KotCS James Rollins novelization

Eric Solo

Eric Solo

Member
I'm about 1/3 of the way thru the KotCS novelization. I like the description of Arellano's activities at the beginning and I like how he cleaned up some of the plot holes. For example: Going back to Indy's house after the motorcycle chase. In the movie they just kind of went to Indy's house. In the book they hide out for a while and SNEAK into the house very ...um....sneakily. :)
 
Kooshmeister

Kooshmeister

New member
I had mixed feelings about Rollins' novelization initially. I was annoyed that he gave names to all of the Area 51 soldiers at the beginning who have about a second of screentime in the movie....but not to any of Soviet soldiers except Dovchenko, even though he keeps coming back to several specific guys. That just seemed unnaturally lazy.

However where the book excelled is in places the movie failed. Like explaining a lot more about the aliens and Akator and the Ugha in general, and a more drawn-out ending and clear-cut explanation about precisely what happens to Spalko and also explaining how Oxley made it past the guards in the Peruvian cemetery twice (a very funny explanation that makes Indy and Mutt look a bit foolish).
 
L

Luke Skywalker

New member
DIrishB said:
Nice! Been meaning to pick this up. By the way, anyone know if there's a nice collected edition of the adult novelizations of Raiders, Temple, and Last Crusade like they did with the young adult novelizations, let me know.
Click to expand...

if you buy them sepparated they will fit the KOTCS paperback in size. The collection of the three novels is like a hardcover in size.
 
L

Lambonius

New member
I'm about 3/4 of the way through the novel right now, and I just have to say that I think the novel is leaps and bounds better than the film--and I really liked the film! As many have said, the novel just explains so many of the gaping holes in the movie's plot. It leaves me thinking that the true problem with the film was not in the script itself but in the editing room. They just cut SO much valuable stuff out that would have helped flesh out a lot of the scenes that felt really rushed. I know the novel is not the same as the script, but I remember seeing storyboards for several of the extended scenes that appear in the novel but were cut from the film. I can firmly say now that I believe this film would have been a lot better if Speilburg had not been so concerned about getting the time down to just over two hours. Another 20-30 minutes of added explanation and dialogue, not to mention some of the great cliffhanger (literally) scenes that got cut from the film would have made the movie a lot stronger as a whole, in my opinion. I'll try to post a more thorough review of the book when I finish it (probably later today) if anyone is interested.
 
D

deckard24

New member
Lambonius said:
I'm about 3/4 of the way through the novel right now, and I just have to say that I think the novel is leaps and bounds better than the film--and I really liked the film! As many have said, the novel just explains so many of the gaping holes in the movie's plot. It leaves me thinking that the true problem with the film was not in the script itself but in the editing room. They just cut SO much valuable stuff out that would have helped flesh out a lot of the scenes that felt really rushed. I know the novel is not the same as the script, but I remember seeing storyboards for several of the extended scenes that appear in the novel but were cut from the film. I can firmly say now that I believe this film would have been a lot better if Speilburg had not been so concerned about getting the time down to just over two hours. Another 20-30 minutes of added explanation and dialogue, not to mention some of the great cliffhanger (literally) scenes that got cut from the film would have made the movie a lot stronger as a whole, in my opinion. I'll try to post a more thorough review of the book when I finish it (probably later today) if anyone is interested.
Click to expand...
Agreed!:hat:

I'm about half way through the novel and it's significantly better then the film! I just can't help but wonder...what if the film had been closer to the book? It honestly feels so much more like an old school Indy flick then the final cut of KOTCS did! Too bad they didn't follow Rollin's novel instead of Koepp's screenplay!
 
Attila the Professor

Attila the Professor

Moderator
Staff member
deckard24 said:
Agreed!:hat:

I'm about half way through the novel and it's significantly better then the film! I just can't help but wonder...what if the film had been closer to the book? It honestly feels so much more like an old school Indy flick then the final cut of KOTCS did! Too bad they didn't follow Rollin's novel instead of Koepp's screenplay!
Click to expand...

Well, presumably, in large part Rollins did follow Koepp in terms of much of the additional footage, but Spielberg cut it. Mac and Spalko in the jeep was almost certainly in the script at some point. Ditto for the "Who will they say I was?" bit from Stanforth. Perhaps a bit extra dialogue from Mac relating to Mutt and Marion. Probably seeing the water machinery at Akator.

I'd bet, though, that Dovchenko lustily watching Spalko fence at the camp was from Rollins, and the Mexican opening definitely was. Ditto for the Orellana bit.
 
Dewy9

Dewy9

New member
I don't think SS does director's cuts, but it might be nice in this case. I love the movie, but it does have it's flaws.
 
D

deckard24

New member
Attila the Professor said:
Well, presumably, in large part Rollins did follow Koepp in terms of much of the additional footage, but Spielberg cut it. Mac and Spalko in the jeep was almost certainly in the script at some point. Ditto for the "Who will they say I was?" bit from Stanforth. Perhaps a bit extra dialogue from Mac relating to Mutt and Marion. Probably seeing the water machinery at Akator.

I'd bet, though, that Dovchenko lustily watching Spalko fence at the camp was from Rollins, and the Mexican opening definitely was. Ditto for the Orellana bit.
Click to expand...
Well it's too bad Spielberg cut it then! I personally really liked the "Who will they say I was?" line, and I felt it added so much to the subject of Indy's advancing age. It's funny that little things such as a single line can add so much to the overall impact of the story, especially in this case the father/son relationship between Indy and Mutt. I'll be looking forward to discussing the book and its differences with the film in depth once I finish it!
 
Goonie

Goonie

New member
Attila the Professor said:
Well, presumably, in large part Rollins did follow Koepp in terms of much of the additional footage, but Spielberg cut it. Mac and Spalko in the jeep was almost certainly in the script at some point. Ditto for the "Who will they say I was?" bit from Stanforth. Perhaps a bit extra dialogue from Mac relating to Mutt and Marion. Probably seeing the water machinery at Akator.

I'd bet, though, that Dovchenko lustily watching Spalko fence at the camp was from Rollins, and the Mexican opening definitely was. Ditto for the Orellana bit.
Click to expand...

I have to agree that the book was great! It's too bad in the movie Indy didn't actually see the Ark, but in the book he did. I would've loved to see the expression on his face had he seen it in the movie.

It's also too bad the Akator water machinery wasn't explained (or shown) better in the movie as it was in the book.
 
D

deckard24

New member
I still have about 60 pages or so until I finish the novel, but man I am just struck by how much better the story is in this format then what we got on screen! Everything from the Chauchilla Cemetary chapter, the opening in the Yucatan Peninsula, the motorcycle chase and the sneaking into Indy's house, the expanded dialogue between Mutt, Marion, and Indy, and the effect of the skull's power on Indy at the Russian camp, all gave the story so much more in the way of drama, suspense, comedy, and overall exposition. There is a real sense of peril in the novel that is sadly missing from the movie, and it really is a shame that Spielberg didn't follow in a similar style!
 
Dr.Sartorius

Dr.Sartorius

New member
Although I liked the movie I wish it had been more like the book. I loved the little character moments like Mac talking to Spalko in the jeep, Indy and Marion starting to rekindle their love after the waterfall scene, Mutt bonding with Indy, etc. I would've enjoyed the film so much more if these things were shown on screen.

I loved the action in the film but in the book it is a lot more frequent and Indy-esque. For example, Indy and the gang actually fight the Ugha warriors when they're attacked. It just raises the peril level, which unfortunately was not present in the film to this degree. Indy also uses his whip a lot more in Rollins' novel. :whip: I have no idea why Spielberg didn't include this in the film.
 
Saber79

Saber79

New member
I thought the novelization was really really good. Although I really enjoyed the movie, I also feel that the book was what the movie was supposed to be.

Rollins did a great job describing the action, which to me made it feel like "Raiders" in a way.

I loved how dangerous the cemetery actually was, with its collapsing floors and pitfalls. And the battle with the cemetery warriors was brilliant. I felt that when Indy whipped away the knife, Mutt really had a great chance to see the real Indy, instead of the fleeting glimpses of Indy throwing a punch, diving into a tunnel, and then standing there with whip and gun in hand. I think the whole cemetery scene in the book should have been what we saw on the screen.

The one scene in the book that really defined the story was when Indy was packing his bags and looking at his fedora and whip still in the closet. He chooses to leave them there, thinking of starting over. Then after the escapade with Mutt on the bike, realizes that this is who he is and gives the whip a hard crack the emphasize his point. I really thought that scene would have been a great ..."measuring stick" to the character.
 
Morning Bell

Morning Bell

New member
I enjoyed the novelization quite a bit as well. The backstories were the most interesting thing for me and overall I thought it was well-written. I really enjoyed the film as well and the book was a nice companion piece to it.
 
StoneTriple

StoneTriple

New member
DIrishB said:
Luke Skywalker said:
if you buy them sepparated they will fit the KOTCS paperback in size. The collection of the three novels is like a hardcover in size.
Click to expand...
Nice, thanks.
Click to expand...

The paperback of Kingdom is also larger than the other paperbacks. Mine arrived about 6 hours ago. I'll be on a 12-hour flight in about a month. I'm going to try to wait until then to start reading it.
:cool:


*edit*
I just saw on Amazon that there is a regular sized paperback now. It pushes it to 368 pages. I'll get that one for my trip. Easier to travel with.
 
Last edited:
Indyfan4ever

Indyfan4ever

Member
Dewy9 said:
I don't think SS does director's cuts, but it might be nice in this case. I love the movie, but it does have it's flaws.
Click to expand...
Well Speilberg did do a Director's Cut for 'Close Encounter's of a Third Kind':hat:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top