Taking a Not-So-Wild Guess at the Fourth Indiana Jones Movie's Plot

I missed something in my previous post. All that time I had been reading all about the Mitchell-Hedges Crystal Skull, I didn't bother reading about F. A. Mitchell-Hedges. It all makes a lot of sense to me now.

Wikipedia's entry on F. A. Mitchell-Hedges mentions about him being thought of as the inspiration for the Indiana Jones movies. Could he be... Could Indy be...

Now, here's my guess on the story of the film, though I won't bet anything on it. Possible spoiler follows… that is if I’m right.

Indy will obviously discover the crystal skull, probably with the help of Shia (who could be the male version of Anna Mitchell-Hedges), after which he will have the same fate as F.A. (being accused of discovering a "fake" artifact) because tests would show that the skull could not have been made earlier than the 19th century. Then, if there will be aliens, he will be “saved” by them from eternal shame, proving (either through peaceful communication or hostile invasion) that the skull is really very old (like 3,500 years or perhaps older). If not, well, he will definitely be “saved” one way or another. Then, after that “shameful” experience, Indy will finally hang his hat and call it quits. That, in my opinion, makes for a graceful exit, rather than quitting due to old age.

Let’s wait and see.

Update (Spoiler): As I was preparing this for posting, looking for an image to go with it, I accidentally stumbled upon some news (or rumor) that aliens will indeed be part of the movie. Read about it yourself by clicking here.

Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull

I tried digging for more information today about the upcoming Indiana Jones film (Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull) which is due to be released on May 22, 2008. But, instead of finding out more about the film, I ended up learning more about crystal skull(s).

From what I understand about the things I've read (meaning, these are my personal conclusions), it seems that much of the crystal skull(s)'s story was made up by a man named Frederick Albert Mitchell-Hedges. It is probably for this same reason that the most famous crystal skull of all is the "Mitchell-Hedges Skull". And that the made-up story behind that one particular skull had been attached to other crystal skulls as far as their "origin" and "use" are concerned.

For the lack of information on the other crystal skulls, I focused my little research on that one skull, the Mitchell-Hedges Skull.

According to F. A. Mitchell-Hedges, the crystal skull is of pre-Columbian origin, particularly Mayan, and is at least 3,500 years old. According to legend, which I'm inclined to believe he also made up, it was used by Mayan high priests when performing "esoteric rites" that involved killing people. In the first edition of his autobiography "Danger My Ally" published in 1954 he wrote: "It is said that when he [the high priest] willed death with the help of the skull, death invariably followed." (words in parenthesis mine)

As for where and how he discovered the skull, he claimed that it was actually his adopted daughter, Anna Le Guillon Mitchell-Hedges, who discovered the skull in 1926. Anna supported this story in a 1968 affidavit (printed in Richard Garvin's "The Crystal Skull") and further claimed that she found the skull buried under a collapsed altar inside a temple in the Mayan city of Lubaantun in Southern Belize (then British Honduras).

However, all of Mitchell-Hedges' claims (including his story about the skull's discovery) are widely disputed as there are no documented evidence that could support any of them.

What does exist is documentary evidence showing that F. A. Mitchell-Hedges had bought a crystal skull (probably THE skull which father and daughter Mitchell-Hedges had repeatedly claimed to have discovered) in 1944 from a London art dealer by the name of Sydney Burney. (Wow! That's like telling your mother that you didn't steal cookie from the cookie jar when you're presently eating a cookie. But, even in that situation you could tell your mother that the cookie you're eating did not come from the cookie jar.) Burney, by the way, was mentioned to be the owner of the skull since 1933 in the July 1936 issue of Man (a British anthropological journal) which is considered to be the earliest published reference to the skull.

As if that was not enough to shatter the Mitchell-Hedges' story, a research carried out in 1996 by the British Museum on several crystal skulls has shown that "the indented lines marking the teeth (for these skulls had no separate jawbone, unlike the Mitchell-Hedges skull) were carved using jeweler's equipment (rotary tools) developed in the 19th century, making a supposed pre-Columbian origin even more dubious" (Wikepedia article on the Mitchell-Hedges Crystal Skull)

"An investigation carried out by the Smithsonian Institution in 1992 on a crystal skull provided by an anonymous source who claimed to have purchased it in Mexico City in 1960 and that it was of Aztec origin concluded that it, too, was made in recent ages and that it originated with Boban. According to the Smithsonian, Boban acquired the crystal skulls he sold from sources in Germany; findings that are in keeping with those of the British Museum." (Wikepedia article on the Mitchell-Hedges Crystal Skull)

Will this "controversy" be included in the movie? I certainly hope so. I'd rather be fooled anew by a new story which takes off from something which I already know something about (even if it's just another fiction) than be told "let's just say that you didn't know anything about this".

By the way, MTV has an article on its website entitled "'Indiana Jones And The Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull': What's The Title Mean?" where Harverd lecturer Marc Zender made a few educated guesses on the possible role of the skull(s) in the upcoming movie. The article also mentions about a rumor that's been going around that aliens will have a part in the movie. To read the whole article, click here.

The Fourth Indiana Jones Movie

I can’t wait for the fourth Indiana Jones movie to come out! I am keeping my hopes up that it will be better than the earlier three movies. So far they’re saying that it will be. It’s just amazing that nothing much about the movie has come out up to this moment unlike what happened with the Transformers.

It was months before the movie’s release when the Transformers movie script leaked out. There were also tons of production photos and concept art popping up everywhere on the net (which Paramount endlessly tried to censor).

Soon after, people connected to the movie were trying to dismiss the leaked script either as a fake or, as Michael Bay had put it, an outdated version of what he was actually using for the final movie. Well, it was not a fake. Outdated maybe, but only to a miniscule degree.

There is nothing like this, so far, happening with the Indiana Jones movie. The film’s producers even sued Tyler Nelson, a ballet dancer who was cast as a “dancing Russian soldier” in the movie, for spilling the movie’s plot during an interview with an Oakland newspaper (Edmond Sun). This has led to a Superior Court order which found that Nelson have “knowingly” violated an agreement (which he signed) which barred him and everyone else involved in the film from discussing anything about the film to the public.

Although nothing much can be found about the film on the net or elsewhere, the title has officially been released. It’s called “Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull”.

Although I am not a very religious person, I was hoping that the fourth installment to the Indiana Jones franchise would be about another biblical artifact. I was quite disappointed that it’s not. Of the past three installments, I liked “Temple of Doom” the least. Maybe it’s because I don’t know anything about those glowing stones he was chasing after there. And until now I have not bothered finding out more about them. I hope I will not have the same feelings for the “Crystal Skull”. I still have time to find out about the real Crystal Skull before it comes out. For those of you who want to know more about the artifact, try googling for Mitchell-Hedges Skull.

So, what can we expect of the film? Well, I guess, just as for anything that every tomorrow brings, we can only hope for the best.

Live-Action Film Version of 80s Cartoons

Seibertron.com has posted something about a G.I. Joe live-action movie coming up. Well, Seibertron.com’s source is actually ComingSoon.net, but since I’ve been a regular visitor of Seibertron.com, that’s where I got the news from.

I’ve also stumbled upon some news somewhere before about a live-action Robotech movie being in the works, as well as one for Astroboy.

Sounds exciting… though, maybe not as exciting for me as when I heard that a live-action Transformers movie was going to be made more than a year ago. That’s when I got hooked on Seibertron.com.

I’m not a fanboy, though I’m probably near the edge of being one. I still remember watching Transformers in the 80s as a kid and drooling over the toys that were being advertised every time it’s aired (the same goes with Ghostbusters, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, and G.I. Joe).

I’ve got only two Transformers toys which my parents bought me (which I still have, by the way)… an Insecticon (I already forgot its name) and the Corvette (Stingray, I believe, is what it’s called but I have the Japanese version which is red colored and not blue as it was in the American version of the cartoon). I got them not because of endless nagging but because of passing in the quarterly school exams. For my brother and I, that was the only way to get something we wanted. But getting passing marks in the major exams didn’t give us license to demand for what we wanted. We had to wait for an offer. If no offer came, well, life went on. That’s because we were made to understand early on about money matters. Get the connection?

Hmmm… that reminds me of the time when, as a grade school student, I gathered all the old (Manila Bulletin) Panorama Magazines I could find in our house and cut out all the application forms from the advertisements of insurance companies thinking that I could help my parents get more money if I filled out and mailed those forms. All I could understand from those advertisements that time were the numbers, and they had BIG numbers printed in BIG BOLD fonts. I thought those companies were giving money away! That was the time when I was still clueless about what bouncing checks were. By what they’re called in the local language, I thought they really explode.

Anyway, going back to my original topic… I think I have one up there somewhere…

The excitement I felt for the live-action Transformers movie actually came not from being a Transformers fan, but rather out of my curiosity about how they were going to make it realistic and believable. Like how Optimus Prime would transform in the “real world” without having a gaping hole on his back (as he did in the G1 toy which I was able to play with only once at my brother’s rich friend’s house).


I was a bit disappointed when I found out that the movie was not going to be faithful to the original cartoons as far as the robots and cars were concerned. But all the changes that were done were, I think, understandable and acceptable (at least after I saw the making of the movie).

I almost got influenced by the nay-sayers into bad mouthing Michael Bay when I was following the movie’s progress. But when I finally saw the movie on the big screen, I can’t find anything about it that is worth thrashing (being honest to myself). The opening narration (by Peter Cullen) was particularly powerful for me, not for what was said but for how it sounded. For me it felt like hearing something, or someone, from my past.

There are still a lot of haters out there, but as far as I’m concerned, I like the movie quite a lot. So much so that I asked my sister-in-law, who’s living in the States, to buy me a copy of the two-disc special edition DVD release. And after watching the movie for the second and third time on DVD, I only have praises for it, more so for the technical side of it (behind-the-scenes). I have yet to watch the movie with the commentaries track.

Having all that said, I doubt the upcoming G.I. Joe and Robotech movies will have the same effect on me as the Transformers had. For one thing, although I have watched the G.I. Joe cartoon regularly as a kid, I can’t seem to remember anything about G.I. Joe that’s as memorable as Cullen’s voice in Transformers (except for the plain white Storm Shadow who was my favorite toy for a very long time). Also, IMO, the G.I. Joe movie might just come out like any other war movie(?). Well, maybe if they use the same opening theme and sequence, I’d probably change my mind somewhat. As for Robotech, well, I wasn’t a regular follower of that, I only watched it whenever nothing else was on. I’m sure a lot of people out there are saying that I’ve missed a lot, and I agree. So, as far as these two movies are concerned, I’d probably just take them for what they are now (or will become when and if the movies do come out) and not relate them to their past incarnation.


For Astroboy, well, I just hope they’ll stick to his original appearance.