What do you think she meant when she said “a huge black monster with giant claws”?
It’s admittedly been a while since I’ve seen the first three Indiana Jones films, but I don’t remember the fact of the hero being an archaeologist being so foregrounded. My memory is that they make reference to Indy’s day job relatively sparingly, letting him slip into generic adventurer mode when necessary. In Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, it’s practically impossible to forget that Jones is an academic: the guy is flashing his credentials in your face practically every minute he’s onscreen, either by discoursing about Mayan civilizations or dispensing sage advice to greaser sidekick Shia Laboeuf.
Of course part of the reason for this emphasis is Harrison Ford’s advanced age: these days, he’s simply more convincing as a disgruntled midcentury professor than a virile action hero. In this way, he somewhat resembles Steven Spielberg himself. The literary critic Franco Moretti, in his fantastically suggestive essay “Planet Hollywood”, has pointed out the didactic quality of Spielberg’s oeuvre, which he links to the rise of the adult/children’s film genre, a type of movie in which the young and old are simultaneously served. Each film he makes has the air of being the movie on its chosen subject Ñ or at least, the only one that a vast majority of the population are going to see Ñ and that leads him to inject a certain amount of edifying wisdom into each one. This approach of course has its successes (do we need to argue anymore about the greatness of E.T., or Schindler’s List, or the original Indiana Jones films?) but it also its hazards, which have only become clearer as Spielberg’s career has progressed. He seems to be more and more aware that he is speaking to, and for, demographically distinct audiences: the kids who grew up on the original Indiana Joneses, and the kids who will need to go see it now if the film is to be as profitable as its producers hope Ñ all of them proxies for the child Spielberg taking in serial B-movie adventures in the 1950s. As Spielberg’s career has progressed, his sense of responsibility to a variety of audiences Ñ a responsibility that is already double, in that he feels the need to entertain and instruct them Ñ has sometimes made his movies feel weighted down, in spite of their effortless technique, and especially as the old working binary Ñ child/adult Ñ has fragmented into a bewildering array of moviegoing generations, former children, future adults, etc.
Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull suggests that Spielberg is once again trying to do two incompatible things at once: namely, to instill a desire for intellectual accomplishment, while at the same time undercutting it at every turn (Indy after riding a motorcycle through a college reading room: “If you wanna be a good archaeologist, you’ve gotta get out of the library”). The whole film is shot through with a certain kind of melancholy regret about not having done enough to instruct the younger generation. This adds pathos, but ultimately sinks the film as entertainment, which, of course, it has to be to work as instruction in the first place. Case in point: the extremely lame ending, which suggests a parody of Robert Zemeckis’ Contact with a little bit of Brian DePalma’s Mission to Mars thrown in. As so often in Spielberg’s recent efforts, he seems to panic that the film hasn’t had enough significance, and so pulls some out of thin air (sorry, “the space between spaces”) rather than taking from the perfectly good material he’s already accumulated (the McCarthy era, generation gaps, Cold War weapons races, etc.). It’s like an old teacher suddenly remembering on the last day of class that he was supposed to “inspire” his students.
Still, it’s nice to see Karen Allen again.
by Evan Kindley | Source: 35mm print
25 May 2008 5:28 PM | Comments (9)
It’s admittedly been a while since I’ve seen the first three Indiana Jones films, but I don’t remember the fact of the hero being an archaeologist being so foregrounded.
I agree with this to an extent – Indy’s very generally more an action hero than archeologist in the first three films – but your use of the word “foregrounded” has another meaning here. That is, Indiana is literally foregrounded in two incredible shots: in one, before a nuclear explosion, and in the second before the hurricanic climax. These two shots are quite simply the most momentous images of Indiana Jones I’ve ever seen, so I very much enjoyed this film if only because of these images and no other reason. (More here from Keith Uhlich.)
Oh, and the army of monkeys that’s recruited, in the span of about forty seconds, to battle the Russians.
Wow. I’m not sure I can consider any scene in this movie as being “‘momentous”. The brilliant scene surrounding the nuclear explosion notwithstanding, it all felt very hollow to me. It spent so much time/energy making as many references to the previous films as possible in 120 minutes, I don’t think it was able to grow legs of its own. I think it had a milder case of Star Wars prequel syndrome.
I felt fairly uncomfortable by the end of it, cause this movie just wouldn’t stop winking at me.
Mark: My thoughts exactly. Evan: It’s wonderful to see Karen Allen (and her smile) again. I just wish they’d given her more to do!
Sure, the nuclear test site scene worked, but did no one else feel a little uncomfortable about using the most brutally destructive force in the universe as a comedy action beat? Apparently some of the Japanese attendees at Cannes were understandably upset.
And Rumsey, no offence but those fucking monkeys were just embarrassing. What the hell was even going on there?
Well, for better or for worse, nuclear bomb testing was a significant aspect of American history. And witnessing/taking part in the most important acts of history is pretty much what the Indiana Jones character is all about.
I don’t think that scene crossed a line. It was just a test.
MINOR SPOILER If Indy had crawled into a refrigerator in Hiroshima and survived the nuclear attack, that would have certainly been offensive to many – and rightly so.
And Rumsey, no offence but those fucking monkeys were just embarrassing. What the hell was even going on there?
WRONG the monkeys were awesome. They’re caricatures just like the Nazis or KGB agents or whathaveyou in any other Indiana Jones movie—and what is an Indiana Jones movie without gigantic, over-enunciated stereotypes.
But I agree, I guess, that that scene is an embarrassment – like a handful of others in the film – but only in regard to others in the film. In and of itself, it’s awesome.
The monkeys seemed like a Lucas touch to me. Very Ewokesque.
i really enjoyed the cgi prairie dogs at the beginning… so cute and funny!
the monkeys and the drawn-out nuclear test ‘joke’ were my two gripes about the film. but by the time the end credits rolled, i had long forgotten about them.
ps. the Lucas touch was awkward at some points (re: mostly the f—ing monkeys. oh, and the damn prairie dogs. Steven must’ve been out drinking one day to let George take over like that. i was sure it was a weak tv commercial).
Rumsey
26 May 2008
7:53 AM
Website