Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull

Raiders of the Lost Ark is such a seminal film-- historically, artistically, and culturally-- that it's spawned countless imitators and homages-- so many, in fact, that it's not at all unfair to say that the vast majority of action-adventure films to come out since that one have been, on some level, Raiders knockoffs. This extends to any number of non-Indy films like National Treasure and Sahara, but also to the two sequels that emerged in the 1980s, both of which are generally regarded as flawed tributes to the first film rather than exciting new chapters in an ongoing story.

But now there's a third sequel (okay, technically Temple of Doom is a prequel, but whatever), one a long time in the making. The worst thing you can say about Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is that it is, essentially, just another entry in the long line of Raiders tributes-- which it is. But the best thing you can say about it is that it's arguably the best of the tributes, and, thus, among the better films of its kind to arrive since Raiders-- which it is.

Yes, the film is basically an homage to a movie that is itself an homage to the low-budget, B-movie serials of yore, but that's not such a bad thing, because it's a pretty good homage, not nearly as dark and oppressive as Temple of Doom and not quite as goofy as Last Crusade-- two movies that are, by the way, underrated in critical circles; even if they both fall short of the original, they have their own distinct characters that make each film in the franchise stand out as unique, emphasizing different aspects of the Indy mythology, and Crystal Skull, in its own way, accomplishes the same thing: It captures the spirit of that first movie, and indeed of the entire series, without ever feeling too much like any one of the first three movies in particular.

It's got everything a good Indy movie should have: Swashbuckling, treasure-hunting, grave-robbing, broadly-drawn villains, smartass wisecracking, exotic locales, huge set pieces, an effective evocation of a specific time period, the creeping presence of the supernatural, even a dash of romance. And it's even got some new stuff: Science fiction, Cate Blanchett as a ruthless Russian, Shia LaBeouf as Indy's switchblade-wielding sidekick, and-- regrettably-- some slick CG in the final scenes.

But the most unwelcome thing in the movie is the pandering presence of nostalgia-- which, to his credit, Steven Spielberg largely avoids, and the movie is much better for it. By and large, this film is about continuing Indy's adventures, not looking back on them wistfully, and so this film is a worthy addition to the Indy canon, not just a sentimental summer diversion. But there are a few slip-ups, some of which are very minor-- lingering shots of a photograph of Sean Connery on Indy's desk-- but one of them is truly unfortunate, and that's the return of Karen Allen as Marion Ravenwood, totally without her edge and her spunk here, reduced to grinning through the whole movie and adding nothing to the story whatsoever; she appears to be here only so that fans have a chance to see her again, and that's a regrettable lapse in judgment in an otherwise smart movie.

But in the scheme of things, it can be overlooked, only because Indy's back-- in the words of Beck, he's a little worse for the wear but he's wearing it well-- and he's returned in a movie that is far from his finest hour, but still a worthy vehicle for a fine franchise. So maybe the best thing you can say about the movie is actually this-- that as the credits roll at the end of the movie, it's hard not to think how good it is to have him back.