Lucas has raped my childhood once again.

i actually agree with travler. however, i don't think the movie would have been quite as bad if it weren't so anticipated. people expected more than the movie could deliver. however, i loved shia in the movie; it would be probable that if there's another indiana jones installment that he would step into ford's shoes as the new hero. kid's and diehard indie fans will enjoy this- anyone else might feel disatisfied.

Entertaining? Check.

Good? Absolutely not.

WAY too over the top... EVEN for an Indiana Jones movie. The review was right. I was as excited as anyone for the new one and was thoroughly disappointed. Indie was too old. Too many bad clichés. Like he said... we waited all this time for....this?

All and all...... total let-down.

I saw it today and the article is right on. Sad to say I am disappointed. Too much special effects and too futuristic for Indy Jones.

hated it!

it's one man's opinion. dial it down a notch, people.

Actually I think Travers is a much better reviewer than Ebert, who spend so too much time on summarizing the plot, so I can't even read him any more and he should be called a summarizer in my opinion. But than -- these are just people who are passioned about cinema, who like to watch movies in large quantities and -- who love to think and write about them. As is Indiana Jones just a movie. I too have seen it and I don't think of it any better than of the first three. But it's also not worse. I quite liked it. The aged Harrison Ford acts very well in portraiting a field man, who has practice in his blood and can't say goodbye to his hat. I think this aspect of "neverendness" was covered very nicely; not in the script, it's the subtle element of acting and the plot.

I'm not here to slam Travers, BUT he flip-flops. He gave "Star Wars Episode II" a quite positive review upon its release ("...the dark fantasist in Lucas makes a comeback...."), then backtracked and called it awful not much later. This is far from the only example. While it's never a good idea to trust a critic's opinion, take Travers with an extra large grain of salt.

just a movie people.

Travers is nothing more than an agent provocateur. He spins his bullshit web reveiws about each movie and then sits back a watches each side slam each other. In the grand scale of things his job is as imortant as a Wal-Mart greeter. He reminds of children from divorce that have learned to work each end againt the middle. Go see the movie and enjoy it for what it is---a movie.

It's a safe bet this movie is WAY better than Iron Man. For starters, Spielberg actually knows how to craft action sequences.

Well, one thing is for certain. There is a lot of passion out there about this movie. I don't think I've ever seen such negative reviews of a crictic's review. Especially for a movie no one posting has even seen. So maybe it's not as good as even Temple of Doom. Maybe it's not even as good as Iron Man. But when was the last time anyone talked this passionately, or defended so passionatley an Indiana Jones movie? Advice, go in expecting to be dissapointed and you'll probably enjoy it. Otherwise I'm just impressed by the hatred this movie can inspired for it's critics.

In the end, this should be viewed as an audience movie. Anyone criticizing the movie because it's not like the first one, or that it's not as good as Munich or Schindler's List. As long as the audience enjoys, then Ford, Spielberg, Lucas and company will have done their job.

At least Peter liked it. James Berdanelli gave it 2 out of 4 stars (ouch!). But then again, he gave only 3 stars to There Will Be Blood.

I'm trying to keep my expectations at bay. I am still patiently eager to see this one.

To Mas:

Anyone who says King Kong sucked is obviously an idiot and has no opinions worth listening to.

I usually go along with Travers; however, he creamed all over King Kong, a movie that sucked. Ever since, I've taken what he's said with a grain of poop.

This movie looks like a gigantic piece of crap. The dialogue sounds way too corny, and the idea that aliens are involved just sounds stupid.

Plus, in terms of story, I see no reason to have made the fourth movie. I get that Indy is old now: what else is there to make a movie about?

travers review goes by HIS opinion, if you want to know how good the new indy movie is, watch it yourself and come up with your own conclusions. To each his own! not everybody has the same taste, and maybe its not what we all thought it would be, lets just be glad they at least attempted another one. and if its sucks. it sucks. so what if its not as good as the other 3? When we hear Indiana Jones we'll just be thinking of his past 3 fab movies. just go by your own opinions before you judge something you havent yet seen.

This comment is responding to Mikey Mouse's comment on the scores:
Actually, the scores to these films changed immensely and were quite distinctive. The Raiders score introduced the themes and set a new standard in adventure music that has influenced great composers of today and their scores (John Debney's score for Cutthorat Island, Elfman's scores for Spider-man, Zimmer's scores for Gladiatior and Pirates, etc.) The Temple of Doom incorporated many new tribal and percussive elements to reflect the primitive nature and brutal treatment of the cult figures. The Last Crusade had some incredible new themes for the young Indiana Jones played by River Phoenix, a great new theme for the Nazis entitled "Scherzo for Motorcycle and Orchestra" and an excellent motif for the Holy Grail, which was much more reverant than the suspenseful warning themes associated with the Ark of the Covenant. In fact, the Last Crusade only plays the Main Raiders theme a handful of times. Sure, Williams has a style and he "copies" himself, but he always stays fresh and relevant for today's films. Copying oneself is usually referred to as an individual style; the man no longer has to prove himself when he has created virtually every recognizable film theme in history. Personally, I am excited for this film and the score that accompanies it. While Raiders is the classic, I think my favorite is Last Crusade. Yeah, it mimics Raiders a lot, but Indy doesn't seem like Indy without Nazis and a religious artifact and the chemistry between Ford and Connery is priceless.

Have some respect IGNORANTS, Peter Travers is a legend, one of independent films last troopers on the mainstream.

Travers is not part of the Gen-X so called critics that came out on the internet exploition, he 's got 30 years of cinema journalism behind him (even before Rolling Stone asked him to join
the mag).

Check your facts before posting.

Sounds like fun. What more was anyone expecting?

What about John Williams score? You mean the one that's going to sound like the score of the last three Indiana Jones movies? How much did the scores on any of those change?

I mentioned in an earlier post that one of the key ingredients of the indy films is the bright, sun stroked look by cameramabn Douglas Slocombe. Spielberg has been working With kaminski since Schindler's and sometimes they do magnificent work (Schindler's, Minority Report) and not great work (The Lost World, The Terminal.)I feared a little when the explosion scenes in the previews made this look a little like the battle scenes in Private Ryan. The cold, sleek, washed out look worked great in A.I and War Of The Worlds but not for an Indy film. Even Catch me If You Can had a striking color- ful pastache to it. That might be my one quibble with this movie. I'm still pretty Gaw-damn excited about seeing this. 19 years is a looong time to wait. And I hear Harrison hasn't been this alive on screen since The Fugitive.

peter travers liked "no country for old men"

i liked the character development in that

and lack of substance

4 more days baby!!! Can't Wait!!!! Long live Indiana Jones!!!!

Well, this is RollingStone. No mention of William's score. Really poignant for a music magazine blog. Yeah, yeah, yeah "RollingStone isn't just a music magazine". Obviously Indy's music has never mattered and music in any of the soundtracks haven't been of consequence when talking about the films. Way to go.

Are you serious? What in the first 3 films, gave you characterization? Spare me the longing for more scenes to put them on the "human level". Its Indiana Jones! The great adventrue!

By the way roger ebert has posted his full review and gave me a huge sigh of relief, 3 1/2 stars out of four stars, impessive by my standards.

Lucas and Spielberg,had the money and names already, so they decided to let Robert Watts do all the work, keep peace, and make the hits, while the two bosses did whatever they do behind closed doors.