Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny (2023)

Director: James Mangold

Cast: Harrison Ford, Phoebe Waller-Bridge, Mads Mikkelsen, John Rhys-Davies

Have I Seen it Before: No.

Did I Like It: As much as I might have been anticipating <The Flash (2023)>, I was equally dreading this film. There are a lot of complicated feelings going into it before the film even begins. The early reviews out of Cannes were harsh in their apathy, but it isn’t like that crowd has gotten every call right. We all had our feelings about <Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (2008)>, so much so that the nineteen years we spent clamoring for a fourth film guaranteed that collectively no one spent the last fifteen asking for a fifth. Pretty much everyone had a certain amount of doubt about Steven Spielberg not helming the fifth entry, but after <Logan (2017)>, I at least was comforted that the right man for “one last ride with a beloved character” had been hired. As much as we may have judged George Lucas harshly for his various excesses in the 2000s, I felt like everyone—including Lucas—was a lot happier with him having moved on.

So, what’s the verdict. There is a convoluted time travel plot (yes, you read that right) at the core, and if we remember from my review of <Terminator Genysis (2015)>, I’m willing to forgive quite a bit in the service of convoluted time travel.

The most refreshing element of the film, though, is its restraint. One of Crystal Skull’s less talked about flaws is that it is largely built on a foundation of leftover parts from <Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981)>, but aside from some obligatory beats calling back to the original film in this picture’s final minutes, there is a surprisingly low amount of fan service on display. A few photographs in Indy’s (Ford) apartment. Some legitimately earned mediations on grief, which also will shut up the dunderheads in 2008 who said the franchise was going to be handed down to Shia LaBeouf. One throwaway line referring to his father’s watch and another to the blood of Kali. That’s all. I really expected to needing my re-watch of the series this week.

Are there flaws? Sure. There are special effects that—while not ruining the whole affair—do distract. Several shots during a massive parade set piece don’t pass the smell test now, and will only get worse as the film ages. A WWII-set prologue uses a de-aged Ford almost works, although young(er) Indy can’t quite escape the uncanny valley when any sort of light (simulated or otherwise) passes over his face.

All in all, this is a perfectly serviceable Indy adventure? Is it the perfection of Raiders? Is it the breathless insanity of <Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (1984)>? Not quite, but it may be unreasonable to expect any movie to reach to those levels. Is it the fine-tuned crowd pleaser that is <Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (1989)>? Probably pretty close, and that is far more than I expected as I went in to the theater.

Logan (2017)

Director: James Mangold

Cast: Hugh Jackman, Patrick Stewart, Dafne Keen, Stephen Merchant

Have I Seen it Before: Mystifyingly, only once during its theatrical run. Here, I finally cracked open my blu-ray and experience the black-and-white cut, which has only improved the film. You really should only watch it that way from now on, in case you were wondering.

Did I Like It: When the X-Men movies started now... checks calendar...Oh, Christ...twenty years ago, I think we all agreed that the efforts* of Bryan Singer produced the best possible version of an X-Men movie. It downplayed the more impenetrable space opera elements and tried to take the more human elements of those stories and actually making a film out of them. Was the effort completely successful? No. Did the series proceed to vary wildly in quality and embrace those elements only fans would care about? Yes.

But, here? First of all, the trailer for the film may very well be one of the greatest trailers ever produced, but that’s hardly a fair yardstick by which to judge any feature. Plenty of absolutely forgettable films have managed to spark some kind of imagination from the ad department. 

This film—the real, full meal of it—may not be the greatest thing ever, but is so lovingly crafted that I will have a truly difficult time coming up with any complaints about it. Stripping the characters of much of their strength, they are left to feel their way through the proceedings, and it is immediately clear that, best, they will only be marginally successful in their last mission to find some kind of peace. Any time a filmmaker can tell a tragic tale and still leave us with some shade of hope, that is a truly special thing, and the presence of the Marvel vanity card at the beginning of the proceedings should barely be mentioned.

That being said, it isn’t without its faults (I said it would be difficult to complaint, not impossible). As a native of Oklahoma, I don’t remember the mountains off in the distance, but it’s hard to view a film that only kind of has an awareness of one of its locations too harshly. That being said, too many times, a post-modern example of a genre can’t help but make their homage explicit. This movie has Shane (1953) oozing out of the scars left by its adamantium claws. One can feel that kinship, and it is no less powerful if one didn’t have any awareness of that previous film, or the western genre in general. Having the characters watch and then quote from the movie feels like a distraction. What is otherwise a visceral cinematic experience become briefly a movie about people watching movies, which isn’t nearly as fun.

*Is “effort” even the right word when it comes to the films of Bryan Singer? It’s only in the full light of day that we realize he was very nearly fired from almost every movie he helmed after Apt Pupil (1998). That knowledge probably makes X2: X-Men United (2003), with its near mutiny from the cast easier to watch now.