So, we have some tool in Belize who believes that a crystal carving of a human skull may have been stolen 80 years ago from a location in his country, and thus believes that the plastic model of an alien skull seen in a movie somehow violates the implied trademark his country allegedly holds on the crystal carving of a human skull?

Wow, Jaime Awe. In your rush to become the "Zahi Hawass of Belize", you're now just as stupid as the folks that believe that the crystal carving of a human skull was created by aliens. Zahi Hawass actually went after authenticated Egyptian antiquities, not farcical copies manufactured by silly Brits hoping to cash in on the occult.

What's worse is that, as a result of forcing the issue, you'll guarantee that your "cultural artifact" is authenticated as European in origin, not stolen from a Mayan city as you allege, and thus invalidate any alleged trademark claim precisely because not a single crystal skull has ever been found in or stolen from Belize.

In short, your greed and vanity will be the undoing of your culture's claims. Heckuva job.

ferretman: This was on TV the other night and it would of been the 3rd time watching it...but I finally realized that it was not a very good movie.

I just watched it the other night, too, and although I agree with you, I also discovered it's not AS bad I remembered.

All the things that everyone complains about, all true (the fridge, the monkeys, the sword fight on the trucks in the jungle, the driving off 3 waterfalls) all bad.

But it DID have some moments

(also, my question is not "why does Indiana Jones have a photo of his father on his desk" but "why does Indiana Jones have a photo of his father on his desk that is clearly a promo shot from the LAST Indiana Jones movie???"