Review of "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull"

1957, the height of the Cold War. Soviet soldiers, led by Agent Spalco, kidnap Marion Ravenwood, long-standing lover of Indiana Jones, putting the professor in front of a choice: Marion's inaction and death, or assisting Soviet intelligence in search of the legendary Crystal Skull in exchange for women's freedom.

"Return"

Pam-param-pam pam-pam-pam, pam-param-pam p-param-pam-pam. To think, he's back! An ageless son of a bitch, and in a long time not a teenage sixty-five ready to put his head in the jaws of a lion, if that brings him closer to another archaeological relic. We would like to say that we will not be surprised by the curbs, but Indiana Jones did not leave a stone on our rocks. I want to scream, jump on the backs of armchairs and generously shower people around with a pop-corn: this is Professor Henry Jr., ladies and gentlemen!

Actually, right up until the viewing, the only fear was the notorious atmosphere of "Indiana", quite in the picture present - judging by the rollers. How will she be perceived at a mature age and on a big screen? It's not you to translate Gavrilov into thirteen years old.

To the great pleasure, all doubts were in vain. Kinoman orgasm rolled up long before the first chords of the "March of the Seekers", and not even on the opening credits, like two drops of water similar to the opening of the "Last Crusade" (the regular swinging with the classical trilogy is generally abundant, and it is not always done on the forehead, and sometimes with such old-fashioned cunning - they say, but remember, why so, and not that way?), but as soon as Mount Paramount turned into a wind-dried heap of something slylyachy. Here, by the way, you just want to have Steven Spielberg on hand to ask - how is it, promised to do without computers?

However, pay attention to such trifles stop almost immediately. Given in the literal sense of the word, the explosive prologue, the tempo does not let go until the very end, heartlessly not allowing an elementary transfer of the spirit between the pursuers chasing each other. Indiana somehow from the first film became the standard of inventive action, and imagine, even after nineteen years and a dozen appearing imitations confidently holds the brand. If it's a trick, it's such that it will be repeated and parodied over the years, and the audience will exhale breathlessly, reflexively holding his breath.

Spielberg, it should be noted, turned into a dangerous rut: when the same "Lethal Weapon" got its own central characters, including the inevitable evil - the young assistant - to its own quadricwell, it did not look so light and elegant as the first Riggs and Merto case. Needless to say, long before the premiere of the disillusioned character of Shai LaBeouf, he was perceived in absentia not with bayonets, but with a certain amount of displeasure. Well, what the hell kind of a partner at Indiana Jones? No, he can remember Shorty Round from the Temple of Doom, but he was a comedian, and the current Dog Williams (the name is Shayu) was attributed to the function of an indian substitute.

The film, however, managed to gracefully avoid misfiring. Not only that, the Dog turned out to be a spitting copy of Marty McFly (viva 50's!), Famously performing any tricks, so at those very moments when a cliche or dramaturgical vulgarity looms on the horizon, the picture behaves in the most unpredictable manner and ironically discharges the situation. Well, it's kind of like the subject matter of "Kissing off," if you like.

And what do we not say about the root of evil, you think? It's seen - the central villains expose our compatriots. Let's boycott the cinemas and write angry petitions to the distributor!

If you really think so, check with the doctor immediately. Who did you expect to see in antagonists, if the action takes place in the era of McCarthyism? Hiding in Peru, fascist criminals or fallen from the sky green men? Completely to you, the Red Threat is the same collective image as the Sicilian Mafia. Do not you think that the whole of Italy ignores the Hollywood crime genre? Is it really possible to take offense at the magnificent Cate Blanchett (honestly, the best villain of the series), with a charming accent commander "Go!" Quite a Russian Igor Zhizhikin and carrying a charming nonsense about Comrade Stalin?

Offend better at George Lucas, who gave the course of the story, the final of which loses three predecessors. No, no, it's not bad and more than spectacular, it's just hard to get out of the general context and it looks too much toy. Apparently, because of him and reported from Cannes, calling the film "not necessary continuation." But what's the real sin, even with such an ending, "Indiana Jones" gives odds to many modern adventures, and the pleasure of seeing the beloved hero on the screen is comparable only with the ecstasy of the rumble from the columns of the melody:

Pam-param-pam pam-pam-pam, pam-param-pam p-param-pam-pam!