The Article You're Reading Right Now

As it turns out, it’s not the years or the mileage. It’s the baggage.

By Burbanked on Feb 15, 2008 in Henry Jones Jr., Movie Marketing 101, Movies, Terrible Twos, Trailers | 934 views |

I’ve mentioned many, many times in these pages my great affection and affinity for the Indiana Jones character and all three movies created in the franchise. I truly believe that they represent among the best that cinema has to offer, and I hold them deeply in my heart because of what spectacular, precious gems they are to me and my memories of being a young, starry-eyed filmgoer. I should also say that although you’ll have a hard time convincing me that a fourth Indiana Jones movie was ever necessary, I’m open to the concept and execution of it, if only because the optimist in me wants to believe that Spielberg, Lucas, Ford and the rest of the incredibly talented artisans creating the movie can find that magic once more.

So it truly gives me no excitement or joy to express to you that much of the new Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull trailer just makes me cranky as hell.

The parts of it I love, I do love. But the parts that have me surprised, dismayed and a little queasy are the ones that just feel so very wrong for the character, the ongoing story, the filmmaking and the purpose behind it all. Take a look at the clip here first:

I’ll start off sharing my crabby rants, after the jump:

I’m amazed that they’d burn a good third of this trailer rehashing the other movies. Astounding. To spend that kind of trailer real estate reminding your audience of your character’s “brand” is, I think, miserably desperate. Does Paramount have so little faith that 2008 movie audiences won’t know this character? I know it’s been a while since he’s been in the multiplex, but there’s got to be a more clever way to remind us of Indy’s iconic status than to reuse old footage.
And what’s more, the old footage doesn’t lead up to anything. “He protected the power of the divine…he saved the cradle of civilization…he triumphed over armies of evil…” and then: “…the adventure continues.” That’s it? After heroic verbs like “protect” and “save” and “triumph” we get something as wimpy as “continue”? Why waste a build-up on that kind of letdown?
Winstone: “This isn’t going to be easy” Ford: “Not as easy as it used to be.” Me: “Wait. What? When exactly has ANYTHING been easy for Indiana Jones? Isn’t the whole point of his character that he thinks things will be easier than they are? Don’t we love about him that his attitude’s always been “no problem” when in fact every exploit is a major, life-threatening adventure?
“Damn. I thought that was going to be closer.” Fine, this is a funny moment, but I don’t think I’m being too picky when I say that this kind of thing would have been handled in the other movies with a panicked smile or a sardonic look. Think of Indy disabling the Nazi who discovers him putting on the too-small uniform in Raiders or the looks Indy gives when fighting the huge thugee in Doom. NOTHING goes the way Indy plans it to go; that’s the charm and the humanity of his character. He rarely needed a snarky one-liner to tell us that fact before, and in the middle of a fistfight it doesn’t make much sense to be quippy.
There are far too many computer-generated effects in this trailer. I know that’s the way it’s got to be, but what happened to Frank Marshall and the others crowing about how they were going to do this the old-fashioned way, with Big Macho Practical Stunts and effects?
Is there a single decent shot of Marion in this trailer? If so, why did I miss it? If not, why not?
Hey, look at that big vehicle up-ending and flying toward the windshield of the truck Indy is in! I haven’t seen that special effect since the last eight Michael Bay movies that made me sick to my stomache!
And if you didn’t get this in that point above, the moment I compare a Spielberg movie to one of Bay’s, I’m feeling seriously depressed.

To be fair, there are a number of things that are also rather terrific here:

They couldn’t have picked a better sequence to begin the new footage. The old-style car, circle of gunmen and Indy picking up the hat are indeed classic, goosebump-inducing shots. Superb, really. Why not just start the trailer with this?
Ford looks great in the outfit, the sets are wonderful and the clip is extremely well-paced.
They haven’t spoiled the whole movie through this trailer, and that’s a thing of beauty. I know there’ll be much more footage shown before the movie opens, but at least this only teases better than a lot of others.
LaBeouf: “You’re a teacher?” Ford: “Part-time!” Okay, that’s a great exchange and the low-angle shot on Indy is pretty damn excellent.
Come to think of it, part of what I do like about this trailer is that we’re only given a Minimum LaBeouf Allowance (MLA). Yet one wonders: if the studio is so afraid that we don’t know who Indiana Jones is, why aren’t they playing up the youngster’s involvement?
That shot of Indy swinging on the whip and kicking someone through a window is truly exceptional.
And I do like the underground-spirally-treacherous-staircase bit. I know it’s probably a computer effect, but that one sold me. Very cool.

By the way, my blogging brother-in-cynicism Ray at The Rec Show does a smashing job of reminding us that George Lucas’ ability to cut a great trailer has very, very little to do with the quality of the finished movie product.

In the end, the Crystal Skull trailer has me feeling excited, yet conflicted. I would never not see this movie, and no amount of botched marketing will keep me away. Maybe some of my silly gripes above will be improved or removed by the time the film is done. This trailer has some greatness and I know I’ll probably like the movie in May, but they haven’t really convinced me yet that this was a movie that had to be made in the first place.

Trackback URL

14 Comments so far

pacheco | Feb 15, 2008 | Reply

My personal opinion:

I brushed off a lot of your complaints. I’m not nearly the Indy fan that you are, but I’m not too bothered by some things that are more about the trailer than they are about the film.

For example, the old footage and title cards. Sure it’s annoying, and it’s bad practice for a trailer, but I really don’t think it reflects TOO much on how they’re approaching the film. The early trailer for Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire did the same thing (it had clips of each of the main characters throughout the first 3 films), and EVERYONE knows who Harry Potter is. I ended up loving the movie and just being slightly annoyed by that part of the trailer.

I do agree that the “quippy”ness in the middle of the fight was annoying and possibly disconcerning.

The CG, however, does not bother me. While I can admit that I’m a sucker for some good CG, I’m not THAT much of a sucker. I saw past the visuals of 300 and saw shallowness, and Transformers was just a mess of CG. But when it’s well done, I love it. The thing is, we’re not in the 80’s anymore. It’s a different era of filmmaking. So while it might feel better, more nostalgic, and more consistent with the series to have Indy 4 contain many more practical effects, I don’t have a problem with it having plenty of CG. Spielberg’s a different filmmaker now. He’s not afraid to use CG (War of the Worlds, A.I., Minority Report), and I personally think he does a consistently fantastic job with them.

Anyway, just some thoughts from a casual admirer of the series.
MC | Feb 15, 2008 | Reply

You do make a good point about them wasting so much time with the recaps of those first 3 movies… the only reason I can think for them doing that is perhaps they are going to be releasing a high def package of those three movies and they are putting those images in people’s minds as a subtle suggestion.
Ray | Feb 15, 2008 | Reply

Thanks for the bump, kiddo.

A few additional thoughts:

- The CGI, while obvious, doesn’t bother me. It’s certainly no worse than some of the horrible bluescreen photochemical stuff in Raiders (think about when the Nazi car goes over the cliff - awful!). It’s not the CGI effects we can SEE, but rather, the ones we can’t see (like the gun removal shit that has come out in the last day or so) that bothers me sooooo much about Spielberg and Lucas. E.T. was forever ruined by Spielberg’s CGI gun-removal nonsense.

- The lack of Karen Allen disturbed me, too. It reminds me of the trick Lucas pulled with CLONES in hiding the romance.

- The “Closer” quip in the truck bothered me for only one reason - the two Russian truck drivers in the car sit there for what appears to be five minutes while Ford delivers the line, and THEN they get elbowed in the face. HUH??

-
Adam R | Feb 15, 2008 | Reply

The opening narration is hilarious. “Protecting the power of the divine” (God: Thanks Indiana! That was a close one!) “Saved the cradle of life” (I know the Doom plot isn’t the easiest to understand, but I don’t recall Pancot Palace ever being described as the Cradle of Life) “and triumphed over armies of evil” (while also protecting the power of the divine again).
Damian | Feb 16, 2008 | Reply

As soon as I saw this trailer I was wondering what you would think of it, Burbanked. Needless to say I was “giddy as a schoolboy” (BTW which Indy films is that line from?). I suspected that there might be a few things about it to make you a little nervous. If I may, I’d love to share my opinions on it as well as address some of the things you bring up.

One of the things I always figured they would incorporate into this entry is the fact that Harrison Ford (and consequently Indiana Jones) is much older. In fact, I think it would be foolish not to address that. While Last Crusade had an old man accompanying Indy on the adventure, this time Indy is the old man. Thus, lines like “Damn, I thought that was closer,” and “Not as easy as is used to be,” are elaborations on that theme. Incidentally, I never took the latter line as a declaration that it was ever easy (because you’re right; it was always hard), but there was a time when it certainly was easier.

Also, I don’t really mind them re-using footage from the trilogy at the beginning of the trailer to connect this film to the others. Was it necessary? No, but it does reflect the fact that this film is probably going to be the last of a series that we all have great affection and nostalgia for.

Finally, while I think Ray at the Rec Room is right about the disparity between Lucas’ trailers and the actual films, the thing that I think people tend to either completely forget or simply fail to appreciate is the fact that, whatever else an Indiana Jones movie might be, it is a STEVEN SPIELBERG FILM. We must keep that in mind. Maybe that’s not a comfort to a lot of people but I am only too keenly aware of the difference between a Spielberg-Lucas collaboration and a Lucas solo effort. Ray does make a good point, though, about the fact that the two bad guys in the truck just seem to sit there while Harrison says his line.

Also, does the warehouse in this trailer look to anyone else like the same warehouse in the final shot of Raiders?
Burbanked | Feb 16, 2008 | Reply

Nice to hear from you again Damian, and thanks to all for the comments.

I have to say, I’ve watched this a few more times, and it’s making me less cranky than it did originally. What’s interesting about “not as easy as it used to be” is that if you watch closely, the lines the two men say aren’t even synched up with the movement of Winstone’s and Ford’s mouths. I could easily see this being cut or altered, and the same thing goes for the “damn” line - if, of course, Spielberg decides that the scenes don’t need them. What do I know?

Damian, you’re right. Spielberg has certainly earned a lot more faith that he’ll do the right thing than Lucas, but I was willing to go with Lucas before TPM, as a lot of fans were. I hold out hope and belief that this will ultimately work, but it’ll be a while before we all decide whether or not - again - this whole endeavor was necessary in the first place.

And yes: the warehouse HAS to be the same one, I’d guess.
Megan | Feb 16, 2008 | Reply

“(think about when the Nazi car goes over the cliff - awful!).”

You know, I always wondered if maybe the “awfulness” of that bit was kind of a backhanded wink-wink-nudge-nudge on purpose awfulness. But I might be overthinking it…
Damian | Feb 17, 2008 | Reply

Thanks, Burbanked. I’m slowly inching my way back into the water (so to speak). Anyway, good job analyzing the trailer BTW. I’m mentioning you in my own post on the subject.
N2x | Feb 20, 2008 | Reply

For gripes three and four, two words: David Koepp.
MC | Mar 4, 2008 | Reply

Remember when I suggested that there were other motives for having that older footage in the trailer?

http://geeksofdoom.com/2008/03/03/indiana-jones-trilogy-dvd-release/

I rest my case.