The twenty years since Harrison Ford last donned the whip and fedora translates to about the same time for Indiana Jones, as since 1989's The Last Crusade, the series' setting has leapfrogged from 1939 to 1957. We're reintroduced to professor-by-day, archaeologist-by-night Colonel Jones (WWII has come and gone) as he is forced to reveal to Russian spies a discovery the United States government would rather keep secret. The object of their desire seems an unlikely find for an Indiana Jones film; unfortunately, as with the movie's three predecessors, the opening sequence hints at elements that will play a larger role in the overall plot.

Scrapped ideas from the Lucas drawing board often find their way into the finished product; consider the haunted house that was rejected as the focus of the third film but nonetheless made an appearance. In the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull's case, the idea for Indiana Jones and the Saucer Men from Mars has worked its way more deeply into the final film's plot than I would've liked. Xenoarchaeology has always been the domain of Captain Picard, not Professor Jones. The series needn't necessarily be limited to its roots — with each new film, the franchise becomes something it was not. But I've historically expected Indiana Jones to contain elements of magic and mysticism, not science fiction.

Despite that departure, much of the film is consistent in appearance and style with its predecessors, there is some obvious CGI in effect. Most noticeable are when it's used to generally wholly fabricated animals, such as gophers and monkeys, which might be acceptable were they integral to the plot, but more often they prove unnecessary set decoration, distracting from the story. Raiders of the Lost Ark had a genuine monkey; why couldn't this one? The Tarzan-style action that followed, though true to the pulp of the era in which the film is set, was absurd. Again, I've always found that Indiana Jones action which is not mystical is realistic, but this film strains one's credulity.

What isn't strained by this film is Harrison Ford, as he handles the action sequences surprisingly well, his performance as an adventurous archaeologist appearing not to have suffered the ravages of time. Near the film's beginning is a fun motorcycle ride through the streets of New Haven, Connecticut, which was made more enjoyable to this actor by noticing the many extras and saying, "That could've been me!" A later exhilarating scene is a rain forest car chase with clever combat and constantly shifting terrain that involves the entire cast. It culminates in a pugilistic bout that's accentuated with the satisfyingly sound of many meaty connections, reminiscent of Indy's round with the bald German boxer in the first film, which was similarly set on the precipice of annihilation.

But it does seem that Harrison Ford needs more help from his friends than usual, as evidenced by his growing party. Though Indiana Jones has never ventured out alone — where would he have been without Marian, Willie, Sallah, and Short Round? — this time his entourage numbers five, which detracts from Ford's spotlight. But the return of Karen Allen as Marian Ravenwood is a nice bookend to the series, and even I must admit that Shia LaBeouf didn't ruin Indiana Jones nearly as much as he did Transformers. A similarly expansive, though better received, effort is made when the film references the Young Indiana Jones Chronicles, as pointed out to me by Showbits contributor GeneD. Though I've never seen that television series, I appreciated the official gesture to expand (or at least acknowledge) the canon of the expanded universe.

The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is not the weakest of the four Indiana Jones film, but it is, with any luck, the last. As another review pointed out, The Last Crusade was a more fitting farewell to Henry Jones Jr. and Sr., and now feels a bit diminished by this continuing adventure. Yet Crystal Skull nonetheless gives us the thrill of seeing our hero back in the saddle, and the adventure he takes us on has enough surprises to make it worth the ride.

On one hand, this preview doesn't offer many clues about the plot, Karen Allen's return, or Indy's relationship to Shia LaBeouf. But on the other hand, we don't want the trailer to give much away. Either way, what could a trailer do to make us want or not want to see the film? I've met people as recently as this calendar year who didn't know a new Indiana Jones was in production, let alone on the cusp of release. So perhaps the advertising Lucasfilm does need not be persuasive so much as declarative: yes, this film exists. You know the name, and you want to see it. What more is there?

Finally, today we are presented with the official title — which tells us almost nothing:

HOLLYWOOD, Calif. (Sept. 9, 2007) — The title of the new Indiana Jones adventure, now in production under the direction of Steven Spielberg, is Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, it was revealed today by actor Shia LaBeouf.

LaBeouf, who stars in Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull with Harrison Ford, Cate Blanchett, Karen Allen, Ray Winstone and John Hurt, announced the title during today's MTV Video Music Awards, which were broadcast live from Las Vegas.

Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is a Lucasfilm Ltd. and is being distributed by Paramount Pictures. It will be released in the U.S. and simultaneously in most territories worldwide on Thursday, May 22, 2008. Frank Marshall returns as producer, with Kathleen Kennedy joining George Lucas as executive producer.

Breaking news about Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull can be found at http://www.indianajones.com.

Now, I don't need spoilers anymore than this film needs advertising. And maybe, not being an archaeologist myself, I'm missing the connotations and backstory implied by the title. But it sounds as fabricated as the Temple of Doom. Come on, Steve — just a hint as to the plot? Pleeease?

Yet after hearing positive word-of-mouth for Transformers, I allowed my expectations to be raised… and therein lay my downfall.

For anyone mentally above the age of, say, 30, and is therefore unfamiliar with this franchise, here's a synopsis: the Autobots and Decepticons, from the planet Cybertron, are benign and malevolent robots that disguise themselves as Earth vehicles. In this film, they've come to our planet to recover the Allspark, the non-sentient cube of unknown origin that first breathed life into their mechanical bodies. Control of the Allspark will grant its wielder mastery over all robotic life, whether it be used for niceness or bad.

If that had been what the movie was really about, it might have stood a chance. Unfortunately, its true focus is its two sexually-charged, teenaged protagonists (Shia LeBeouf and Megan Fox). In fact, Bumblebee's first mission is apparently to help the guy get the girl, which sets the tone for interspecies interaction: when dealing with humans, the Autobots are as thick as molasses. An agonizing scene wherein they are supposed to wait outside while LeBeouf retrieves a pair of eyeglasses from his parents' house plays host to immature and unbelievable behavior of both 'bots and biologicals. I suppose I should take into consideration the fact that we actually see the Autobots arrive on Earth during the time frame of the movie, meaning they've had no opportunity to acclimate to local culture (except what they claim to have gleaned from the Internet).

Continuing the anthrocentric trend, the film's primary antagonists are not the Decepticons, but the government. John Turturro and his henchmen can't tell a good guy from a bad one, so they indiscriminately assault and arrest whatever mechas they come across. Turturro's schizophrenic character is poorly written as some sort of schizophrenic good cop/bad cop who randomly, snidely remarks about how he's made horny not by Megan Fox, but by her criminal record.

As a result of all this biological interference, the robots (isn't that what we came here for?) have very little opportunity to be anthropomorphized. Their personalities are barely developed, with the likes of Megatron, Starscream, Ironhide, and Jazz given few scenes and even fewer identifying characteristics. And though I don't question the quality of the CGI that brings these robots to life, I do take exception with the decisions made of how to use it. Though the cars and tanks are easily distinguished from each other, their robot forms are not as easily identifiable, except for the bright colors of Optimus Prime or Bumblebee. And robots should never, ever have lips. At least the words (if not the dialogue) are satisfactory, with the original Optimus Prime, Peter Cullen, reprising his role. It's tolerable that we're missing Frank Welker as Megatron (and Orson Welles as Unicron).

It's a good thing I didn't review this film for Computerworld.com, as the technological terminology was just deplorable. What kind of virus is a "spider-bug"? How can a DNA-based virus hack a computer faster than a regular one? (Later, the Decepticons are referred to as "Non-Biological Entities". So much for DNA.) And since when is hacking detected by listening for audio signals? Is this CIA or SETI?

Ostensibly, this film is about a boy who discovers giant robots and gets caught up in their large-scale battles. For those reasons, I can imagine loving this film as a kid, just like I did Masters of the Universe, which celebrates its 20th anniversary this year. And though I'm still sufficiently immature to enjoy the original cartoon, this modern day remake doesn't live up to its animated predecessor.