Movie & Music

What was so urgent?

Why did Steven Spielberg have to get Indiana Jones' famed fedora out of the Smithsonian and revive a movie franchise that first appeared 27 years ago?

Why all the hype and mystery?

True, this was a chance to bring back a character ardent fans from the not-too-distant past thought was gone forever. Yes, this was a chance to bring back the man who seemed an almost impossible combination of prodigious intellect, academic accomplishment and cowboy swagger.

But if this is one of the iconic figures in film history, certainly he deserved a better vehicle.

There is not much to distinguish this story from the very first one because both follow practically the same path. It goes something like, Jones is given a treasure to find. But he must do it before some sort of evil empire gets their hands on it because this treasure yields some sort of otherworldly power that humanity can't afford to let fall into the wrong hands.

Substitute the Nazis in the first film with Cold War Russians (circa 1957) this time. Cate Blanchett plays KGB agent Irina Spalko who wants to get her hands on a crystal skull belonging to an ancient Peruvian society because it may give her the power to read others minds.

Of course there are big military applications for such power; The ease with which to interrogate enemies, knowing their moves ahead of time during combat. Probably not the best bet to place during the Cold War to establish one's superiority. But this is the movies.

Yet, KGB agents aren't archaeologists, so they force Jones into helping.

It also helps that one of Jones' colleagues, Harold Oxley (John Hurt) is captured while looking for the skull himself and if Jones doesn't help, Oxley will die.

Shia LeBeouf plays Mutt Williams, whose mother is being held with Oxley. So he and Jones start to work together.

Make no mistake, this is an action film. There is just enough set up to justify motorcycle chases, fistfights and secret antechambers with moving walls within ruins thousands of years old. And each temple, again, has some sort of maniacal Rube Goldberg device meant to kill all who attempt to find it's treasure.

Everything here resembles the first film and that's the gist of my complaint. Didn't Indy deserve something more than a mere retread of his first movie? Or did Spielberg not trust audiences to flock to the box office if he gave them something too different, too fresh?

And as much as I liked seeing Karen Allen again, was this an attempt to bring back a forgotten actress or a lame attempt to hearken back to the first movie?

Whatever the reason for this revival is, it all looks too familiar. There is nothing new to embrace, nothing new to discover. There isn't the same kind of excitement brought on by the first film. That is unless we think LeBoeuf's character, which is more Arthur Fonzarelli than Indiana Jones, is going to take over.

Make no mistake, with all the money the two National Treasure movies have made, they look utterly silly in comparison. And this is the model for them, no doubt.

But either it's time to infuse Jones next movie with more writing talent, if there is to be another. Or it might be time to send the whip and the hat back to the museum.