an Indy movie and by Indy movie standards probably made this out to be worse than it really was in my mind.  I have no interest in seeing ti again though, so that does say something.

Quoted from Dreamscale I actually found myself routinely looking at the run time, as I was bored and ready for it to end, which obviously is never a good thing. .

I think the biggest problem from a writing point of view was the structure. Indy was always ahead if the Russsians in the film, so there was no tension.

If you compare it to the first film, you'll see that in that one Indy was always fighting the odds and constantly having to overcome obstacles...in this he was either well ahead or having to overcome artificial obstacles (the nuclear bomb) which were resolved with luck or without effort.

You had the same problem with Lucas's last film...Star Wars.

Just seems to have forgotten the very basics of dramatic storytelling which were the lynchpin of his earlier films.

I saw this on my birthday (which is when it came out) a couple of years ago. It's definitely not as good as Raiders or The Last Crusade, and Cate Blanchett made a weak villain, but it was still enjoyable. That moment when Indy's dragged out of the boot, stoops to pick up his hat, and turns round...he's a truly iconic character.

The fridge thing was a bit ridiculous, though. I remember enjoying it at the time, but it does take the tension out of the rest of the film a tad - this is a man who can survive a nuclear blast by climbing into a fridge and being thrown hundreds of feet through the air. If he can come through that unscathed, then do the baddies really stand a chance?

It was probably worth it for a good bit of nostalgia for anyone who was around for the first ones, and I'm sure they had fun making it. I hope they don't bother with Indy 5, though. I also hope that, aside from horror, people have the good sense to leave classic '80s franchises where they are. I have a horrible image of a Back to the Future (one of my favourite films) remake with Zac Efron playing Marty McFly...why is it so horrible? Because it could so easily happen.