Indiana Jones and the Boring Review That I’m Too Sad To Create A Clever Title For.

I’m about to lead off with a spoiler, so if you haven’t seen the movie, don’t read this article.

There’s a scene right after the extended opening sequence of Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull that, I thought, was the best, most perfect jumping-off point for what was to come and I was more excited than I’d been watching a movie in damn near 20 years. I was convinced that all of my earlier fears about this movie would prove unfounded.

It was the scene in which Indy was getting grilled by the FBI guys about the whole warehouse/commie fiasco - and they were questioning his patriotism and loyalty! What a spectacular setup - and look how stripped down our hero is, how not-iconic, not-epic. No hat, jacket or whip. He’s sitting there in a white t-shirt like an old man who can’t convince anyone of his value or worth! Indiana Jones the character is suddenly thrust into a situation in which he has to prove just what a big frigging deal he is. And remember, this is just following that epic angle of Jones and The Hat, silhouetted against a massive mushroom cloud. The ultimate humbling experience and a powerful metaphor for the changing times he finds himself in.

That’s the movie I wanted to see. I thought and dreamed at that moment that Indy would be stripped of everything that made him who he was - his reputation, his career, his ability to get out of every scrape. The FBI threat should have been real and pervasive throughout the movie’s narrative; it should have removed his humor, taken the wind out of his resourcefulness, beaten down his resolve. Then we find out that Brody is gone, Henry Sr. is gone - and Indy has nothing, no one, no quest or crusade. He’s done and washed up and maybe he’ll be thrown into prison. So what is he going to look for? What will motivate him to look at his life and fix all the wrongs?

It should have been Marion. The idea of re-acquiring the only thing he’s ever lost that mattered. At a time when he has nothing, not even a certain future. Wouldn’t that have been a terrific plot motivator?

Mystery Man On Film painfully points out 50 flaws in the movie and I both love him and hate him for how damn right he is. It’s a devastating article, agony like hard truth is supposed to be. And his big zinger - where he kicks off the whole thing - is in this same idea: that Indy has zero motivation to go looking for the Crystal Skull in this movie. None. And to MM’s great series of mistakes and plot questions, I’d add a similar one: why not simply have Mutt TELL Indy who Marion is at the beginning? Then THAT becomes Indy’s motivation, at a time where he’s lowest in life and has nothing to move him forward to act.

Let’s talk about that thing George Lucas kept bringing up in the development of this sequel, and allow me to paraphrase:

You keep using that word MacGuffin, Mr. Lucas. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Of course it’s open to interpretation, but I’d suggest that, at its simplest, a movie MacGuffin is the thing you THINK the movie is about, the thing the CHARACTERS think the movie is about, but it’s NOT THE THING THE MOVIE IS ABOUT.

Notice how the titles of the previous Indiana Jones movies aren’t really about the MacGuffin:

• Raiders of the Lost Ark - sure, it mentions the Ark, but the title itself is actually about the raiding of the Ark - it’s the quest, not the goal. The Ark in the story is the MacGuffin that motivates the plot, but it’s not at all what Indy gets out of the adventure. It’s about his heightened awareness, of his realization of “hocus pocus” and forces he doesn’t understand. It’s about coming to understand his feelings for Marion and of deeper, more meaningful things.
• Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom - notice that this is not called Indiana Jones and the Search for the Shankara Stones. The title doesn’t mention the MacGuffin - it’s a true MacGuffin, the most textbook case of the franchise! The stones mean nothing to the true story, which is that Indiana learns that there are more important things than “fortune and glory.” He decides to put his own needs aside and rescue slave children! That’s the point, not the stones, and at the time the movie’s creators understood this.
• Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade - again, no mention of the MacGuffin. The Grail is important to the story, even more important than the Ark was, simply because Indy has to physically use the MacGuffin to save his father - but still, the story is about their relationship, not the Grail itself. Their growing respect and admiration for each other is the ACTUAL Crusade, not the search for the Grail. It’s the “illumination,” baby!

Again: the MacGuffin is NOT the thing, it’s what Indy experiences along the way. The MacGuffin should be able to be a paper airplane and the damn movie should still work.

So what’s that new title again? Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. That tells you exactly what the movie is about, exactly what the most important thing will be, with no shading and no surprise and no metaphor. Thin. Superficial. It’s not about anything. The only surprise is that we’re surprised by how thin the final product is. I mentioned this before: that the Crystal Skull itself was used prominently in the movie’s marketing where no artifact had had such prominence before. To me that’s just bad writing, bad storytelling. It’s thin and they know it so it’s been shoved up our noses instead of true character development and motivation.

And don’t start complaining that the other films didn’t have character development and motivation. You can suggest that nothing was as good as Raiders and you’d be right, but the others accomplished a minimum of character development and handled the idea of the MacGuffin far, far better than Crystal Skull.

Think about how thin everything is here, how quickly everything is handled. Indy’s line about “none of them were you” to Marion is a terrific line - but it comes about three seconds after they’ve been bickering, and it resolves their characters’ conflict immediately! There’s no weight or resonance to the moment - it’s there and then it’s gone, so why should we care at all about it?

Think back to Raiders in the Cairo street chase. Indy and Marion have struck a wary partnership, partly out of necessity but really from the deep affection that they’re desperately trying to hide from each other. Look at these two shots of them looking at each other - damn! Movie star chemistry! They’re lightly bickering, chased around the streets and Indy believes that Marion has been killed - and then look at him:

“Marion!”

It’s devastating! It’s fear and loss and drama - and he won’t find out that she’s really alive for another 15 on-screen minutes or so. And the Ark is about as far from our minds as it could possibly be. That, friends, is a true MacGuffin.

MM is right on the money in pointing out so many screenwriting problems with this movie. Since seeing Crystal Skull, I’ve gone back and watched both Raiders and also Raiders‘ screenwriter Lawrence Kasdan’s terrific Silverado. Kasdan was once the absolute go-to guy in the creation of traditional yet complex main characters, not to mention fully-fleshed-out supporting players and terrific sequences filled with unexpected turns, reversals and growing tension. I’d give Skull scripter David Koepp some credit for stepping up to the plate in what must have been a damn near impossible assignment to stitch together the expectations of Lucas, Spielberg, Ford and however many dirty fingers got stuck into this messy pie. But in the end, it’s Koepp and Lucas who utterly fail to pull the story together. And shame on Spielberg for bowing too deeply to Lucas and not exerting seemingly any story influence or at the very least asking those “yeah, but does this make any sense?” kinds of questions.

And this is a rather random thought, but how was Stunt Coordinator Vic Armstrong, famous for his Raiders-era resemblance to Harrison Ford and his superlative work on the sequels, not contracted for this movie? I know he was making the Indy-Light Mummy sequel and all, but Crystal Skull also suffers from his absence. The guys who fill in here have some decent credits - Bourne Ultimatum and Casino Royale among them - but it’s not the same action choreography, not at all.

George Lucas was infamously quoted in the publicity run-up to this movie’s release, claiming that it’s inevitable that the fans will be let down. He said,

“When you do a movie like this, a sequel that’s very, very anticipated, people anticipate ultimately that it’s going to be the Second Coming…And it’s not. It’s just a movie. Just like the other movies. You probably have fond memories of the other movies. But if you went back and looked at them, they might not hold up the same way your memory holds up.”

We can speculate about what goes on in the mind of an artist when they create a piece of sculpture or literature or cinematic history. I’d argue that an artist wants to express himself and his inner feelings, needs, desires and outlook - but I think, to some degree great or small, an artist also wants his art to be noticed. To make an impact. For people to react, and - again, I’d suggest in most cases - for that reaction to be favorable in some way. I find it incredibly difficult to believe that an artist spends so much time, money, soul and effort on the creation of something so clearly manufactured to bring joy to a mainstream audience - yet at the same time disparages the very fact that people want to enjoy it.

I’d agree that our expectations may be unreasonably high, but isn’t that simply a result of Lucas’ earlier career efforts succeeding too well? Is he actually suggesting that, in the creation of one of cinema’s most impactful and groundbreaking populist movie franchises, that he and Spielberg and Ford and John Williams and Douglas Slocombe and Armstrong and all the rest actually set out to create “just a movie. Just like the other movies”? And even if they didn’t set out to create that, well that’s what happened. History doesn’t always go along with what we plan for it.

How sad. And how sad that he’s right: Crystal Skull ends up being “just a movie”. But someone should tell Lucas that in 25 years people won’t be looking back at this one with those same fond memories.

More required reading on the subject (and I’ll keep updating this list as I needlessly feed my frustration with this movie. Grrrr.):

• Ray is outraged. His fury gives me no joy, but this is the kind of thing Ray does really, really well.
• Piper is sad. This is exactly how I feel: just kind of let down, bored, sort of “oh well, someone tried.” For a movie lover, that’s about the crappiest you can possibly feel.
• Jeff Wells points out that whatever Crystal Skull’s charms, watching the movie a second time pretty much evaporates any goodwill you might have felt initially. And as usual, the comment string inspired by Wells’ thoughts is the stuff of epic entertainment.
• Dennis Cozzalio takes a trip to the drive-in that sounds like a whole lot more fun than watching Crystal Skull was - and Dennis points out that the movie’s first shot - its FIRST shot! - reveals just what a joke the rest of the experience will prove to be.