Monday, May 26, 2008

Indiana Jones and the Chariots of the Gods

Today, despite having a rough run in the communications department with my parents, I was able to go see the new Indiana Jones movie. My memory of the first three is rather vague, but it was enough to help me enjoy the franchise and appreciate what made the movies so great in the first place. The film doesn't take itself too seriously, and as a viewer, I didn't either.

Now, early on when this film was announced, leaks after leaks were posted all over the internet about this movie. It was going to feature Indy's kid; Area 51 was going to be involved. And then when the title was announced, the Tokyo Disney Resort message board I lurk (I rarely post on any of the message board forums these day due to my opinion being treated negatively.) lit up with speculation as to why the film involved the Crystal Skull version of the same ride at Disneyland. The Aztec setting and then the leak of the promotional toy showing the Crystal Skull confirmed for many that this was going to involve aliens and the hypothesis written by Erich von Däniken.

Around this time, I wasn't paying attention. I was too busy playing the Sam & Max episode that parodied Däniken's hypothesis titled Chariot of the Dog.

Anyway, I was lucky to not get usher duty while working at the theatre during the opening weekend of the film. I don't like having to work that job when there is a movie I'm actually interested in seeing simply because it spoils the whole film for me to death. But I did hear all the mixed reviews from film buffs that went to the opening day morning shows. It was a mixed bag, but one thing was spoiled for me with the confirmation that aliens were involved. Okay, that wasn't a real spoiler because I knew about that since January, but you get the idea.

My expectations for the film was that it would be as entertaining as how I remember the past films, and sure enough they were met. Lots of great moments, most of which I'm expecting to see as additions to the Indiana Jones Stunt Show in Disney's Florida property. (One scene I don't think will make it that I liked was the sword fight done on the hoods of a pair of racing military jeeps.) But once the overall theme of the movie started to hit it's running stride, things started to get really interesting knowing what I knew of Däniken's hypothesis. It only seems ironic that I was introduced to his hypothesis through a video game that was parodying it.

If you read Chariots of the Gods and/or have a basic understanding on the idea that some of history's greatest cultural phenomenons were probably created by aliens, then you'll find this movie to be quite the enjoyable ride. It's classic Indy in that there is a level of skepticism held out until the evidence points out that the far fetched ideas of the bad guys may actually be factual. And the strange part is, I am probably one of the few who actually know what the film is based off of. It is more than a search for an artifact and the power it could bring; it's a quest for knowledge that could ultimately change our history and place in the universe as we know it.

And if that doesn't sell you, Cate Blanchett has a really great death sequence and Indy ends up surviving a blast from an atomic bomb. Those two reasons alone are worth the $9.50 ticket price in my book!

1 comment:

Robert Stone said...

Jon,

Forty years ago? Can it have been that long since Chariots of the Gods?: Unsolved Mysteries of the Past was published. (Yes, the question mark is part of the title.)

I don't remember when I first heard of Erich von Däniken and his exposition of the hypothesis that many ancient civilizations' technologies and religion were given to them by space travelers who were welcomed as gods. But it was a long time ago. I remember there was a time when I heard people talk about it often.

When the old world conquerors came to the new world, some of the natives treated them as gods whose return had been foretold in their myths. We don't put much faith in gods these days because we subject everything to the "modern" scientific method which unfortunately teaches us that more research is always the next step even when the truth is that its approach can never lead to the truth.

Thanks for the review.

Robert