Nobody has said Indy IV is as great as Raiders the same way nobody said the PT was as great as the OT, or atleast SW & ESB for that matter, so why not the hatred for this movie the same way I hear about the PT? I always said from day one the PT by not having those same characters from the OT never had a chance, and the bottom line is most of you enjoyed an OK Indy movie cause you still have that great Ford character to root for so you have an emotional investment walking in. Would you all felt the same way if the star of the movie was Shia? Would anyone shown up for Indy IV with Shia as the star, and no Ford? Same exact movie, same script, different actor? I suspect not.
My nephew wants to see it just cause he never saw in Indy film in the theater, so I will probably see this sometime in the summer, but I still contend all the way back when this movie was announced, this is about as much needed as those two average sequels, and really Raiders, IMO, is the only great movie of the set, and the only one that is still truly enjoyable 20 years later. I watched them all last weekend on USA, and Raiders is still in my Top 10 favs of all-time, and TOD and TLC are just knockoffs the same way Indy IV will be.
I don't begrudge anyone for enjoying Indy IV, but sequels to me are everything that are wrong with Hollywood, because from the sounds of everyones expectations, you didn't expect a great movie. Hollywood knows that, and as long as a 'lowered expectations' movie like Indy does 100 million in its first weekend, expect more movies that OK, but not great.