Microreview: Indy IV (spoiler warning)

Maybe it's because my expectations were so low because of the fanboy complaints on the Interwebs, but I liked the movie. Not the best Indy movie (Raiders and Last Crusade were better, though not Temple of Doom), but still entertaining. Some various comments:

• "Mutt" wasn't as bad as I expected, though his hair obsession was silly.
• The thing with the nuke and the fridge - that was rather ridiculous.
• Likewise with the gunpowder in the warehouse.
• I don't get the complaints about the CGI - I didn't think it was bad at all (except for the rocks settling in the crater at the end). In particular, the ants were fine, if a little big.
• Though, the ants dragging the commie into the hole - kinda silly. Stripping the flesh from his bones would have made more sense.
• The nod to the Arc was neat.
  
• Cliff+tree+duck+falling into the river safely and whacking a bunch of commies off the cliff = hard to suspend disbelief on that one.
• I rather liked the "council" chamber with the 13 crystal skeletons, up to the point where they merged into a Grey and the alien ship took off. It fit the story but seemed out of place for an Indy film (moreso than what went on prior to that).
• The vine swinging was silly.
• So were the gophers. The monkeys, at least, contributed.
  

So, yeah, there were a lot of silly if not outright ridiculous moments in the movie, but overall it still felt like an Indiana Jones film. I can understand some of the fan criticisms, since many of the elements of the old films were altered or gone in this one:

• Psychics and aliens rather than mysticism and religion
• The age difference
• The whole 50's thing: greasers, Commies, etc. (though given the social issues and subject material of movies during the 1950's, these elements were quite appropriate)
• Indy's an archaeologist, not a spy (but he apparently was one in WW2; the OSS was the precursor to the CIA for those of you who forgot history class)
  

The "family reunion" angle could be argued to have detracted from the film, except for the fact they did the same thing in the last one (though I would agree that Sean Connery is preferable to Shia LaBouef).

But this complaint that "George Lucas raped my childhood" or whatever they're saying: Please. The fact of the matter is that Indy IV suffers from the same problem that Phantom Menance (admittedly the weakest of all six SW movies) did - people who saw the original trilogy as kids now expect the new movie to affect them the same way despite being in their 30s.

That said, from what I've heard about the rumored "Indiana Jones and the City of the Gods" script, that would have been a better movie.