Barnes at the Movies: Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull

Alabama Henderson, er, Indiana Jones has developed into a modern day movie icon over the past twenty years and with the announcement of a fourth installment of Indy's adventures, many voiced concerns of making yet another sequel nineteen years after the last movie. I was among them, afraid that Harrison Ford wouldn't be able to get his Jones back and that this movie would just turn into a passing of the torch to Spielberg favorite, Shia Lebouf. I'm so glad that I am wrong.

Crystal Skull sees Jones (Ford) in 1957, his loyalty to his country being questioned by the FBI and losing his job as a university professor. He is approached by a young man named Mutt Williams (Lebouf) who is sent by his mother, an apparent acquaintance to Jones, to ask Jones to assist him in rescuing her and helping a fellow archaeological colleague of Jones' and friend to Williams, Professor Oxley, by finding an ancient Mayan crystal skull. All the while, Jones and Williams are being chased, captured, and all that rot by a group of Soviets led by a supposed telepath, Irina Spalko (Cate Blanchett).

Ford picks up his character right where he left it and while I expected to hate Lebouf, he actually did well in his role. I expected him to fill the hack role of the trying-to-be-wise-ass-actually-annoying-the-audience young sidekick to Indy (think Ryan Reynolds and Aschton Kutcher) or his apparent typecast of the nerdy, I'm-not-sure-how-I'm-gonna-do-this-coming-of-age-get-the-hot-girl character, but he showed why Spielberg is nuts for the guy. The rest of the cast do their roles well and flow with the tone of the movie. There is also a cameo appearance by Sean Connery...'s photo.

As for the movie as a whole? This movie isn't high art nor has intriguing character development, but that's never been the point of the Indiana Jones series. The question you need to ask for these type of adventure movies isn't "How's the cinematography/subtext?" it's "Is it fun?" And it's fun. Go Spielberg. While in past films there have been elements of mysticism and the supernatural, I still didn't expect to see elements of science fiction (yes, sci-fi) in the film. However, it makes some sense in that the bulk of the series took place in the 1930's and 1940's (when there were quite a few action-adventure movies) and this movie takes place in the 1950's (when science fiction films were rising in number). There are a few references to the first Indy movie, Raiders of the Lost Ark, including involving a character from that film.

In conclusion, grab a fedora, a bullwhip, a smirk, and pay full admission to see this flick. If you go into the film wanting to have fun, you will. If you walk in with a jaundice eye, then you're being a snake. And Indiana Jones hates snakes.

Barnes At The Movies: Iron Man

So I saw Iron Man last weekend and decided that I'd write a little review of the movie and any others that I see during this summer blockbuster season. Iron Man is based off the Marvel comic book of the same name and is the first Marvel Universe movie totally in-house in Marvel's production and distribution department. The theory behind this would be Marvel would have primary control of the futures of their properties and open doors for some characters that most studios wouldn't take chances with, an example being Marvel making a movie about Ant-Man. Who's Ant-Man? My point exactly. The underlying hope is that if Iron Man did well along with other Marvel character movies that this could open doors for character crossovers that would otherwise would be impossible due to interference from other companies (i.e. The X-Men could never coexist with Spiderman because Wolverine is with 20th Century Fox and Peter Parker is hanging out with Sony).

So let's take a look at Marvel's first step into independence. Robert Downey Jr. plays Tony Stark, a booze-hungry playboy (art imitating life, eh, Rob?) who is a brilliant inventor and scientist specializing in creating weapons for the U.S. military. While at a demonstration of one of his new missles, he is kidnapped by a terrorist group and his heart is injured to the point that an electomagnet is inserted into his chest in order to prevent shrapnel from entering his heart and killing him (remember, this is a comic book movie so suspend disbelief). The terrorists force Stark into making them a version of his newest weapon, but instead he secretly builds himself a crude suit of armor that assists in his escape.

After a huge firefight, Tony is rescued and reunites with his Air Force affiliated best friend, Jim Rhodes (played by Terrence Howard), and his personal assistant, Pepper Pots (played by Gwyneth Paltrow). The usually aloof Stark is now concerned that his weapons are being used by both sides of the battlefield and wants out of the arms business, much to the chagrin of his business associate Obidiah Stane (played by the Dude himself, Jeff Bridges). While his pleas of pulling out of the weapons game go on deaf ears, Stark redesigns his armor suit and thus Iron Man is born.

I have to say that I went into this movie with cynicism. I wasn't sure how Marvel could promote and create a film without the input of a proven studio and I wasn't sure that the Iron Man character had steel legs to stand on for a mainstream audience. I thought it would be all flash and explosions with little story and I have never been so glad to be wrong. When it could have been easy to make a movie that was pure eyeball-orgy, Marvel made a movie with the same reasoning they had for its comics: Make stories about people with powers instead of stories about powerful people.
Jon Favreau, who is known for directing comedies like Swingers and Elf, did a great job in creating a fine balance between plot driven, character forming scenes and blow-em-up action. Robert Downey, Jr. was born to play Tony Stark. Minus the techno-genius, the two are exactly the same guy. Downey does a great job in creating a Howard Hawks-esque, fast talking egomaniac that you can't help to cheer and even feel sorry for. The story was solid, the special effects did not take you away from the film, and the action scenes struck all the right notes.

I usually judge a movie by how much I'd pay to see it. I always ask myself, "Would I'd be willing to pay $15 for an evening show, a $5-7 matinee, wait until it gets to the cheapo $2 theater, rent or Netflix it, wait until it's on cable, or not watch it at all?" So on a scale of -$5 (in which the theater owes me money) to $15 (the most I'd be willing to sit in a theater to watch a flick), I give Iron Man a solid $12.75. Let's face it, the movie isn't going to the Oscars and it's too good to be nominated for an MTV Movie Award, but if you like fun action flicks with solid acting performances go and see it. Oh, and be sure to stick around after the credits for a grand surprise...Avengers Assemble?

Barnes' Favorite Fictional Bands: #7- Timmy and Lords of the Underworld

That's right. Do they have only one song? Yes. But that song rules. The Lords of the Underworld showed great potential but were missing a key ingredient...then it happened. Timmy and the Lords rocked on and rocked out at Chef Aid, displaying great beats and riffs. Granted the band is limited lyrically, but that doesn't stop them from getting the number seven spot on my list.

Witness the band's greatest moment.