The Frank Darabont Script

RocketSledFight

New member
James said:
I preferred KOTCS in this respect, because he literally has nothing to come home to at the start of the adventure. Not even Henry Sr. in a forgettable cameo.

Now that I read this, I think I very much agree with you. The startled Henry Sr. cameo in the Darabont script made my skin crawl a bit. I said in an earlier post that I disliked the noir-ish aspects of this script, and upon re-reading it, I feel strongly that Koepp was moving in the right direction. I found myself really missing the dynamic of father and son that I felt in KOTCS when reading, and the gloom of everything - drunken Indy's singing, etc. - while not quite 'melodramatic' as others have said, really does give me the impression that the writer was taking the material far too seriously.

And really, I would trade the KOTCS 51 opening scene for the plane sequence in Darabont's draft any day. Frank's opening was bad.
 
The death of Henry Jones in Koepp's gives a melancholy weight to Indy's character reminiscent of Rocky Balboa with the absence of Adrian.
 

RocketSledFight

New member
While I would have liked a mention of Sallah in KOTCS, I don't think he's really necessary as a performance in the film. Felt superfluous in Darabont's draft.
 
RocketSledFight said:
While I would have liked a mention of Sallah in KOTCS, I don't think he's really necessary as a performance in the film. Felt superfluous in Darabont's draft.

As much as I love Sallah and wanted him in KOTCS instead of Mac, I agree. Everything in Darabont's seemed superfluous. His script seemed like it was trying too hard to pander to the fans.
 

James

Well-known member
RocketSledFight said:
the gloom of everything - drunken Indy's singing, etc. - while not quite 'melodramatic' as others have said, really does give me the impression that the writer was taking the material far too seriously.

I'm really not even sure I agree with his interpretation of Indy. It's one thing to have Indy mourn the (perceived) death of a loved one, but quite another to have him get sloppy drunk and feel sorry for himself. I'm not sure Indy would steal artifacts from his beloved museum or leave someone he respected in a filthy cage, either. And let's not even mention the way he suddenly turns into Will Smith while blowing away a rare and unknown lifeform!


Agent Spalko said:
The death of Henry Jones in Koepp's gives a melancholy weight to Indy's character reminiscent of Rocky Balboa with the absence of Adrian.

Yeah, it doesn't take much to add emotional resonance to an Indiana Jones film. You can convey Indy's newfound respect for his father with a single look on a deserted beach, or sum up entire character relationships by just showing a fedora exchanging hands (or heads).
 

RocketSledFight

New member
I think it's more than a bit funny that those who both enjoyed KOTCS and hated it kind of assumed that Darabont's script was this holy grail that Lucas and Spielberg left by the roadside, when I'm almost positive they picked it apart for these reasons.

Darabont is a truly great filmmaker and screenwriter, and the script has lots of strengths. But I feel less angry (even as a fan of what we saw on screen in Indy 4) about the decision to go in a different direction than I did before reading.

Crystal Skull isn't genius, but it doesn't pander and it doesn't feel a strange need to explore itself and its relevance as the capstone to a great series, as City of the Gods does. I left the theater with my expectations a little turned but still happy after the film I was given. I get the sense that after seeing what Darabont envisioned, I would feel a little ... I don't know ... bothered? Troubled? By the fact that what I saw was at moments gloomy and overly-serious. Feels forced. By trying, maybe, to bring back some of the darkness of Raiders, Darabont shot himself in the foot.
 
Yeah he did and he burned his bridge with Lucas over it. I actually like the title City of the Gods better because it would have given KOTCS some much needed credibility to its alien mythology but I think Lucas' decision to reject Darabont and give his stamp of approval on Koepp's script was probably one of the most rational decisions he has made in recent years. I now have a .01% better appreciation of KOTCS now. Thanks, George. (y)
 

misnomer

New member
^ couldnt disagree more-EDIT (James' post) what KOTCS needed was weight. The Darabont draft has some ropey moments- (the frog scene, snake scene and humming bird bits,far too many nods, one too many double-crosses and a poor villain) but pretty much everything else feels like an Indiana Jones film should. Theres a sense of danger. Oxley and Marion are handled very well.

Yes, the beards were right to simplify this script, but it looks like they watered it down far too much in order to shoehorn Mutt in.

Absolutely love the hanging scene, the plane fight and the river sequence.
Most importantly, Darabont included the IJ s.o.h that was lacking from the film
'ill take it from here'- engine dies. thats classic Jones.

Ah well- im sticking with the first 3 and forgetting 4 exists, just like Ive done with Die Hard and Alien.
 

agentsands77

New member
James said:
As for Indy, the same story arc is still present in KOTCS. He's weary, disillusioned, and has everything taken from him at the start of the film. We don't need to be hit over the head with all this in the form of dialogue- it's right there in Harrison Ford's performance.
Not to the degree. In KINGDOM, it's really just there for about a scene. Once that's done and over, the movie progresses as if it never happened, as does Indy's character. It's just like how KINGDOM only pays lip service to Indy's age... brings it up occasionally, only to never do anything interesting with it.

Darabont's Indy is closer to the Indy I wanted to see in KINGDOM. Burnt-out, older, tired of adventure, and then betrayed by the nation he belongs to.

James said:
Even though Koepp's script hasn't leaked, it was used by James Rollins as the basis of his novelization. And when reading it, you get a sense that the script probably fleshed out the story far better than what ended up onscreen.
We can't use it as a judge, since Rollins padded out the script and filled in holes as he saw fit. The novelization was clearly going to be a much more fleshed-out version of what we saw on screen, regardless of the state of the script.

James said:
Yeah, it doesn't take much to add emotional resonance to an Indiana Jones film.
Yeah, it doesn't. But even so, KINGDOM was practically lacking in any level of emotional depth. It was entirely lightweight.
 

agentsands77

New member
misnomer said:
^ couldnt disagree more-EDIT (James' post) what KOTCS needed was weight. The Darabont draft has some ropey moments- (the frog scene, snake scene and humming bird bits,far too many nods, one too many double-crosses and a poor villain) but pretty much everything else feels like an Indiana Jones film should. Theres a sense of danger. Oxley and Marion are handled very well.

Yes, the beards were right to simplify this script, but it looks like they watered it down far too much in order to shoehorn Mutt in.

Absolutely love the hanging scene, the plane fight and the river sequence.
Most importantly, Darabont included the IJ s.o.h that was lacking from the film
'ill take it from here'- engine dies. thats classic Jones.
Entirely agreed. CITY OF THE GODS could stand a good rewrite, but it gets more right than KINGDOM does. CITY OF THE GODS was in the right direction.
 

FordFan

Well-known member
Agent Spalko said:
I now have a .01% better appreciation of KOTCS now. Thanks, George. (y)

.01% better? I think it's a good movie, Spalko, and I think you'll come around to seeing that too. Part of what bothers me about people saying negative things about this movie is they think being a cynic is cool. Kind of in a Chuck Klosterman, "Reality Bites"-way. I'm not saying you're that way, but I will be checking back to see if you like it in the coming months.
 
FordFan said:
.01% better? I think it's a good movie, Spalko, and I think you'll come around to seeing that too. Part of what bothers me about people saying negative things about this movie is they think being a cynic is cool. Kind of in a Chuck Klosterman, "Reality Bites"-way. I'm not saying you're that way, but I will be checking back to see if you like it in the coming months.

You'll be waiting till hell freezes over. Make no mistake, I think both of them are awful scripts. The story is still disastrous. I was only putting a positive spin on it because everyone thinks I am always just trying to be negative. I still have contempt for what was presented to us on screen and my feelings for that will never change.
 

James

Well-known member
RocketSledFight said:
I get the sense that after seeing what Darabont envisioned, I would feel a little ... I don't know ... bothered? Troubled?

Yeah, I came away thinking it was a little unpleasant. Indiana Jones movies are supposed to be fun. But there's nothing fun about watching a hero find out his true love has married. I didn't care for it in Superman Returns, and I'm glad Indy wasn't subjected to it. There's also nothing fun about seeing Indy reduced to a jealous ex, or forced to undergo his snake phobia a second time.

Agent Spalko said:
I actually like the title City of the Gods better because it would have given KOTCS some much needed credibility to its alien mythology

I always preferred it as well, for precisely that reason. However, I think reading this script has changed my mind. :D But I guess Darabont's storyline was really more about the city, while KOTCS was really more about the skull.

agentsands77 said:
Not to the degree. In KINGDOM, it's really just there for about a scene. Once that's done and over, the movie progresses as if it never happened, as does Indy's character. It's just like how KINGDOM only pays lip service to Indy's age... brings it up occasionally, only to never do anything interesting with it.

I personally see it in everything up to the Asylum. His friend betrays him, his country disowns him, and he acknowledges the passing of his two father figures. We then see his world-weariness in his exchanges with Mutt at the diner and the Peruvian marketplace. All of this stuff is on par with the character moments in the previous films. Indy's relationships with everyone can usually be reduced to a handful of scenes. KOTCS just deposits the bulk of them closer to the film's opening half than the previous entries did.

His scenes with Marion are not as developed, but there is still a progression present onscreen. It's thin- even by Indiana Jones standards- but it's there and befitting a movie that is aiming to duplicate the B movie experience of the 1950s.
 

agentsands77

New member
James said:
I personally see it in everything up to the Asylum. His friend betrays him, his country disowns him, and he acknowledges the passing of his two father figures.
Sure. In the exchange with Dean Stanforth. But as soon as that's over, he's just talking to Mutt in the diner as regular ol' Indy, and the motorcycle chase seals the deal. The movie doesn't give Indy's disillusionment any time to really sink in... once it's brought up, BAM! we're past it, and Indy's just good ol' wisecracking Indy.

James said:
We then see his world-weariness in his exchanges with Mutt at the diner and the Peruvian marketplace.
I don't see any strong examples of it in either of those scenes. There's certainly not much bitterness.

James said:
All of this stuff is on par with the character moments in the previous films.
Well, the previous films didn't really have great character moments.

RAIDERS wasn't much of a character-driven film at all. There's not really much of an arc for Indy's character. But it does have the wonderful Marion/Indy bar conversation, which sets the standard, and is more than any following film ever comes close to.

As far as TEMPLE/CRUSADE are concerned, well, I think they're pretty poor. TEMPLE OF DOOM was pretty much a wash in that area, and LAST CRUSADE did one crappy job in handling the father/son relationship. So for KINGDOM to be on the same level isn't necessarily doing that great, and with all the added silliness and the breakneck pace, nothing at all sinks in.

INDY IV was the first time they really tried to do a substantial character arc with Indiana Jones, and based on what we have available, Darabont was the only one to really take advantage of that.

James said:
It's thin- even by Indiana Jones standards- but it's there and befitting a movie that is aiming to duplicate the B movie experience of the 1950s.
That's a cop-out excuse, though. Sure, you can forgive pretty much every flaw in an Indiana Jones movie with the excuse, "Well, it's no crappier than the B-movies it's trying to emulate." But that's not how Indiana Jones works. Indiana Jones isn't trying to recreate those movies, it's taking inspiration from them and then doing it better.

Lucas even said Indiana Jones is B-movie stories executed on an A-level. That doesn't really happen with KINGDOM.
 
Last edited:

James

Well-known member
agentsands77 said:
I don't see any strong examples of it in either of those scenes. There's certainly not much bitterness.

That's a cop-out excuse, though. Sure, you can forgive pretty much every flaw in an Indiana Jones movie with the excuse, "Well, it's no crappier than the B-movies it's trying to emulate." But that's not how Indiana Jones works. Lucas even said Indiana Jones is B-movie stories executed on an A-level.

Oh, I don't see any bitterness either. I'm not sure I'd really want to. But there's a definite weariness to him and more of a maturity than was present in LC: "It's just a story, kid."

We just have two different views on what Indy 4 should've been. Lucas and Spielberg said they were aiming for the same level as the previous films, and I think they succeeded. As you say, none of those films were really known for their character development. And as such, I don't think we needed to see Indy suddenly given the Batman Begins treatment.

But it's not really a cop out to use the B movie excuse. KOTCS is still true to the previous films, in that it's a B movie being executed with the A level resources of a $185 million film. How can you fault it for lacking character development, when you don't even think it was there in the previous sequels?

Ultimately, I think it basically comes down to a generational gap. You have two guys in their 60's trying to put their childhood up on the screen. There's naturally going to be a noticeable difference from the way two filmmakers in their 30's would probably do it (as ROTLA illustrates).

The way they interpret pulp and B movies is also going to be a lot different than the way kids today would approach a pet project. Most movie fans online tend to favor realism. But one look at the various ideas for this series reveals exactly how Spielberg and Lucas regard the Indy films: Haunted houses, giant rolling boulders, talking monkeys, magic rocks, saucermen from mars, etc.
 
Last edited:

DetectiveFork

New member
Peacock's-Eye said:
Yes, that gives Indy a journey - but I like Koepp's journey better: Indy goes from thinking that he's going to lose everything, to gaining everything. He also learns that he's not just a relic from a more romantic time - out there, somewhere, there is an advanced civilization that also prizes discovery & knowledge above all else. The things Indy prizes are universally important. I find that idea potent & deeply moving.

Like any other fan, I have my own preconceptions, and one of those is that Indy is a character who is driven by a thirst for discovery, adventure & companionship. That's what I get from the other movies.

I just wanted to commend you on an excellent post. This is exactly what I like about Indy's journey on KotCS, as well.
 

psion

New member
First I like to say I love Frank Darabont, I had the honor to meet him and talk to him for like 40 mins at Peter Jackson's King Kong Premiere Party.

I just finally read his script. it is well written, but it does feel like Raiders rehash. Its great, but the story while it is a in Raiders great level, it puts Indy, as a character back into the raiders time, eventho the movie is set in the 50s and that the Character didnt have any big growth other than he suppsely got over his fears of snakes.

The actions scene are much well written in this script than the KOTCS.
But overall, there was too much exchange of dialogue between the love trilangle of Peter, Indy, and Marion. That it was over done. The dialogue was great, but it did not match Lawrence Kasdan's style between Marion and Indy (in KOTCS, atleast he was consulted)

I think that was the main problem for Lucas. The Love Triangle, and how much it playes a main part in the movie.

It was like Raiders, becasue multiple groups of evil villains wants the Skull.
So the chase itself is more thrilling. The Ants sequence is the most well written here, way better than the current version.

I didnt like the opening sequence tho, in the Hanger, as it was very plain. you know will trying to get Indy, to ride a horse.
The one in KOTCS, it was much better.

I would say the Darabont version of the ending, is much more cooler and to the same , but rehased level of Raiders. But making the Alien, less mysterious and into a Evil Monsters is kind of lame to me.

I like the horror effects stuff, but the KOTCS, did make the Aliens nicer, which I prefered. And making Yuri lived in the end and shake hands with Indy.... dont like that.

I would have prefered the KOTCS script, but with Darabonts action sequences, it would have made the movie perfect.

Remember, in the Darabont script, it wasnt Mutt doing Tarzan, it was INDY and OXLEY, doing Tarzan. That was werid.

Too serious, when Henry called his son, that is why you are name after a dog. Even more silly, when Indy tries to duplicate his action scene in Raiders in the museum, with cigarette ash as sand. And he is drunk. WOW, very heavy, for kids these days. Lucas, wants Light, i kind of got what he meant.


I like the script, I wouldnt say 100% I want this version of the movie.
 

Salacious

New member
I'm really shocked that alot of people are liking this biplane sequence. Its horribly outrageous! And not the good kind of outrageous!

Its one thing for Indy to be dragged underneath a truck, to jump out of an airplane with an inflatable raft, or even to fall down a waterfall 3 times....but this sequence looked like something out of a comic book! This would not fit in an Indy adventure! Its simply too ridiculous.

Cant belive Darabount wrote it...and whats even more shocking is that I am reading alot of people liking it. :confused:

What a BS action sequence. Absolute garbage!! :dead:
 
Top