Indiana Jones et le Cadran de la Destinée

  • Canada Indiana Jones et le Cadran de la Destinée (plus)
Bande-annonce 6


1969. Indiana Jones s’apprête à tirer sa révérence. Après avoir passé plus de dix ans à enseigner au Hunter College de New York, l'estimé professeur d'archéologie est sur le point de prendre sa retraite et de couler des jours paisibles dans son modeste appartement, où il vit seul désormais. Tout bascule après la visite surprise de sa filleule Helena Shaw, qui est à la recherche d'un artefact rare que son père a confié à Indy des années auparavant : le fameux cadran d'Archimède, un appareil qui aurait le pouvoir de localiser les fissures temporelles. En arnaqueuse accomplie, Helena vole l’objet et quitte précipitamment le pays afin de le vendre au plus offrant. Indy n'a d'autre choix que de se lancer à sa poursuite. Il ressort son fedora et son blouson de cuir pour une dernière virée... (Walt Disney Company France)


Critiques (12)


Toutes les critiques de l’utilisateur·trice

français La distribution des acteurs et la partition musicale de John Williams sont réjouissantes, Harrison Ford est rajeuni de façon remarquable, et la surprise du dénouement final est plus crédible que les absurdités d’extraterrestres du film précédent. Mais l’omniprésence du numérique, où même le tuk‑tuk circulant dans les étroites rues marocaines n’est pas réel, est quelque chose que JE NE VEUX PAS dans un film d’Indiana Jones, parce que j’ai fait l’expérience de la trilogie d’origine et que je l’aime toujours pour son inventivité et son honnêteté. Cette routine dans laquelle les réalisateurs n’ont pas besoin de se montrer créatifs sur le plan cinématographique, parce que la post-production en images de synthèse fait tout pour eux, est tout à fait à l’opposé de l’approche originale de Spielberg. Le potentiel de chaque scène en souffre. ()


Toutes les critiques de l’utilisateur·trice

anglais The last quarter of an hour is the only passage where some nostalgia works, and if I were the narrator, I would be much more uncompromising in my completion of Dr. Jones's life's journey. I would have found it much more emotional and logical (connoisseurs know). The rest is inconsistent to say the least. The opening with the train when there's palpable CGI rushing at you from all sides, is not enjoyable, it makes you remember with sadness the train opening of The Last Crusade, where Spielberg didn't need computers (understandably) and it worked much better. The tediously long chase in Tangier again, given the long takes, looks as if the local streets are empty of cars and people and as long as airport runways, I didn't believe it for a second. And that's how it is with everything. It's just such a see-and-forget feel-good movie most of the time, about on the level of the overwrought fourth film. Otherwise, the much-criticized Phoebe Waller-Bridge was fine, she has such a mischievous charisma and is a great counterpoint to the curmudgeonly Harrison Ford, and actually entertained me the most out of the whole film. ()


Toutes les critiques de l’utilisateur·trice

anglais I've had that famous John Williams tune playing in my head for about two hours now, and not because I enjoyed the fifth Indy so much, but rather because I'm in the mood to watch the first three episodes. I'll never watch the fifth one again, I'm almost certain of that. It’s not a completely bad movie, which could be said of the fourth, but it's just not “it”. The new Indy is carried by Harrison Ford and he's really trying his best, but he's just left on his own and he’s obstructed by everything else. The Fifth Indiana Jones film is visually bland and in some moments regularly repulsive, but mostly it has a boring story full of boring characters, and especially the bad guys are a bunch of uninteresting bums who are impossible to be scared of – Mads Mikkelsen is looking like he's about to start crying the whole time. Moreover, the treasure hunt itself leading up to the very weird (and slightly uglier) finale consists mostly of routine chases, because someone figured they couldn't have an 80-year-old Ford running around the set doing action shenanigans. James Mangold directs it all with no attempt at invention, and the result is at best a passable piece of craftsmanship somewhere on the level of National Treasure: Book of Secrets and a tiny bit above Uncharted, which is definitely not praise for this franchise. It lacks the style, the inventiveness and the evident joy that accompanied the first three films and, to some extent, the fourth. A product without soul. ()


Toutes les critiques de l’utilisateur·trice

anglais It’s fine that Disney is keeping old dads in mind, even though the mouse lost his shirt on this film. No, it’s not Logan with a whip. Mangold made a safe, old-fashioned movie along familiar lines that is already a bit long in the tooth in the action scenes and, hand on heart, is reminiscent of a conversation with an old man who’s telling you the same old war story for the five hundredth time,  a sure sign of encroaching senility. The pace and gradation fall off after the fine first third and the film thus needs a defibrillator in the form of nostalgia, which fortunately comes so forcefully in the final minutes that the whip regains its crack. And no, I don’t mean that beautiful crisp metaphor of a person who lives from/in the past, but rather that tender scene of two people who are probably hurting all over. I can relate to that! ()


Toutes les critiques de l’utilisateur·trice

anglais When I think back over the last three months of movies I've seen in the cinema, Indiana Jones comes out as the weakest. Objectively, it might have been worth 3 stars, but I struggled for the first time in a long time and the film failed to engage or captivate me at all. If I look at my watch at least five times in the cinema during a film, I can't give it more than 2 stars. Indiana Jones is not my favorite franchise even though I grew up on it, but I wasn't too pleased with Mangold. The acting is not bad, though Mads Mikkelsen is terribly bland when he's supposed to play the bad guy. Harrison Ford is likeable but didn't entertain me, and I liked Boyd Holbrook but he didn't have much to play here. I didn't enjoy the action scenes, they were digital and lacked pizzazz (the car chase was good though), and when it came to the adventure rides it was one of the highlights (the eel scene was probably the best), but there were only two such scenes in total. The humour was completely absent and I found the plot also quite uninteresting and not very engaging. At home I would probably have turned it off, for me it was an exhausting movie. 4/10. ()


Toutes les critiques de l’utilisateur·trice

anglais The last farewell to a man for whom no desert was too hot, no jungle too deep, and no tomb impenetrable. A critical and financial failure means that the memories of old times are now carried in a completely different form than before, and endless nostalgia cannot work. But on me, it does, because every reference to previous installments resonated in the right place within me, and the truly serious moments that allow Harrison Ford to give performances minimalist yet almost burdensome in their perfection, encapsulated story arcs and audience arcs that have lasted for decades. I'm not saying it's a flawless installment given that after the brilliant introduction the story drags and doesn't let up on the brakes until the final act. However, there we are given so many surprises combined with classic Hollywood spectacle that I don't even want to look back on any complaints I had with the minutes that came before. The feeling of saying goodbye to the most primal form of Indiana Jones is so bitter because suddenly I feel that five adventures are not enough, and the knowledge that it is an intentional ending doesn't help me much. The gates remain closed, and there are not many high-quality adventure films left in such an honest form. ()


Toutes les critiques de l’utilisateur·trice

anglais A nostalgic adventure ride, but Mangold should have gone easier with some the unnecessary CGI and sped up the pace. In any case, Harrison Ford is the driving force and especially in the emotional scenes (the ending) he can grab you by the heart. Again, though, I had the overwhelming feeling that having multiple people writing the script was harmful. The opening chases are formally fine, but they are basically pointless – a shorter one would have been enough. The depression-ridden and aching Indy is so much better. Phoebe Waller-Bridge could pull an entire film or franchise on her own as a more grounded Lara Croft, she’s actually the only one who’s a match for Ford. Mads Mikkelsen is an unremarkable villain, he does know how to play one, but his Nazi scientist is not fully a villain, he’s more of a smart-ass. Completely untarnished, however, is the reputation of John Williams, whose timeless motif and playful themes will hold any true believer to the end credits. ()


Toutes les critiques de l’utilisateur·trice

anglais Not great, not terrible. At the start, when we flashback to World War II and a Wehrmacht officer shines a flashlight in the face of a clearly digital Indy, who squints his eyes everywhere but where he's supposed to, it's a bit scary, but thankfully after a few minutes the train (literally) does slowly move forward and we get a few jokes, solid action and imaginative locations. The dogged effort to honor the unique retro-adventure concept of the saga is evident at every turn, but not always entirely necessary or appropriate. Hats off to Ford, who pulls off some incredible stunts for an octogenarian. On the other hand, I believe this film will probably flop in theaters even if Indy stands on its head. Because it's too uninteresting for the young generation, with an uninteresting, generic pulled out of thin air, and the older viewers would rather watch The Last Crusade, which doesn't need try to go back to its roots, because it’s right there. ()


Toutes les critiques de l’utilisateur·trice

anglais Anyone who gasped at the flying saucer last time may be caught off guard by the end of the fifth Indy, but for me that was perhaps the most interesting part. The film is certainly not bad, but it noticeably and fundamentally lacks the creative contribution of Steven Spielberg. I'm not saying that an Indiana Jones film can't be made by someone other than him, but it probably can't be made by someone unable make it entertaining. Spielberg's vision, imagination, sense of suspense and humour and ability to think through scenes to the smallest detail, James Mangold can’t do any of that (so well). I felt as if he was trying to evoke a Spielberg-like atmosphere mainly in the excellent opening scene (where the digital Indiana Jones, vintage 1944, looks almost flawless, but speaks in a voice decades older), and then not again, or only occasionally and perhaps accidentally. It’s not unwatchable, but it’s not that good either. And the different approach is also evident in the work with John Williams's excellent score, which is an equal partner in Spielberg's films, whereas here it rather supports it. The whole time I was wondering what this film would look like if Spielberg had directed it. Do you remember that less than five-minute scene from Kingdom of the Crystal Skull that starts with a bar fight and turns into a car and motorcycle chase? Well, not a single scene from Dial of Destiny is that good, and that's a shame, because otherwise everything that should be here is here. Harrison Ford still sells every look, every dry line, every emotion, Phoebe Waller-Bridge is charming, Mads Mikkelsen is probably the weakest villain of the series, but the bar was so high. In the end, I think the most important thing is that I want to see Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny again. ()


Toutes les critiques de l’utilisateur·trice

français Indiana Jones et le Cadran de la Destinée est, à certains égards, un film tellement safe et moderne dans sa conception que cela lui ôte tout attrait, originalité, physicalité et audace créative, des qualités que nous avons tant appréciées dans les trois premiers volets. Et malheureusement, même la magie de l'aventure semble avoir disparu. Le générique mentionne quatre scénaristes et cette disparité est palpable dans le produit final. En fait, on a même l'impression que le scénario a été écrit par l'intelligence artificielle. C’est que le film semble inclure tous les éléments caractéristiques d'un long métrage de Jones, mais il donne plutôt l'impression d'être une imitation préfabriquée d'Indiana Jones plutôt que sa véritable dernière aventure. Est-ce pire ou meilleur qu’Indiana Jones et le Royaume du Crâne de Cristal ​​? Difficile à dire. Certaines choses sont mieux, d'autres sont pires. Quoi qu'il en soit, il n'a pas atteint la qualité de la trilogie originale, même pas avec son train numérique. ()


Toutes les critiques de l’utilisateur·trice

anglais Honestly, I didn't have high expectations for the fifth installment of this franchise, so I wasn't unpleasantly surprised. Despite the numerous action scenes and typical chases, I found myself slightly bored. It's not like I was nodding off; there was always something happening, but the film failed to truly captivate me. I had hoped for at least a nostalgic mood, which I thought would be guaranteed. To my disappointment, for the creators, nostalgia meant countless references to previous installments. The way they populated the story with characters from Indy's past made it seem like the creators themselves were experienced archaeologists. There were too many familiar faces, the plot with the Nazis was recycled, even including a child hero and various creepy crawlies. And if that wasn't enough pandering, every contact with the hat was accompanied by the notorious theme. But despite my grumbling, I found moments that amused me greatly, though they're unfortunately the ones the creators shouldn't be proud of. I really don't think it's a good idea when filmmakers get so excited about Luftwaffe bombers that they decide to create a hybrid between a Heinkel 111 and a Dornier Do 17. And to top it off, they even attach a bunch of lockpicks to the tail fin of that poor mutilated creature. I've seen a lot, but this was a first for me. It still makes me laugh as I'm writing this. / Lesson learned: If you want to annoy a Major General, address him as a Colonel. ()


Toutes les critiques de l’utilisateur·trice

français Le nouvel Indiana Jones m’a laissé des sentiments très similaires à ceux du précédent Royaume du crâne de cristal : il est agréable de revoir ce personnage emblématique sur grand écran, mais c’est surtout de la nostalgie que l’on ressent. Ce n’est plus ce que c’était. Et ce n’est pas parce qu’Indy a pris des rides et perdu du muscle... Les nouvelles suites n’ont tout simplement plus la même magie et le même charme. Mais Indiana Jones reste toujours populaire et les producteurs comptent beaucoup sur cela, selon moi. Et ils comptent aussi sur le fait que le spectateur pardonnera tout un tas de bêtises, et que lors de scènes d’action délirantes qui défient les lois de la physique, il fermera un peu les yeux, parce que c’est Indiana Jones après tout... Les personnages sont par ailleurs sympathiques. J’apprécie toujours Mads Mikkelsen en méchant, même si on était loin du personnage du Chiffre. 😊 J’étais aussi contente de revoir Thomas Kretschmann en nazi : comment pourrait-il en être autrement, n’est-ce pas ? Personne ne pourra jamais lui prendre ce rôle. En résumé, le Cadran de la Destinée a été pour moi une petite parenthèse nostalgique dans laquelle j’ai apprécié quelques références aux films précédents, mais sinon c’est vraiment de la série B oubliable, qui n’offense pas mais n’enthousiasme pas non plus. Les beaux jours d’Indiana Jones sont depuis longtemps derrière nous et les deux derniers films n’ont fait que profiter de cette popularité, ce qui est malheureusement assez courant par les temps actuels... [Festival de Cannes 2023] ()