Cool News
Moriarty’s One Thing I Love Today! THE COMPLETE MAKING OF INDIANA JONES!
Hey, everyone. “Moriarty” here.
Quint shames me with his column. Point taken.
I know I’ve taken some time off from this column just as I got it up and running and working well, but sometimes that’s just how things stack up. After the intense creative process (which is actually ongoing as we wrassle with casting issues) on BAT OUT OF HELL, I needed to take a little time to recharge the batteries. One good thing about that is I’ve found all sorts of great stuff to feature in the column in the weeks ahead.
To kick things off again, let’s talk a little more about Indiana Jones. After all, he’s been on everyone’s mind this month, and people have been watching the first three films again. I assume it’s no accident that Del Rey published THE COMPLETE MAKING OF INDIANA JONES this month. What’s interesting is just how much this new book reaffirms my love for RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK and my varying degrees of annoyance with every single one of the Indy sequels. J.W. Rinzler wrote that awesome MAKING OF STAR WARS book that I reviewed last year, so it’s not a shock that he managed to turn this accounting of every detail of the making of these films into a gripping and entertaining narrative. What did surprise me is how this is actually a collaboration with Laurent Bouzereau, who has become Spielberg’s video documentarian of choice. Bouzereau is, of course, the author of THE ANNOTATED SCREENPLAYS, one of the best archival books about the development process that led to the STAR WARS we all know and recognize now. Putting these two guys together to trace the evolution of Indiana Jones as a character seems like a pretty sure bet for a great book. And... it is.
Buy it for the first 150 pages alone. It’s a day by day, blow by blow accounting of the making of RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK, and it is a portrait of two friends who had a big crazy idea that turned to be the greatest adventure movie ever made. It’s better than fiction.
See, I don’t think nostalgia is an inherently evil thing in pop culture. For example, I spent yesterday afternoon on the set of LAND OF THE LOST, and I’m not going to downplay the nostalgic rush I got out of meeting Sid and Marty Krofft and standing in the middle of a group of Sleestaks. So no matter how much I may intellectually rail against the way nostalgia is eating the film industry, I understand some of the impulse. What made RAIDERS different, and the reason you can’t lump it in with the lazy remakes and reboots that clog our cinemas right now, is that Lucas and Spielberg took their nostalgia for things like 1930s adventure serials and James Bond films and instead of just writing fan-fiction or waiting until they got the rights to do some official remake, they took that energy and that enthusiasm, and they channeled it into an original creation. It’s the same sort of giddy invention that fueled the first STAR WARS film by Lucas, that same drive to somehow get these ideas that had been inspired by their own early flirtations with film and wrestle them up onto the screen. These days, the thing that depresses me most is seeing how many people spend massive amounts of time and energy creating fan films that are all about someone else’s copyright. If those same fans took that same energy and passion and poured it into telling stories of their own creation that still tapped into those same fun types of iconography, who knows what the blockbuster landscape might look like? Because maybe those original shorts, even if they are cheap and handmade, would be enough to convince some studio to take a chance on one of those original voices. As it is, there aren’t a lot of development execs chomping at the bit to sort through hundreds of hundreds of hours of bad lightsaber duels on the off-chance that there’s a great natural filmmaker waiting to be discovered. So all of that energy is expended on doing something someone else already did instead of creating something new. If Lucas and Spielberg had done that, we would have never had Indiana Jones.
Another reason I think this book is not just a fun read but an essential read for people actually working in the industry is because it serves as such a potent reminder of just how economically responsible RAIDERS was. $22,805,000. All in. Even with inflation, that’s a remarkable figure, due in no small part to the idea that Lucas and Spielberg were partnered with the studio on this one, and they all had something to prove.
Money’s a funny thing in Hollywood. The more of it you have, the less problems you have on-set, but as I get older and as I spend more time making films and on other people’s sets and as I see certain patterns play themselves out over and over, I’ve realized something: problems are your friends. Some of the greatest moments in our favorite films were the result of someone having to creatively solve some problem on-set. Obviously one of the greatest moments in RAIDERS is the Cairo swordsman scene, where Indy just shrugs the guy off with a single gunshot. I’ve heard several stories about the evolution of that moment, but the version here in this book seems to be the most carefully researched and definitive version of how that scene came to be. What I never realized is that they actually completed the entire swordsman fight on location and that Michael Kahn and George Lucas actually cut the fight together for the film. It came down to a test screening to convince Lucas that the version with the single gunshot was the one audiences preferred. That revelation flies in the face of every story I’d heard about the making of this film, and there are plenty more like it throughout the book. I would love to see the teaser trailer they made that they played a few times at the Chinese Theater during the Christmas season in 1980, then never used again. There’s so much ephemera connected with the production of the film that I’ve never laid eyes on, and I say that as a hardcore fan of the film from the day of release. I read every magazine back then, every book, every anything that had to do with RAIDERS. And even so, there’s plenty here that’s brand new. I really do envy Rinzler and Bouzereau and all the guys who have access to the archives as they put together these amazing books that have been coming out over the last few years.
And even though I have problems with each of the Indy sequels as movies, I also enjoy them as Indiana Jones movies. The character is fun. Period. I like watching Harrison Ford put through the wringer and when the films do work, they are like nothing else. The rest of the book traces the stutter-start development process on each of the sequel scripts, and you can see how, since day one, George Lucas has been reluctant to throw an idea away. He is the original recycler, holding on to set pieces, locations, supporting characters, or action gags for years or even decades. Reading about how DOOM or CRUSADE came to be makes me appreciate them more.
I wish the book actually stopped at CRUSADE, with an eventual update about CRYSTAL SKULL coming only after some time had passed, so it could be set into context with some clarity. After all, there's nothing here really regarding YOUNG INDIANA JONES, so the title's already not quite accurate. Right now, I’ve read a lot of radical sound and fury about CRYSTAL SKULL online and in print, both pro and con, and I think some distance would benefit anything written about the movie by anyone. That’s why the material on RAIDERS, DOOM, and CRUSADE is so great... it’s had time to marinate. People have had time to reflect on these events. The new interviews that Bouzereau did are interesting because he’s managed to really dig deep into the movies, asking people about things that a real fan would want to know. That’s why there are so many great questions answered throughout, so many great stories told. Time’s passed, and whatever you think of the Indy films, you’ve had time to live with them. They are familiar. CRYSTAL SKULL, love it or hate it, is still too fresh to really allow this level of attention. It’s the weakest stuff in the book, which is to say it’s solid and interesting and well-written, but it doesn’t carry anywhere near the charge of everything that comes before it. A minor complaint about an otherwise essential addition to the library of any real fan of the films.
Thanks to Herc for pimping this, since I didn’t realize it was coming out, and thanks to David at DelRey for making sure one was sent for review. It hasn’t left my desk since it arrived, and Toshi’s spent as much time poring over it as I have.
And thanks for nothing to Quint, who is determined to shame me more than I shame myself with his relentless seven day a week pace. You don’t scare me, Quint. You hear me? You don’t scare me!
Well, okay, you scare me a little. But I’m still gonna try to keep up. Game on, Crusty Seaman. Game on.
Drew McWeeny, Los Angeles
Drew McWeeny, Los Angeles
-
+ Expand All
-
This is a must have.
-
Wow.
-
Great commentary on the state of today's blockbusters Mori.
-
Damn good book
-
...and will Ford be 80 by then?
-
I got sent this as a a thank you present, cause I moderate Spielbergfilms.com.
An essential volume. I'm just finished the Raiders part of it and it was VERY interesting. I've just started getting into the part about "Temple".
Essential for any fan of the movies. Great book, I'm loving it! -
Crystal Head in "The Complete Making of Indiana Jones"
-
Its very rough and short because obviously, it wasn't completed, but this is still pretty cool nonetheless. I found it a few months ago - I love Youtube. http://tinyurl.com/4nv64x
-
Jun 09, 2008 5:22:33 AM CDT
Do LuCash and Jerkberg tell us how they fucked things up?
by motoko kusanagi
No? Count me out.
-
It seems like genre filmmaking just had more spark back in the days when filmmakers had to struggle to figure out how to do something or invent something themselves. I suppose maybe because as a director you are a visual storyteller and when you have the option of putting visuals in front of everything else it's just an awfully tempting proposition. Back in the day you better have had strong characters and a tight story because you didn't have the budget or the technology to fill every shot with technical effects. I really hope someday a generation of filmmakers comes along and brings some equilibrium to the computer age. Not that there isn't some good work being done today but I think the ratio is pretty heavily skewed. I just know that somewhere out there someone is filming a bad Terminator film because they think tons of robots and flying ships can make up for a bland lightweight story and is more interesting than a good one and that is just fucking sad.
-
22 million dollars is about 65 million today. Great analysis about what's wrong with moviemaking today!
Maybe you can write your next column about the different script versions of CRYSTAL SKULL? I'd really like to know how much better the Darabont version was than the final film... -
But you're right about the Crystal Skull bits. Not just in terms of the first three films being of a time but there just hasn't been enough dust settled on Skull to look at it in any detail or with objectivity. Too many questions. For example - why have whole paragraphs about Spielberg wanting to do this the old fashioned way, then have whole sections about the CG and not ask the question 'what the hell happened?'. I think they would have asked that about the first three but the promotion of Skull would have prohibited any honest answers. Overall though, a fantastic book.
-
...I thoroughly agree, and that's why it's so great to see the Star Wreck guys take everything they learned doing just about the biggest fan film ever and moving on to something that looks incredibly original (in the same way as Raiders and Star Wars I mean, original but inspired by pulp material) and cool in Iron Sky.
-
Damn You Michael Bay
-
Damn You Michael Bay
-
After the superb Making of Star Wars, I couldn't wait to get my hands on this. Although a lot of focus is on Raiders, all the films get some attention and the book provides oodles of interesting tidbits. Highly recommended.
-
Thanks Bobo, that was pretty cool, though it seems to consist of a paltry 2 scenes... there must be more! I'd LOVE to see goodies like that on the dvds, I wonder why we never get the real gems. Most DVDs today have a commentary if we're lucky and a couple of studio promo-type "Making of" featurettes. I love to see screen-tests, outtakes and alternative takes, especially from a classic like Raiders. I know The Beard will never do a commentary as he's said it destroys the film-making mystique, and I have to respect that, but why keep the juiciest extras gathering dust in a Burbank vault? Can you imagine how cool it would be seeing a Tom Selleck Indy screen-test?
-
The Tom Selleck Indy Screen test is on the Indiana Jones Trilogy DVD Extras disc. Can't remember exactly where, probably in the Raiders documentary.
-
The Tom Selleck screentest is in the extras for the Indy Box set I bought a couple of years ago.
-
Sorry, you beat me to it!
-
In my mind, it is Indy 4 in name only. Sort of fun, but just so whacked out and apart from the others, in time, subject matter, weirdness, jokes that try too hard.
-
regarding this column, maybe if you take out the word "today" then you'll feel less pressure to constantly deliver. because then, it wouldnt be expexted on a daily basis and maybe people wouldnt bitch at ya due to that. just an idea. i realize "things i love" doesnt have the same ring without the word but yeah. anyway this sounds like a cool book, maybe i'll pick it up with the star wars one, i havent read a real book in like years so educamation time.
-
I'd no idea, I didn't see it listed on the box. Thanks for the tip. That's the old box set not the new one? Hmm, You Tube here I come..!
-
When Skull came out, I picked the book up that weekend, and finished it in about five hours. Fantastic read.
-
This past weekend has been a sour one as far as my relationship with AICN goes. It's mainly my fault, I admit, for getting so annoyed at certain peoples' comments on the TBs, but GONE and ScriptGirl also helped. This column, however, has rectified my negativity. Great writing Mori, keep it up (as long as you're able to, at least). I believe in you!
-
I know a LOT of people that liked Indy. That is, basically everyone I know that isn't a fanboy and doesn't frequent this site. Don't even come close to thinking KOTCS is universally (or even in the majority) hated. And saying that Hollywood produces only shit IS a bunch of SHIT. I could list ten movies from last year right now that were AMAZING.
-
Any mention of the three guys that did the RAIDERS adaptation as kids? They really should be namedropped in this.
-
Must have caffine before posting...
-
... no... no, they shouldn't. I like those guys, and I'm glad they've had some attention for it... but where does the piggybacking end? This is a book about the making of RAIDERS. The making of the real one. I think it would be sort of ridiculous to single out one fan film above all others and include it in this book that is otherwise about the making of the actual movies.
-
Yeah, that's the old trilogy box set, but it might be in the new one as well, I'm not sure of the differences.
-
Now that Indy 4 is out, is there anything you can tell us about the Darabont script? I read what the "Making of" book says, which is not much. Maybe you can just tell us how close the movie is now to Darabont's script? Is Darabont's script better than what ended up on the screen (which I thought was pretty good)? Was Lucas a fool for turning Darabont down? Please...anything.
-
C'mon Mori. You know you want to.
-
I completely agree! I actually e-mailed Mori two weeks ago asking him the exact same questions you asked, but alas, did not receive a reply. I would find it absolutely fascinating to see how Darabont's script (which both he and Spielberg loved) differed from what ended up on screen, and if it would have made a better film (i.e. no monkey scene). I'm convinced the more stupid aspects of KOTCS came from Lucas, would rejected the Darabont script because it was too serious. That's my theory, at least.
-
But not in the Lego Indiana Jones game? Something seems odd about that...
-
The latest one held no magic for me. I don't know what went wrong inside the theatre last week when i watched Crystal Skull but I've never been pulled out a movie on so many occassions. I'm too old for this shit and i wish sometimes the actors and directors would realise this too!
-
I am not an Indy fan to begin with, but I will say that the opening scene for the first movie is probably one of the top 5 opening scenes ever. Thought that its funny Doc Ock is in that scene and then was never heard of again until Species. I mean here how little I know about Indy, in re-watching the old movies to get ready for the new one me and my roommate watched like the first 15 minutes of Temple of Doom before we decided that it was not the first movie (once we saw the asian boy we knew he was in the second one). But man Krystal Skull was just like the Mummy 2. I got these two guys at work, ones older then me and loves the old Indy's and feel asleep during the new one and hated it. The other guy has yet to see and gets all annoyed when I talk about, because he doesn't want me to RUIN it for him. And I just tell me, anything that could possibly happen to a person happens to Indy, its impossible to ruin. I did ruin the surprise skeezy mustache guy part for him though.
-
coming out with the chapter heading, "Nuked The Fridge"? ( Sorry, someone hasn't that phrase in almost a week...)
-
Where is your write up on the Darabount script for Indy 4 !?
-
I love the guy's work but about half of the people who saw the Mist fucking loathed it. There's no chance any script would have pleased everybody in regards to Indy 4.
-
The critical feedback has been mostly positive and the film has been a huge financial success. I guess people on these boards think they speak for the world but almost everyone I know who has seen the film really enjoyed it.
-
if this is my old friend Simon M. from Minehead.
Son of Twanky. -
it would great to read a detailed analysis of the darabont script by yourself.
could you imagine the world wide interest? then again Lucas would probably get you sent to guantanamo bay... -
A 1954 Paramount film that has yet to be released on DVD, because, some say, that there are too many similarities between Harry Steele, played by Charlton Heston, and Indiana Jones...
-
Respond to Atticus Finch: Now that Indy 4 is out, is there anything you can tell us about the Darabont script? I read what the "Making of" book says, which is not much. Maybe you can just tell us how close the movie is now to Darabont's script? Is Darabont's script better than what ended up on the screen (which I thought was pretty good)? Was Lucas a fool for turning Darabont down? Please...anything. Inquiring minds want to know!
-
It's not worth getting upset about. And it CERTAINLY isn't worth defending, but it isn't one of the worst films I've seen in a long time. It's just disappointing and lacklustre.
-
If your a sports fan, and your team goes to the world series and loses. You get pissed. You get mad at the team and feel dissappointment. Yet, I never heard a fan bash the past glories. I find it funny that with the disappointment of The fourth film people are so easy to throw the baby out with the bathwater so to speak. Seems a shame. I read the book and still love Raiders. Nothing will taint that for me.
-
... and has been earning exactly what the studio expected and hoped for. It's far from a box-office disappointment. Having said that, I agree that the film wasn't perfect.
-
Only, no one bothered to tell Spiel-Cas, "Hey, this part sucks" or "Lose the monkeys" or "Enough with the gophers," and so forth. Or if people DID say something, Spiel-Cas ignored them. Every time they had a chance to do the "grown-up" thing in the movie, they went the kid route. Remember that nice "it's the mileage" sequence on Katanga's boat in "Raiders?" Nothing like that in KOTCS. No heart, no charm, no feet on the ground.
-
and I suppose the key criteria is "seen" but it is far better than, say, both 28 weeks later and 30 days of night (Different genre, I know). Which were truly, truly horrible. Munich was 2/3rd's brilliant with a turd-tastic last segment. It should have finished after the woman got shot.
-
No other site on the internet takes this long to load simple pages.
-
that's not saying much though.
-
I agree. I don't want to, but it's true. I don't think Spielberg tried or wanted to make a stinking pile of shit with Indy 4. I think he's genuinely lost it as a director of action/adventure cinema. He's in a different place now. The director who made The Lost World and War Of The Worlds made Indy 4, and how fucking sad is that. People who defend Indy 4 either don't know what good movie-making is, or are so clouded by it being an "Indiana Jones" movie and wanting so much to love it, they have no objectivity. I remember EXACTLY the same thing with Phantom Menace. It took a while for the smoke to clear, and for all the Star Wars fan to stand back and see that movie for the piece of shit it truly is. The same will happen with Indy 4. Plain and simple, it's a bad movie.
-
In the warehouse, Indy tries to swing on his whip onto the roof of a truck. He ends up crashing through the windshield backwards, and sitting between two Russian soldiers. Before doing anything else, he says out loud, to himself I guess, "I thought that was shorter..." THEN he punches out the Russians. I found that so stupid... first of all why is he talking to himself? Indy doesn't talk to himself. Second, why would he say it before hitting the soldiers? Lucas obviously thinks it's for comedic effect, but it just made me roll my eyes.
-
indy 4 has made more than a few $$$$ even with the... er less than positive reaction, Ford, Lucas and Speilberg have all said they'd do another.....maybe they could get it right this time?
-
Hardly. Most of Indiana Jones was directly stolen from an old Ronald Reagan movie, right down to the leather jacket and fedora. Don't get me wrong -- Raiders was a very entertaining movie -- but there's not much there that's original.
-
And this book looks awesome too!
-
...TOD and TLC. Because I'm still reeling from the mess that is/was CRYSTAL SKULL. I haven't been that disappointed in a film in a LONG time. Considering the pedigree of the previous installments, I actually feel somewhat "embarrassed" for the entire production. I can't believe it turned out to be such a poorly written and executed debacle.I'll say it again - I was more entertained by Michael Bay's TRANSFORMERS than I was INDY 4. And to think that I would actually prefer to watch any of the STAR WARS prequels over INDY 4 makes me shudder to my very pseudo-geek bones.How could this happen?!?!?
-
I loved the MAKING OF STAR WARS book and if this one is as good as that then I can't wait to read it. Even though it's not a perfect movie and not the best Indy I liked a lot of KOTCS. If you can't even enjoy the snake pit scene then maybe it is for the best to leave Indy behind. RAIDERS was a perfect movie and hard to replicate. It not only had the best payoff to end an Indy movie but one of the best payoffs to ANY movie period.
-
Jun 09, 2008 11:02:30 AM CDT
munich was ultimately undermined by its attempt to be "balanced"
by zapano
it's a shame because there are certain elements to the film that i absolutely love.
schindler's list continues to be his last last truly great film
-
Jun 09, 2008 11:22:39 AM CDT
Connery wasn't older in Last Crusade than Ford is now
by nasty in the pasty
Connery was in his late 50's when he shot Crusade, and Ford was 65 when he shot Crystal Skull.
-
"I was more entertained by Michael Bay's TRANSFORMERS than I was INDY 4. And to think that I would actually prefer to watch any of the STAR WARS prequels over INDY 4 makes me shudder to my very pseudo-geek bones." Holy shit! I totally agree. I have all 3 STAR WARS prequels on my DVD shelf and I'm SERIOUSLY considering never buying Indy 4. Why the FUCK do people like Indy 4? Seriously, what is so good about it?
-
lacklustre and enfeebling as indy was it was NOT worse than AOTC. Which is Lucas's fucking nadir. Although TPM and Sith aren't that far from it.
-
..is that Dr. Jones ultimately does not affect the outcome of the story one iota. Even if he hadn't gone on the adventure the Nazis would have opened the ark on that island and perished. He got himself all beat up for nothing. At least in Doom and Crusade he actually made a difference.
-
You can take that to the bank.
-
250 million plus domestically in three weeks is a disappointment? Bullshit. I don’t know what “word on the street” you’re referring to because the film is doing incredibly well. Even with some stiff competition this weekend, Indy landed in the top 3, already overtaking Sex in the City in terms of weekend gross. That initial 60% drop you allude to is typical for any film, especially one opening on Memorial Day weekend, but regardless Indy continues to perform well and should have no problem crossing 300 million. And while you’re right that this is a popular franchise, Indy never pushed Star Wars numbers, although Indy 4 looks to possibly do just that. Sorry you didn’t like it (I personally loved it, flaws and all) but that fact alone doesn’t make this film a financial failure.
-
Munich is a brilliant film and Bloom Box has been universally praised.
-
ok so i really do but i only posted this because i thought it be funny to have three posts in a row with that mentioned in the title....assuming someone else didnt post as i wrote this.
-
Mostly. Saw Indy 4, loved it, had a great time. You people are spiteful, never pleased, shit heads.
-
I mean really, how much worse could it get?
Can you imagine the meeting they must have had when someone said, "You know, instead of having the Paramount logo turn into a MOUNTAIN, we could have it turn into a MOLEHILL! You know the old saying, right? Well, we could do a reversal of THAT and make a molehill out of a mountain!!"
Who were the dillweeds sitting around that table who popped boners and said, yeah! yeah! Probably the same group that green-lighted the Tarzan stuff. -
That scene is no worse or unrealistic or un-Indy than the scene in Raiders when he and the German soldier laugh at the guy hanging on the window, right before Indy slugs him right out of the truck.
-
That scene in Raiders is fantastic and genuinely funny. The aforementioned scene in INDY 4 is TERRIBLE because what the audience is smart enough to already know, is blurted out loud by the character. It's bad writing. Raiders has no such examples.
-
So we might as well kiss any more of Ford as Indiana Jones goodbye forever. It seems to me Spielberg never wanted to make Crystal Skull. Fucking hell, he put it off for 15 years. It's just one of his stopgap movies, like how War Of The Worlds sadly turned out to be. His REAL movies since are Private Ryan, A.I., Munich and the upcoming Lincoln. Hopefully he'll show up for Interstellar too because that has masses of potential.
-
Connery makes The Last Crusade. I know the movie has a certain tongue in cheek quality to it, just like The Crystal Skull, but Connery - well, the guy's a star and even when playing a cantankerous old duffer he still shines with that mega-wattage of a true star. As Anchorite said 'vim and vigour'. Anyone else think that one of the most memorable moments of Crystal Skull was when the camera passed by his photo?
-
I too wanna know more about the Darabont script. References on this site have been dropped repeatedly, by you! So what is now holding you back? Remember the review of JJ Abrahms Superman, that ultimately killed that version? Well how about the reverse, a review for a script that never existed that actually gives some praise or hope for what could have been. I have a feeling Mori might actually be a little frightened of the Beard and The Neck (Lucas, my God dude, they have procedures that would remove that disgusting Jabba bulge!). So if Mori is frightened of their retaliation, and what it might mean for his future in the industry, well I can't blame him. But if that really is the case, can't you just "give it" to Vern, and have, uhh, "him" write up a kick ass review that dishes on the real deal! Come on dude, give up the info!
-
That entire bit about Lucky Lindy being a raging antisemite put him off?
-
Alright, come on boys (and gals), for those of you who are fans of Indy, the true Indy, the one that was only hinted at in KOTCS, you deserve to know the truth about what Darabont had in store for us. We need to start pestering Moriarty, we know he read it, and liked it, so why not give us the scoop on what was there, what wasn't. I am going to start trolling around and posting this on other talkbacks to drum up support, now...WHO IS WITH ME?!?!?!
-
cmon, we understand Harry's brain was more melted than before by them, but we need a coherent piece of opinion about those films too! If you're not too busy with your film. Congrats bout that.
-
Anything DOES NOT go, goddamn it!
-
Translation: "The movie's mediocre. I know this. We all know this. It should never been made. But, shut up, don't talk about it. If we do, we'll realize what hacks Speilberg and Lucas have become ...and don't talk about the prequels yet, either. They'll get better. THEY-HAVE-TO" Moriarty, you evil bastard muahahahaha!
-
I'll order the book. On related news, anyone interested in Indiana Jones and summer movies should check Vern's latest. It's really something. (Remove spaces)
http://www.geocities.com/outlawvern/ReviewsI.html#crystal_skull -
Steven made LC to make up for TOD. Maybe we'll get a better Indy film (complete with Indy shooting someone) to make up for CS?
-
I completely agree. That made me less ashamed to like Indy 4. Because I genuinely enjoyed it when I watched it. It wasn't until I strolled into a talkback that I was like, "Oh wait, it sucks? Shit." In fact, fuck it, I loved that movie. I can't wait for BluRay.
-
what the bloody fuck?! I still LOVE that movie! It has some of the best dark humor in the series, it shows us an Indy who is at a different point in his life...kind of greedy and obsessed with fortunre and glory more than anything...something we still see a little bit in him in Raiders but the whole child slave thing kinda got his blood boiling and sobered him up to reality some. The movie from the time he gets out from under Kali's spell to the end is some of the best action movie action EVER! And Short Round is hilarious! That kid ne
-
what the bloody fuck?! I still LOVE that movie! It has some of the best dark humor in the series, it shows us an Indy who is at a different point in his life...kind of greedy and obsessed with fortunre and glory more than anything...something we still see a little bit in him in Raiders but the whole child slave thing kinda got his blood boiling and sobered him up to reality some. The movie from the time he gets out from under Kali's spell to the end is some of the best action movie action EVER! And Short Round is hilarious! That kid never missed a beat the whole movie! Sure, Willie was weaker character than Marion but that was the whole point! TO saddle Indy with someone the total opposite of Marion and see how he handled that...and the result was hilarious! Love that movie as much as the others!
-
I've read the Darabont script and I'll say that if you thought Crystal Skull was bad then don't expect much better from Darabont. If you liked Crystal, well then you'd like City of the Gods just fine. Koepp wasn't the only guy who "nuked the fridge"... or had a triple waterfall drop and a Tarzan homage (Darabont, who doesn’t have the Shia character, has Indy pursuing Oxley across vines). This seems to have garnered this reputation as a mythical, genius script that would've had fanboys salivating... sorry, it just isn't very good.
-
I haven't seen Crystal Skull so I can't comment on Ford's performance nor obviously compare it to Connery in Crusade, but I believe Connery was 59 when The Last Crusade was made and Ford is 65 now, so Ford is older than Connery was in Crusade.
-
Know where I can find that script? That sounds cool.
-
The question is will the happening bomb?
-
...and I loved this book. I impulse purchased the recent, kind of, Friday The 13th one too. I don't know what it is, but I'm a geek for behind the scenes and effects books, regardless of how much I enjoy the actualy films themselves.
-
You complain and bitch about how abysmal Indy 4 was....but what you don't seem to realise is that YOU PAID FOR IT. It's more your movie than it is Lucas'. Why? Because you all knew Crystal Skull was going to be a disaster BUT YOU WENT TO SEE IT ANYWAY. And don't try to claim that this wasn't a foregone conclusion. Please, don't make me laugh. The process that led to the creation of this abomination has been well-documented both on this site and elsewhere. And even if it wasn't, you all have the example of the Star Wars prequels - which you guys ALSO paid for. And then there were several reviews ON THIS SITE that told you in no uncertain terms that Indy 4 was the movie YOU'D BEEN DREADING. So don't try to claim you DIDN'T KNOW Crystal Skull was going to suck. You guys helped make this turkey happen. You see, although Lucas keeps tossing off his lazy, amateurish CGI demos, YOU keep paying to see them, no matter how bad they get. And then you come here to bitch and moan about how terrible these movies are - thinking that your hate and anger is going to make a difference. Well sorry to inform you: it doesn't make the slightest difference to Lucas. Okay, maybe AT BEST it gives him ten seconds' worth of annoyance or disappointment to hear that fanboys hate his movies. But then he sees the fifty million dollars you've just handed him over the weekend - and a smile creeps across his face. Because it confirms that he did EVERYTHING right. So he goes and makes another lazy, amateurish piece of horseshit, secure in the knowledge that no matter how much you guys bitch and moan, you'll still keep handing over your money. So why should he stop?He'll stop only when you sheep stop going to his movies. Money's the only language he understands. So remember that when you're walking out of MUTT WILLIAMS AND THE DUCK-MEN FROM VENUS, furious at having had your childhoods raped - AGAIN. Because you paid for the MUTT WILLIAMS movies too.
-
Went back and watched Raiders again. It plays so differently than the three sequels. For starters, it's deeply theatrical. Characters enter scenes differently in Raiders. The presence of the bad guys is felt in scenes there not even in. The cohesion between scenes is amazing. Every scene propels us deeper into impossible danger and risk. Nothing feels strung together. Nothing feels like a fashioned set piece. Jones was a serious guy in Raiders. He was all business. His mission was clear in the first ten minutes. The last two films place too much emphasis on "rescue" and not enough on "recovery" from the get go. And it's funny, but in the long gap between Temple and Crusade I don't ever remember wondering what Indiana's family dynamics were. I just dreamed of pure adventure. And did I mention the Larry Kasdan factor? Maybe Lucas and Spielberg set out to make an homage to the serials of the 40's and 50's but Kasdan gave them so much more.
-
That's why Indy III does so.
-
I just watched "The Last Crusade" on DVD and it blew "The Crystal Skull" away. It was almost a perfect film... I wish Lucas and Spielberg had watched it before they embarked on "Skull."
Hey movie fans, check out this great new movie blog on blogspot. It's called thebitterproducer -
Brilliant post. "The last two films place too much emphasis on rescue and not enough on recovery". That is a very succinct way of saying what I have been saying for 19 years with LAST CRUSADE and now with CRYSTAL SKULL. Indiana Jones should be an obsessed treasure hunter, not a reluctant rescuer.
-
Jun 10, 2008 3:28:47 AM CDT
IndustryKiller! - "I just know that somewhere out there someone
by my liege
-
Oh for fuck's sake... is there a character limit on subject lines? Anyway, I was responding to Industrykiller! saying that someone out there was filming a bad Terminator movie...
-
Very funny, self-deprecating humour, and a surprise entry in the traditional Paramount logo-transformation opening - which unfortunately immediately fell flat (in my eyes) because they used a CGI gopher instead of a real one. Are gophers extinct? Extremely hard to capture? Do they cost like $5000000 a pop? Why did Spielberg not do as he promised and go old school there and USE A REAL GOPHER!!! How hard could it have been?!!? Right there, in the first seconds of Crystal Skull, I knew the movie was in trouble. That for me was symbolic of all that was wrong with Skull, a horrible mess of a movie which I refuse to give a pass just cos it's Indy. As you can tell, I'm still quite upset.. but I thought the molehill IDEA was a good one. Gopher rant over.
-
That actually sounds like something I would have to go see.
-
That does sound like an excellent entry: "Mutt Williams and the Duck-men from Venus". It'll be like Flash Gordon, but different.I take back a few of the negative things I've said about you Merriman, excellent suggestion!
-
I agree it was a CLEVER idea, but you listed all the execution problems with it yourself. I mean, this was for an INDY movie where Spiel-Cas said they wouldn't rely on CGI, and it's the VERY FIRST THING we see--a CGI gopher right out of Alvin and the Chipmunks. I could have lived with it if they didn't keep bringing the gophers back for more forced laughs, and Tarzan-Mutt, and etc etc etc.
-
did it make your little pecker stand up proud to type that? You fucking smug cunt. Although I would buy Duck-men for a dollar. You can never go wrong with duck men.
-
so may well take back all the horrible things he said to you. I, on the other hand, am not. Therefore I feel it is absolutely my duty to tell you that the polemic you've just typed does not make you look like some sort of filmic nostradamus, rather it is evidence of your many obvious personality flaws. WAAAAAAAAAAAH, I WAS RIGHT, WAAAAAAAAH, VALIDATE MEEEEEEEEE!
-
That was sarcasm laid on thick for Merriman. I can't stand the insufferable little fucker, and all the shit that comes from him.
-
but it was such an easy set up I couldn't leave it.
-
Darabont script article.
Now! Bitch!
Thanks, guy. -
Are there any discussion on the visual effects of the films? I love the matte paintings in all three.
-
I like how you say "all three," ignoring, I assume, the new one.
There are some mattes that look kinda fake though. Most notably, the cliff-waterspray in ToD and the reddish stalagtite scene in ToD where they're about to discover the thugee sacrifice ritual. -
Well, Lycas wouldn't be the only one witha "myth" surrounding him.
In this day and age, with all the immediate information and analysis of it, it's hard to cultivate a mythos.
There's no time for legends to grow. They're immediately disproven or confirmed. -
"So, yes, Lucas is a significant figure in a certain sense, but he is by no means excellent at what he does."
But see, I would argue that Lucas never was much of a director/writer to begin with. He's always been excellent as an behind the scenes "pushing the technology and post-production" figure.
That is what he'll be remembered most for....and a few classics and minor ones. -
is also likely on its way. Rinzler said they were trying to make that happen, along with a Jedi one.
I can't wait. -
"Are there any discussion on the visual effects of the films? I love the matte paintings in all three."
Yes, there is some discussion of them. But honestly, these books are better at covering the development and production phases. There are some amazing Michael Lloyd concept paintings for ROTLA for instance.
Cinefex had the best coverage of the vfx work for the films. -
Your instincts against CGI are correct! Run! Run from it!
Look, I disagree with people who are trying to paint Crystal Skull as an abomination. All any of the Indiana Jones movies were ever meant to be is a ridiculous, escapist romp through foreign locations with crazy stunts and evil villains and plucky female sidekicks. It just happened that the first one somehow hit the mark in just the right way and created cinematic perfection in a way none of the others could ever expect to live up to. Even as a weaker entry, there are plenty of places in Crystal Skull where Spielberg's cinematic eye and ability to frame shots and create moments where a lesser director would just push through are in evidence.
But--not to beat a dead horse--the complaints against CGI are 100% right, and Spielberg knows in his heart of hearts that this is true. The obvious examples (swinging on vines with monkeys) are obvious, but how about the scene with the siafu (actually, aren't those the ones in Africa?) ants? This is a good idea for a scene, and perfectly in keeping with the Indiana Jones MO: since it's an exotic location, pop in something that we're kind of vaguely aware of as being out there somewhere, which would be neat to see as part of a set piece.
But while a giant army of killer ants that can strip the flesh off a goat in a minute--and REALLY DO exist in the real world--is a cool idea, doing the whole thing in CGI just trains us from the first minute to think of it as artificial. Compare it to the snake pit in Raiders. Of course we know that Indy's gonna get out of it, and we can kind of see the reflection on the piece of glass separating Harrison Ford from the cobra, but dammit if we can't tell that we're looking at a giant pit of real live slithering breathing existing-in-the-real-world snakes. And it's scary and claustrophobic and tense. The snakes aren't making a cute snake ladder out of themselves to try and climb up that statue to get Indy; they don't need to--just their presence (and a single shot of one slithering through Marion's shoe) is heavy enough to be threatening.
Imagine if Spielberg and co. had actually tramped out to the jungle somewhere to find some real killer army ants, had had to spend a week setting up the logistics of how to get their shots without getting killed, if all the stagehands had gotten bitten a time or two, if Cate Blanchett had gone on Letterman with an anecdote about how frightening it was to sleep in a tent for ten nights somewhere on location with the ants somewhere out there, if Spielberg had discovered that the ants just wouldn't move according to his original vision, but he found a new shot ten times better in trying to set the original one up. Then the scene would have a real presence and fullness that this one, well-choreographed and well-lit as it is, just doesn't; it's technically perfect, but it's not scary and we never for a minute think it's real. That's the problem with CGI, and it doesn't seem to be going away as CGI gets better and more real-looking; it's just training us to be unimpressed by things that by all rights should be impressive. -
The truth hurts, it feels good to be right, and I told you so.And Lucas didn't get a penny from me. Your money, on the other hand, made him richer.I'll be back here to tell you this again when the Mutt Willams franchise gets going.
-
I wasn't disappointed by Indy, nor were most of the others who saw it. I know it must hurt your cunt, but you were wrong...way wrong!
-
...to quote Koepp. Or was it Darabont who put this neat (and dull) expression of excitement into Indy's mouth? Will we be able to find out right now? Is this the goddamn script? His draft? http://tinyurl.com/6mrnas Can't wait to get my hands on that wonderful making of-book. Another thing from the behind-the-scenes world of Indy that's getting me all weak in the knees just thinking about it ...are the Raiders story development transcripts!! It's a delight to see Mori doing one of these love letters again.
-
if Wars and now Indy Jones gets lavish books then this one should too dammit!
-
There have been so many people complaining on these boards about Indy 4 that I literally haven't been able to get a word in edgeways. Everything I've heard about it places it on a par with the Star Wars prequels. And seeing as how you work for either Lucasfilm or Paramount, the opinions of you and your colleagues don't count at all, Atticus McPlant.
-
"There have been so many people complaining on these boards about Indy 4..." Exactly. "These boards" are the only place you'll find people bitching because talkbackers pretty much bitch about everything. But one day you'll leave "these boards" and realize people in the really real world actually liked the film and could care less about posting it on "these boards". And since you're ignorantly posting about a movie you supposedly haven't seen, your opinion doesn't count either, doucebag. Now stop talking before I have to bitch slap you again. Also, here is an assignment for you once you leave "these boards". Go to Rotten Tomatoes and check the critical score for Indy IV, then go to Box Office Mojo and see how Indy is about to overtake Iron Man (which is considered a hit), then ruminate about what makes a movie a hit or a failure. Then shove your head in the toilet and flush.
-
go on ANY fucking board and you'll see people say this is shit.
-
Jun 18, 2008 9:20:59 AM CDT
does the book touch on the fact that indiana jones was quite pos
by jase.prasad
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 273 total posts 271 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 92 total posts 92 posts
- AVENGERS enemy revealed as pink boardgame pieces... You might suffer some form of elation... SPOILERS!!! -- 160 total posts 69 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 151 total posts 63 posts
- Does ‘SNL’ Rhyme With ‘Deschanel’?? Learn Which SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE Vet Hosts After Sexy Zooey!! -- 67 total posts 59 posts
- HANNA's Saoirse Ronan to boss around seven little people -- 60 total posts 57 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 484 total posts 49 posts
- Here's The Red Band Trailer For Drafthouse Films' THE FP! -- 69 total posts 42 posts
- Friday Brings SWEEPS DAY NINE!! Gab Here About Tonight’s FRINGE!! Plus Einstein on TIM, Wiig On PORTLANDIA, MAHER, CLONE, GIFTED, GRIMM, SPARTACUS, SUPERNATURAL, GOLD RUSH And More!! -- 120 total posts 32 posts
- SPACE 2099!! -- 183 total posts 24 posts