You know, I like Indiana Jones just fine, but...

[Orrex]

As a paranormal artifact, The Crystal Skull annoys the hell out of me. The most famous claim about is that they simply can't be made with modern tools, which is simply false. They're also imbued with all kinds of mystical mumbojumbo about healings and far-seeing and the heartbreak of psoriasis.

Thankfully, I don't personally know anyone who has a strong belief about these trinkets, but even the venerable Arthur C. Clarke once featured them uncritically on his "Mysterious Universe" program.

I fear that there will be some flare-up of interest with the release of the fourth Indy film. I mean, The Ark, The Sankara Stones, and The Grail aren't any more real in their magical abilities, but at least we don't have people running around claiming to perform supernatural feats with these. The Skull, on the other hand, seems to have circles of believers even today.

Here's a great piece about it at The Skeptic's Dictionary.

[TZ]

1. Huh. I had never heard of crystal skulls before this movie

"The Skull of Doom" (which DOES sound like an Indiana Jones type of thing) sure sounds a lot like the Piltdown Man fraud. Carefully crafted but total bunk.
Interesting. I would have never thought it was anything but another Hollywood yarn if you hadn't posted this. Thank you, Orrex.

[Orrex]

2. You're welcome--you've opened my eyes on more than a few occasions, too!

I think that I actually first heard about The Famous Crystal Skull either on That's Incredible or Ripley's Believe it or Not! way back in the day, but I'm not sure.

Like (I suspect) a lot of skeptics, I really enjoy the use of these props in film and literature; it's when their believers try to drag them into the real world that I balk.

[onager]

3. Paratrinket! There's a useful new word!

:rofl:

Thanks a lot. I didn't know any of this stuff.

They sure ticked all the boxes, though...

...it came from outer space and was kept in Atlantis before it was brought to Belize...

Frank Dorland...claimed that the skull originated in Atlantis and was carried around by the Knights Templar during the crusades....

For example, a skull called "Max" was supposedly given to the people of Guatemala by a Tibetan healer...

"Nick" Nocerino claims he met a shaman in 1949 while traveling in Mexico who led him to a Mayan priest who said he was authorized to sell the skulls because the village needed money for food.

But...but didn't the Mayan priest know how to make the skull do magic if they needed money for...

Oh, never mind.

[salvorhardin]

4. Brian Dunning did a nice job covering the crystal skulls on his Skeptoid podcast

I love Brian's podcasts for his laser precision in talking about skeptical topics in only about 10 minutes. I don't always agree with him, but I think his podcast is the best produced and written skeptical podcast out there today. Brian is also the person who is putting together The Skeptologists TV show.

It was 1926 when Anna Mitchell-Hedges, adoptive daughter of British adventurer and author Frederick Albert Mitchell-Hedges, was something of a real life Lara Croft. She was crawling through an ancient Mayan temple in Belize, long ago wrecked by the ages and the ravages of the encroaching jungle. Beneath a crumbled altar, she unearthed perhaps the most curious artifact from the ancient world: A perfectly clear crystal skull, expertly carved, and immaculately preserved, and about two thirds the size of a real skull. For nearly 30 years the Mitchell-Hedges family kept the crystal skull a secret, until F.A. Mitchell-Hedges mentioned it briefly in his book Danger My Ally. In this book he said the skull was 3,600 years old, and was used by Mayan priests to strike people dead by the force of their own will. After her father's death, Anna took this so-called "Skull of Doom" on tour throughout the world, and its strange powers became well known. Arthur C. Clarke even used the Mitchell-Hedges skull as the logo for his television series Arthur C. Clarke's Mysterious World. The fourth Indiana Jones movie is about a crystal skull with mystical qualities, and furthers the theme originally proposed by Mitchell-Hedges that crystal skulls are alien in origin, coming from Atlantis or Roswell or some alien world. In fact, practically every reference to a crystal skull over the past 40 years or so has usually been specifically about the Mitchell-Hedges skull.
More: http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4098
Or Listen: http://skeptoid.com/audio/skeptoid-4098.mp3

[mr blur]

5. All fakes, according to this article in The Independent:

Indiana Jones and the Heap of Old Junk

The 12 surviving Aztec crystal skulls are cherished by museums, revered by New-Age writers, and have a starring role in Harrison Ford's new movie. There's just one problem: they are fakes, say French experts

<snip>

According to one version of events, the 12 skulls – and a missing 13th sister skull – must be lined up or piled in a pyramid on or before the last day in the Mayan calendar, 21 December 2012. Otherwise the globe will fly off its axis.

Doubts about the authenticity of the skulls as Aztec or Mayan artefacts have existed for years. The British Museum, which owns one example, concluded 11 years ago that its skull had probably been polished by a wheeled machine. The pre-Colombian civilisations on the American continents discovered many things, but not the wheel. (Ah well, say the New Age theorists, the Mayans may not have had the wheel. The beings from outer space obviously did.)

The "French skull", acquired by the French state from a bankrupt collector in 1878, is now in the hands of the Musée Quai Branly, the excellent new museum of non-Western art beside the Eiffel Tower.

Because of the interest inspired by the Spielberg film, the French national museum service's research and restoration centre, C2RMF, decided a few months ago to subject the crystal skull to the most advanced forms of analysis, including "particle induced X-ray emission and Raman spectroscopy".

The centre's official report will be published next week but the principal findings were released yesterday by the Quai Branly museum. The "French skull" was probably made in a small village in southern Germany in the second half of the 19th century. The quartz from which it is made is of Alpine, not Central American, origin. The pre-Colombian origin of the "French skull", and probably several of the others, was almost certainly concocted by the French adventurer and antique merchant, Eugène Boban, who sold it to a wealthy French collector in 1875.

"The grooves and perforations clearly show the use of jewellery drills and other modern tools," said Yves Le Fur, the deputy head of collections at the Quai Branly. "It is inconceivable that such precision was the work of pre-Colombian artists."

<snip>

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/film-and-tv/features/indiana-jones-and-the-heap-of-old-junk-811846.html

[bhikkhu]

23. Oh well....

I remember reading about one crystal skull many years ago, as an example of the advanced technology and unexplained techniques of the Mayans. I read the Independent article the other day with slight disappointment. I suppose it is possible that one, at least, is not a fake; ridiculously inefficient methods of production (from a modern standpoint) are well documented in the ancient Americas. But I suppose it also makes little difference.

[SpookyCat]

6. Funny Coincidence

As I'm reading your post a commercial for the new Raiders movie came on...oooh...spoooky! LOL!

Completely agree though. This sort of thing gives me a headache. The SciFi channel is having a show about the "Mysteries of the Crystal Skulls" so I fear you may be right. It will be the Celestine Prophesies all over again. <sigh>

[TZ]

7. Yeah I saw an ad for that...

and knowing how much Orrex loves the Sci-Fi channel (not!) I figured he's gonna be sooo watching it......;-)

Welcome to DU btw!:hi:

[Orrex]

8. LOL! I was tempted, just to piss myself off

But I'll sit this one out. I can only bear to hear just so much about artifacts that are impossible to make with modern tools. Darn those clever ancients!

[realisticphish]

9. the ancient egyptians

were FAR too stupid and not-white-or-asian to create anything on their own.


SPACEMEN!

[onager]

10. One of my favorite Egyptian stories...

From Dr. Zahi Hawass, Secretary General of the Egyptian Supreme Council of Antiquities--the guy you see on all those non-woo History Channel shows. That even popped up in his Wikipedia entry:

Hawass is also a vocal opponent of ancient astronauts theories about a previous worldwide civilization. He appeared on a History Channel show to dispel the theories, and provided evidence to show that the Egyptians built the pyramids of Egypt.

Over here, Dr. Hawass writes a monthly column for Egypt Today magazine, and also a weekly column, I believe, for the newspapers.

In one of his newspaper articles, he told a hilarious story about an "Egyptologist" who came to study in Egypt from the Edgar Cayce Institute.

This learned expert insisted that the Pyramids were built by the citizens of Atlantis. He also expected to find a huge Atlantean treasure buried under the paw of the Sphinx. The right paw, I think.

He was a crackpot but Hawass couldn't just ignore him. Thanks to the Cayce Institute, he was a very well-funded crackpot.

This woo story actually had a happy ending. With some exposure to real Egyptian history, the Atlantis enthusiast eventually shattered his crackpottery and became a real Egyptologist.

The minds of these folks often aren't so changeable. Egyptians have an old saying about that: "Like trying to make the Sphinx dance."

BTW, if you come to Egypt and want to impress your tour guide, use the Arabic name for the Sphinx--Abu Hol. It means "Father of Terror."

You can also quote another nifty old saying about that tourist attraction located right behind the Sphinx: All men are afraid of Time. But Time is afraid of the Pyramids.

[realisticphish]

12. i would be interested in reading his columns

(assuming they are in English, or translated into it) Do you know if they are available online?

[onager]

13. You can find some of them here...

All in English.

The website of Egypt Today magazine. I did a search on "Hawass" and quite a few hits came up. The column is "From The Notebooks of..." and you'll have to page down. As you might suspect, he is referenced in a ton of other articles.

http://www.egypttoday.com/

His stuff sometimes appears in the newspaper Egyptian Gazette, but it will take some looking around and the paper's website does not have a search function:

http://www.algomhuria.net.eg/gazette/1/

You can also do a Google on "hawass cayce" but...whew, Katie-bar-the-door! The first linked article I tried to read was a long-winded, discomboobled rant involving Hawass, an Illuminati plot, a Masonic plot, a Zionist plot, and I think a few other plots.

The author was fond of the word "nay," a word which annoys me unless it is being used by a horse.

Another rant said a Cayce prophecy was PROVEN!!! correct because Hawass found a tunnel between the Cheops Pyramid and the Sphinx. But Cayce promised a treasure under the paw of the Sphinx, and/or documents tracing the history of the human race back to Atlantis. Incredibly, none of these items turned up. :eyes:

[realisticphish]

14. cool

thanks, it looks interesting

[Dr. Strange]

11. I like him too, but he hasn't posted in a while.

Although he did post something in the Lounge: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=105x7751226#7751340

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

15. Meh, the link sort of undermines your point.

Some of the crystal skulls are genuine meso-american artifacts. Sure, some people really get into the woo. But they do the same kind of nonsense over the holy grail. Ark of the covenant not so much, but plenty of Judeo-christian artifacts out there. And shiva linga are a major part of temples all over India.

All in all, the movie's got bigger problems. Too much CGI, Lucas, Spielberg...

Looks like it'll be another Phantom Menace.

[Orrex]

17. You're right--I posted prior to seeing the film

Happily, Jones himself points out that the "famous" crystal skulls are mundane forgeries. That point surprised me, since I really expected them to capitalize on the idiotic fad that goes along with the Skepdic.com link I provided.

Sadly, the "crystal skull" of the film is even dumber than the one from pop culture.

[semillama]

16. Did you see that the History Channell did an Indiana Jones-themed special?

It was actually pretty damn good, and I was genuinely impressed...

(and you know the ellipses were coming)

They had a section on the MYSTERIOUS CRYSTAL SKULLS which, strangely, had no commentary by any of the actual archaeologists featured through the rest of the show, but did feature the expert commentary of a person who specializes in ANCIENT ASTRONAUTS.

I about blew my top.

[jberryhill]

18. "The Crystal Skull annoys the hell out of me"

You see.

It works.

[jberryhill]

19. Finally got around to seeing this (SPOILER)

Being familiar with all kinds of wooish crap makes this movie fun. It did for me anyway.


*******************SPOILER ALERT**********************

My first exposure to skepticism was "Crash Go The Chariots", that was a critical examination of Erich Von Daniken's "Chariots of the Gods" - the original reference for space aliens are responsible for the pyramids and pre-Columbian culture.

Tying together Roswell, the Crystal Skull, the Nazca lines, Soviet Military Psi investigations, El Dorado... all of that stuff... was a lot of fun.

[Orrex]

20. The idea was good; the execution was IMO fatally flawed

It just didn't have the feel of an Indiana Jones film, due in large part to the criminal over-reliance on unconvincing CGI. It looked like a sequel to Brendan Fraser's The Mummy.

Also, at this point, I think that Roswell/Area51 should have their own version of Godwin's Law. They're the ultimate MacGuffin, and in too many ways they let the writers off the hook.


Glad to hear that you enjoyed it, though. My my count, you, Spielberg, Lucas, and maybe Ford are the only four who can make that claim!

[TZ]

21. Count me in to the group of five!

I enjoyed it..much like Jberryhill being somewhat familiar with the woo in the movie I enjoyed it...Was there stuff that was really far fetched..yeah. In fact I remember R_A saying he and his physics nerd friends saw it together and I can just imagine the commentary....

[Random_Australian]

22. Oh yeeeah. That film was so awesome. It didn't even try to make sense.

Monkeys attacked the bad guys. Why? Because they're bad guys, so that's what happens.

No attempt to make anything realistic. Just plain old "we need a giant woodcutter thing to take us through the forest (I was half expecting darth vader to be at the controls). So, when the woodcutter thing gets smashed, we have lightsaber swordfights while driving through the jungle!"

That movie was hilarious. :rofl:

[TZ]

24. Yeah I did feel like that one scene was

on Endor...I figured you got a kick out of the surviving the nuclear blast in a refrigerator..that did make my eyes roll....
I found it entertaining though. Sometimes I just enjoy a silly movie....

[Orrex]

25. See, that's what a lot of Indy4 lunatics are saying

It's one thing to enjoy a silly movie; who doesn't love Army of Darkness, for instance? But Indy4 is ridiculous and nonsensical in ways that the first three films simply weren't, and as such it's an unworthy addition to to the series.

To be fair, the two earlier sequels (well, prequel and sequel) lacked a certain magic that we saw in Raiders, but even these did a better job of capturing the flavor evoked in the first film.

Here's a quick list off the top of my head of things that were lame about Indy4

1. Levitating homing-beacon magnetism, which seems to operate only when the plot needs some magnetism
2. Indy's an FBI "person of interest," but we never see the FBI again in the film
3. Offhand reference to Indy's war record and service as a spy. Oh, come on.
4. Shia LaBrando
5. Why take the motorcycle to Peru? And how the hell did a "person of interest" flee the country so easily?
6. Kick-boxing Incas. Though the Bugs Bunny-esque blowgun gag was amusing)
7. The skull itself
8. John Hurt's ludicrous performace. He's an incredible actor entirely wasted in this idiotic role.
9. The snake rescue
10. The monkeys, complete with Shia as Tarzan
11. The ants
12. The waterfalls
13. Another group of anonymous natives serving no purpose
14. Wild mish-mash of anachronistic historical artifacts
15. Nonsensical garbage about "extradimensional beings"
16. "Run from the special effect, but don't actual interact with it!" We've also seen this in Land of the Lost
17. The cutesy windblown fedora gag in the church. Gag, indeed.
18. I don't much care for Karen Allen's smirking performance, either
19. The CGI
20. The CGI

Horrible. If I had to choose between watching either Indy4 again or Brendan Fraser's The Mummy, I'd puncture my eardrums and pluck out my eyes.

[TZ]

26. I've found your problem IMO

These movies both Brendan Fraser's The Mummy and Indy4 aren't MEANT to be taken seriously..they are supposed to be so absurd that they are funny and fun..and yes, I enjoy The Mummy and will watch it when it is on TV (frequently).
BTB, I do agree with you on most of your critiques....Definitely heavy on the cheese in that movie...Like R_A said the monkeys attacking the bad guys only..pretty silly...but somehow that didn't stop my enjoyment.
But at first, I could definitely see your point about the "flavor" missing...I felt though as the movie went on it caught that flavor ...Maybe its just because I'm a sucker for Harrison Ford in a fedora, leather jacket, and bullwhip...Old or not..the man is still hawt.

I did genuinely enjoy it...but I confess on the way home I starting thinking..gee I can't wait to get home and post on DU and annoy the crap out of Orrex by saying I liked it.....:rofl:
My big dislike was the damn UFO...why was it such a stereotypical "flying disc"? At least make it glowy and colorful like in Close Encounters....

[semillama]

27. I had the same thought! (spoilers)

I was really expecting Spielberg to tie in Close Encounters with this movie. That would have been awesome. Only one of several disappointing things about the movie.

My biggest disappointment? IT WASN'T CLEVER. If you go back and watch the other movies, there was an element of cleverness to the dialog and plots that was completely lacking in this movie. Plus a complete failure in the character development department. There was so much they could have done between Mutt and Indy that just didn't happen or work, especially when you compare it to the father-son dynamic in Last Crusade between Senior and Junior. Everything just felt too contrived. I will say there was a lot of good stuff going on with Indy himself (little things that connected him to the other films, the bit about him being an OSS officer, the look on his face when the Russians crash into the Marcus Brody statue), but Ford had shit to work with script-wise when it came to his relationships with the other characters.

As an archaeologist, I was disappointed by the lack of connection with anything remotely factual about Peruvian archaeology - with the exception of the Nasca lines (I also liked how Indy was lecturing on Skara Brae, that was cool).

Ah, well. Bring on HELLBOY II!!!!!!

[onager]

28. I had the same reaction to The Mummy & Sequel...

One reason I liked The Mummy was that it stuck to the context of its time, which made it easier for me to suspend my disbelief. It was set in the 1920's and all the stuff in the movie fit that era: the shotguns, revolvers, etc.

They violated the hell out of that in the sequel, which was set in the 1930's but had people carrying Sten submachine guns--which hadn't been invented yet.

I realize that's an anal-retentive nitpick only a crackpot like me would care about. Far worse was draggging in the Annoying Kid Character, and that incredibly stupid "Scorpion King" ending. I just laughed at that, especially with The Rock(head) looking like he was afraid the costume might turn on him and kick his ass any moment. (Now THAT would be an ending worth watching!)

Still, no cinema abuse of the mummy concept comes close to the stupidity of Anne Rice's novelistic treatment. In her book, a woman is watching an ancient mummy unwrap himself and come to life. And as the wrapping comes off, the first thing she notices is...his beautiful eyes.

Right. If I saw a 4,000 year old corpse coming to life in front of me, I'd be getting the hell outta there. And probably doing a serious re-evaluation of my skepticism.

[moggie]

35. One disagreement

Still, no cinema abuse of the mummy concept comes close to the stupidity of Anne Rice's novelistic treatment

What, you haven't seen Bubba Ho-tep?

[onager]

37. No, but I will put it on top of my list...

As soon as I'm done deciphering the Foucaultian/Derridian subtext of Zombie Strippers.

:hi:

[semillama]

39. Seriously put it near the top of your list, if you're a Bruce Campbell fan

He actually puts in a great performance as "Ancient Elvis" and Ossie Davis as JFK is fantastic.

[and-justice-for-all]

29. I thought the film was very entertaining..

I enjoyed it.

The central artifact of this film was no different than the ones in the prior films, it all fiction and fiction makes for good entertainment.

[realisticphish]

30. the problem i've seen

is the same problem that follows george lucas in all his remakes: It's just been too long. He's lost the groove on star wars and IJ. I just don't see the new movie as a continuation. Yeah, same characters, etc, but to me it's just cashing in. Sure, it's as entertaining as any run of the mill action movie, but it doesn't have the same character as the old ones.

[and-justice-for-all]

31. I just take it for what it is...nothing more.

Do not really see a need to over analysis it.

The same type of thing happened with the 'Alien' franchise, waiting to long to develop an already well put together story in to film. Aliens3 looked great, specially with the added footage, but it was completely off base from the original story. There is actually enough story for 3 more films, which would include Space Marines, Aliens, Predators and the SpaceJockies. I was so put off by the way the Alien story has been butchered, I wrote my own brief and submitted it to the Writers Guild.

[realisticphish]

32. no

but beyond analysis, it just doesn't feel right. i can take historical inaccuracy, or whatever, as long as the movie is better for it, or just feels right. Thus, I hated Braveheart, but loved Gettysburg. Both have inaccuracies, but one bothers me less than the other. I dunno, no big deal, i'm just sick of the hollywood trend of remakes, either of comic books, older movies, or tv shows

[and-justice-for-all]

33. Oh man, your in for it...

Comics are the new treasure trove for Hollywood. There is also some old black and White films getting remade as well; ex/ The Day the Earth Stood Still.

'300' was a smashing film, it rocked. It was not historically accurate at all, it was made to be over the top. Who wants to pay 10 bucks to watch the History Channel? Not that the HC is spot on accurate about stuff, they also try to make historical subjects more lively. Because they, do not want you to feel like your in Class or at a lecture, so the content gets blown out of proportion.

Indian is always chasing myths and fables, which makes for good entertainment.

[moggie]

36. Oh dear!

A remake of The Day the Earth Stood Still? I hadn't heard; my first impulse is to regard that as an act of vandalism against a cherished monument. Gort! Klaatu barada n... n... necktie?

[onager]

38. A-H-H-H-H!!!!!

No, no, dear non-existent god and by the eyebrows of Crom. PLEASE not a remake of The Day the Earth Stood Still!

I can just imagine how that one will be "improved."

Almost as frightening as the news, a few years ago, that Whoopi Goldberg was planning a remake of another American movie classic.

Somewhere on the web I found the whole story. One night Whoopi went to her local Schlockbuster for a horror movie, and rented an "old black-and-white movie" she had never seen that she THOUGHT was a horror flick:

A Face In The Crowd

??? That would be Budd Schulberg's classic 1957 rumination on the unholy nexus of American politics, advertising and show biz coming together to throw up a Man Of The People. And you can take "throw up" literally. As a Fundamentalist Atheist, I don't use the word "prophecy" lightly. But it's impossible to watch this movie and not think of G.W. Bush. And several other American political types who crawled out from under various rocks.

Oddly enough, A Face In The Crowd also starred Patricia Neal. And Andy Griffith, who shows what a shame it is that he eventually descended into TV sitcom-land. Damn, what a movie and what performances.

And Ms. Goldberg thought it would be a good idea to remake it as a comedy. The original was a comedy, dammit. But a black comedy, and the joke was on us. The manipulators become the manipulated. And when the hero falls, his replacement is waiting in the reception room of the advertising agency. With a joke, a guitar, a deep love for Jesus and apple pie, and eyes as hungry as Sweeney Todd's razors. With the Standard American Disclaimer: "I'm jist a good ol' boy!"

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0050371/

[PATRICK]

34. Over twenty years ago

I wrote a novel, albeit a ripoff of the Indiana Jones trend that contained a lot of the then current Arthur C. Clarke, Bermuda triangle type stuff that was virtually the culmination of such "ancient unsolved mysteries" whose biggest breath of pop cult life had come from "The Chariots of the Gods." Since then I have felt some peculiar gastronomical sensations as each element of my unpublished book almost inevitably became fodder for books and films- often in not very well realized or rational fashion- which is likely why they made money and mine was part of a slush file bonfire... somewhere... out there.

The latest movie finally combined aliens with the ancient artifact almost like someone had scrounged some final crumbs from the dated fads where the 50's mixed with the interests of the seventies. Now the mix is doubly confusing and quaint should anyone be even tempted to any serious study of the 2008 return in the queasy sentimental format of the "revisiting" sequel.

I tried to beef up my outrageous hodge podge of ancient aliens(silicon based), ancient Native American interaction, space travel, Nazi spies attacking the Manhattan project, Nazca, Macchu Picchu, the Moon, the Anasazi with a lot of research and scientific bones that the typical Indy movie fudges with magic and inconsistencies. (A woman hero too but along came Kathy Turner's movies).

You know, I believe one really can make good movies like this with more than a passing nod to good science and not leading people to take wild speculative fun as serious new belief fodder. I guess that is why I am poor and poorly read.

On edit: I never bothered with my sequel about the crystal skull and the second alien being.