TheRaider.net
 

Go Back   The Raven > The Films > Indiana Jones Trilogy
User Name
Password

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 03-21-2009, 08:59 AM   #176
Rocket Surgeon
Guest
 
Rocket Surgeon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 8,872
Quote:
Originally Posted by ronicle
Geeze why didn't I think of that! Do you know how funny that would have been if Mutt's name was Asta! LOL

Myrna Loy never had children, (although married and divorced 4 times), so I guess Asta was her precious.
Rocket Surgeon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2009, 10:16 AM   #177
Robyn
IndyFan
 
Robyn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 813
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocket Surgeon
Myrna Loy never had children, (although married and divorced 4 times), so I guess Asta was her precious.

She should have married William Powell! She once said that she was never happier than when she was with him... what a missed opportunity...
Robyn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2009, 05:17 PM   #178
Raiders112390
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,038
Is there any place to find the conference transcript?
Raiders112390 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2009, 05:51 PM   #179
Robyn
IndyFan
 
Robyn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 813
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raiders112390
Is there any place to find the conference transcript?

Here's the one I have uploaded..

http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/1844398/R...1%26116%29.pdf
Robyn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2010, 08:59 PM   #180
Moedred
Administrator
 
Moedred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: California
Posts: 4,892
Someone spell-checked and color-coded it...
http://characteranimation.com/indy/R...Transcript.pdf

These are the sources referenced in the Transcript:
Chariots of the Gods? (1968) – Erich Von Daniken
The Spear of Destiny (1973) – Trevor Ravenscroft
1955 (?) article by Phil Kaufman’s Chicago mononucleosis doctor, blood specialist
"In Search of the Lost Ark" (?) - Rolling Stone article

Does anyone have more info on the last two sources?
Moedred is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2010, 03:24 PM   #181
Raiders112390
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,038
I thought the little subtle push and tug between Spielberg and Lucas over Indy's character was interesting--Spielberg wanted Indy to be more of a Clark Gable type character, or in Spielberg's own words:


''Remember the movie "Soldier Of Fortune" with
Clark Gable? There was a good deal of Rhett Butler in that
character. The devil-may-care kind of guy who can handle
situations. He's so damn glib he bluffs everybody around. People
think that he's a push-over. He's challenged, and he always
appears like a push-over. But in fact he's not. He likes to set
himself up in these subordinate roles from time to time to get
his way''

To which George rebuffs him by saying:

''What I'm saying is, that character just would not
fit in a college classroom or even as an archeologist. He's too
much of a scruffy character to settle down. A playboy, or however
you want to do it. He's too much of a wise-guy, maybe that's a
better way to say it, to actually be a college professor. He
really loves the stuff, but he became too cynical, he's too much
of a wise guy to fit into an academic situation, or even an
archeological situation. He's really too much of an adventurer at
heart. He just loves it. So he obviously took this whole bent
that was different because it's just more fun. He just can't
settle down. It's a nice contrast. It's like the James Bond
thing. Instead of being a martini drinking cultured kind of
sophisticate, he's the sort of intellectual college professor
James Bond. He's a superagent.''

Spielberg also adds in how Indy should be a "good gambler.", amongst other things. He keeps going back to wanting to make Indy more of a Clark Gable inspired character, whereas George keeps refuting him by saying he should be more of a Humphrey Bogart character. He also already in 1978 seems to have a vague idea of Indy's background--That Indy has been on supernatural adventures before Raiders and he's the guy people go to get or solve this stuff for them--But he's the eternal skeptic even in light of the things he's seen--and George also introduces the whole Ravenwood character--albeit unnamed--to present a mythology to the series (as Lucas puts it "a character you want to see that's often mentioned" to paraphrase him)--Making Ravenwood are our unseen "Man with No Name." I have to admit, in terms of character or story mythology, Lucas in those days was like a genius. Steven seemed to be more into the casual action-y, James Bond-y type stuff, whereas Lucas was more of a character creator then.

Really it was a perfect marriage--George for the characters, mythology, enigmatic side of Indy; Steven to get the great, adrenaline pumping action scenes--The thinker and the doer creating a film together, so to speak. Had just Steven been on board, we would've probably had a more action based, but less mysterious and deep Indy; Had just George been on board, it might've been a more slower, but deeper film. And then you have Kasdan in the mix throwing in all sorts of details and adding meat to the skeleton George and Steven put together. This really was the perfect trio at the height of their powers.

I know people bash Lucas a lot these days, but I think that Lucas' vision--An intellectual James Bond involved in supernatural mysteries--was much better and much more exciting and original than Spielberg's, which would've basically been a rehash of James Bond and Clark Gable, and I'm glad it won out. It seems like Lucas, moreso than SS, was responsible for the Indy we came to love, and for a lot of the enigmatic brilliance of Raiders. I don't think Harrison would've played a good Clark Gable-ish character anyway.

And even though there is a James Bond influence on the film and on Indy in terms of action and "Indy girls", I personally don't really see too much of the Bond influence on film--I see Indy in Raiders as more of a thinking man's Bogart or a college educated Bogart in Treasure of the Sierra Madre, who has the LUST for treasure and adventure but not the respect and true understanding of it that Indy has. I'd say Fedora (from LC) is more of that Treasure of the Sierra Madre character. Indy isn't suave or cool; He isn't the cool, playful, cat-like, suave murderer of Connery's Bond or the judo chopping classical yet man of action Brit of Moore's Bond. He's more rough hewn, more gritty, his hair gets mussed, he lets his stubble grow out, he gets beaten and bloodied---Bond beats the bad guy with only his tie undone. Indy comes off as almost more like a modern "Cowboy" in some ways.

But that's just me. I wanted to make a thread on Indy's personality as expressed solely in the Trilogy (without all of the extra stuff--Just the original 3 films) and how his character and characterization changed over time, but I figured I'd just make it a new post in this original thread.

It seems both character wise and otherwise after Raiders they really moved away from their original intentions--a character firmly grounded in a low key movie as in low key action and stunts and whatnot; believable, yet touching against the supernatural--Each movie became less serious, much bigger in terms of stunts and outrageousness-It's almost like after Raiders, Indy becomes this larger than life hero--Not the grounded, gritty, almost Noir-ish mysterious guy of Raiders.
It seems a rather easy formula, yet since 1981 GL and SS haven't seem to want to want to retain it. I'm not saying TOD or LC aren't great films--they are, in their own right--But ROTLA is different; a league of it's own. Indy at times feels like a different character in terms of personality, things he says etc.

They really should have had Larry Kasdan write all 3 movie scripts, since he helped create Indy as much as GL and Steven did. He would've had a better feel for the character, in my opinion, than Katz and Boam did. Katz and Co. created this over the top super hero version of Indy, this more comedic, light hearted, less serious guy. Boam did a much better job, but he grounded Indy too much. Made him seem too world weary. Boam would've been good for Indiana Jones IV, because as I've stated before--Indy in LC seems like he's ten years older instead of two years (and not just in terms of appearance, but his overall personality). Boam or Darabont would've been great for a 1940s Indy in a Noir sort of film.

Overall their different characterizations of Indy can be retconned with the help of EU sources as a character arc, but strictly film wise I think it suffers for it.


Anyway, anyone want to discuss Indy's personality and character in relation to both the conference and the trilogy?

Last edited by Raiders112390 : 07-02-2010 at 03:50 PM.
Raiders112390 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2010, 05:14 PM   #182
Rocket Surgeon
Guest
 
Rocket Surgeon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 8,872
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raiders112390
I have to admit, in terms of character or story mythology, Lucas in those days was like a genius.

I don't know about the whole genius label, it just seems to me he took notes on all the stuff he liked from movies and told other people to make it happen. It took the collective tallents of Kasdan to make it convincing on the page and Spielberg/Ford to carve away the excess and leave the final shape.

This is as simple a way of conveying it as I can think...
Rocket Surgeon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2010, 01:54 AM   #183
Montana Smith
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 10,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocket Surgeon
I don't know about the whole genius label, it just seems to me he took notes on all the stuff he liked from movies and told other people to make it happen. It took the collective tallents of Kasdan to make it convincing on the page and Spielberg/Ford to carve away the excess and leave the final shape.

This is as simple a way of conveying it as I can think...

I'd go along with that. Lucas was very focussed in coming up with the idea or forumla for an adventure movie. Spielberg and Ford had the natural talents to turn that formula into something with greater depth. Spielberg as director allowed Ford the opportunity to give little nuances to the role. As it turned out Indy wasn't like James Bond in the way he got things done. Bond had the monicker "nobody does it better": he was virtually perfect at everything he tried to do. Indy, on the other hand, gets by on his luck. Indy's often outclassed and out of his depth, and that's what gives him greater depth.
Montana Smith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2010, 07:17 PM   #184
ATMachine
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by Montana Smith
I'd go along with that. Lucas was very focussed in coming up with the idea or forumla for an adventure movie. Spielberg and Ford had the natural talents to turn that formula into something with greater depth. Spielberg as director allowed Ford the opportunity to give little nuances to the role. As it turned out Indy wasn't like James Bond in the way he got things done. Bond had the monicker "nobody does it better": he was virtually perfect at everything he tried to do. Indy, on the other hand, gets by on his luck. Indy's often outclassed and out of his depth, and that's what gives him greater depth.
Of course, that quality of "outclassed-ness" wasn't at all something initially envisioned as part of Indy's character. Rether, it came later, as part of the collaboration between Lucas, Spielberg, Kasdan, and Ford.

Script changes had a major role in this. For instance, in the first couple of drafts of Raiders, Indy actually succeeds in stealing the idol from the Peruvian temple. Afterwards we see him and Marcus in the National Museum, admiring the idol on display. Belloq doesn't show up until much later in the film.

Later, at the end of the movie, after Indy is captured on the Nazi island, he managed to escape his guards in the chaos of the Ark's opening. Then he reclaims the Ark, rescues Marion, and the two of them (plus Ark) outrun the Nazis in a wild mine cart chase to the submarine harbor, where they finally escape.

That's much more skillful a hero, almost a superhuman one. These ideas were both altered in Larry Kasdan's later drafts, and as a result Indy doesn't succeed visibly on film very often.

Plus, I'd say the casting of Harrison Ford instead of Tom Selleck was also huge in forming the "everyman" aspect of Indy's character. Not to reignite this debate, but Selleck would have been very good at playing the handsome, charismatic leading man who can outwit the Nazis every time.

Tom Selleck would likely have been much more of a dashing, courageous, heroic figure than Harrison made the character. While Harrison's Indy is a good man, and ordinary in many respects, he won't hesitate to fight dirty when he has to, since he'd often likely lose if he fought fairly.

Notably, Lucas seems to have had very little to do with the "outclassed everyman" aspect of Indy's character. In the story conferences, Lucas wants Indy to be a wealthy, Manhattan socialite, bachelor playboy, as well as a dashing, bold, Nazi-punching grave-robber, and also a handsome college professor, respected in his field, whose female students all want to jump his bones. It's pretty clear that Indy is wish-fulfillment on his part, and Lucas has said as much on occasion.

(Lucas was, notably, the one who insisted that Kasdan write a scene for Raiders where Indy is shacking up with a girl student at his house when Marcus comes to visit. Kasdan disliked the idea, and while the scene was written and probably shot, it was ultimately not used in the final cut.)

Spielberg and Ford took the character of Indy in an entirely different direction, and it's one I'm not sure Lucas personally would've opted to go in. Maybe that's part of why Lucas resisted hiring Ford to play Indy--he might have thought Harrison was too "roguish" and not enough of an "all-American hero" type.
ATMachine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2010, 09:11 PM   #185
Raiders112390
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,038
I love this revisionist history of painting Lucas even in the 70s as an almost talentless guy who only succeeded because the others around him were talented.

It's been stated many times he didn't want to cast Ford because having cast Ford in 3 of his biggest movies already (American Graffiti, Star Wars, Empire Strikes Back) he didn't want Ford to turn into his "Robert DeNiro" or aka the guy he uses for every film. I don't it had anything to do with the script since the script was pretty much finalized when Selleck was cast as Indy; I believe he pulled out only two weeks before filming began.
Raiders112390 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2010, 10:35 PM   #186
ATMachine
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raiders112390
I love this revisionist history of painting Lucas even in the 70s as an almost talentless guy who only succeeded because the others around him were talented.

It's been stated many times he didn't want to cast Ford because having cast Ford in 3 of his biggest movies already (American Graffiti, Star Wars, Empire Strikes Back) he didn't want Ford to turn into his "Robert DeNiro" or aka the guy he uses for every film. I don't it had anything to do with the script since the script was pretty much finalized when Selleck was cast as Indy; I believe he pulled out only two weeks before filming began.
I wasn't meaning to denigrate Lucas's contributions, by any means. Without him there wouldn't have been any Indy movies in the first place; he's undoubtedly the prime mover of the franchise and always has been. Rather, I'm only saying that Lucas may have initially envisioned the character of Indiana Jones as a somewhat different figure than we eventually got in the finished films.

Lucas seems to have preferred, at least early on, to visualize Indy as a classic pulp hero: expert at whatever he does, a hard fighter and a lady-killer, while also intelligent and dashing. (Plus a millionaire playboy on top of it.) In the story conferences Lucas compares Indy to Toshiro Mifune's samurai characters, Clint Eastwood's Man with No Name, and James Bond--all super-competent, cool and collected heroes. This type of hero isn't bad at all, and can often be great fun, but it's not the Indy of the final films by any means.

Of course, Lucas's vision of Indy derives from memories of old 30's serials seen through a rose-tinted nostalgia filter. Spielberg's view of Indy, on the other hand, seems to derive mainly from James Bond. It's Spielberg who makes many of the wackier suggestions for over-the-top set-pieces in the story conferences; for instance, the Nazi monkey came from him. It was also Spielberg who specifically pushed for casting Sean Connery as Indy's dad, precisely because of the link to Bond.

Indy, and the films he appears in, are the fruit of several people's ideas of what he should be--Lucas, Spielberg, Kasdan, Ford--and to take any one of those contributors away would have resulted in an entirely changed film, and a vastly different lead character. None of those four people can be called "the sole creator of Indy," and by the same token, no one person's contributions can simply be dismissed outright.

(As much as I'd like to give Lucas a kick in the head sometimes... )
ATMachine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2011, 01:32 PM   #187
Rocket Surgeon
Guest
 
Rocket Surgeon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 8,872
Raiders Story Conference: The Adaptation

Belfast Film Festival and Kabosh have collaborated to create an original piece of theatre based on the transcript of these meetings.

Raiders of the Lost Story Arc tells us a lot about the making of a classic film, it also shows what could have been; can you imagine Peter Falk as Indy?, Could the name Indiana Smith and Raiders of the Lost Ark have been a blockbuster? And what about that camel chase?

George: What can he chase them with? What if he jumps on a camel?
Steven: I love it. It’s a great idea. There’s never been a camel chase before.
Lawrence: Is this camel going to chase a car?
Steven: You know how fast a camel can run? Not only that, he can jump over vegetable carts and things. It could be a funny chase that ends in tragedy. You’re laughing your head off and suddenly, “My God, she’s dead.”

Created and directed by Stephen Hackett and Paula McFetridge, performed by Paul Kennedy, Frankie McCafferty and Alan McKee. Come along and see how a cinema classic was created in this World premiere theatrical dramatisation
Rocket Surgeon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2011, 03:33 PM   #188
Montana Smith
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 10,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocket Surgeon
Could the name Indiana Smith and Raiders of the Lost Ark have been a blockbuster?

I like Spielberg's contribution on this, and George's early compromise:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raiders Story Conference

LARRY KASDAN : Do you have a name for this person?

GEORGE LUCAS : I do for our leader.

STEVEN SPIELBERG : I hate this, but go ahead.

GEORGE LUCAS : Indiana Smith. It has to be unique. It's a character. Very Americana square. He was born in Indiana.

LARRY KASDAN : What does she call him, Indy?

GEORGE LUCAS : That's what I was thinking. Or Jones.

There was even a slim chance he was going to be called Montana Smith...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raiders Story Conference

GEORGE LUCAS : ...Maybe he came from Montana...


Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocket Surgeon
Belfast Film Festival and Kabosh have collaborated to create an original piece of theatre based on the transcript of these meetings.

...

Created and directed by Stephen Hackett and Paula McFetridge, performed by Paul Kennedy, Frankie McCafferty and Alan McKee. Come along and see how a cinema classic was created in this World premiere theatrical dramatisation

Are they dramatizing the complete transcripts? It sounds like a cool concept for a theatrical production.
Montana Smith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2011, 03:47 PM   #189
Attila the Professor
Moderator
 
Attila the Professor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 6,436
Quote:
Originally Posted by Montana Smith
Are they dramatizing the complete transcripts? It sounds like a cool concept for a theatrical production.

That'd be pretty lengthy, I'd expect. It's essentially 115 pages of the Lucas, Spielberg, Kasdan parts, and with a low estimate that each page could be done in about two minutes...that's four hours right there. And there's not really an ending...but there's a decent adaptation possible.
Attila the Professor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-13-2011, 04:24 PM   #190
Montana Smith
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 10,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by Attila the Professor
That'd be pretty lengthy, I'd expect. It's essentially 115 pages of the Lucas, Spielberg, Kasdan parts, and with a low estimate that each page could be done in about two minutes...that's four hours right there. And there's not really an ending...but there's a decent adaptation possible.

You're right.

There's also a bit of repetition and to-ing and fro-ing, so it would need to be put into a logical progression.

It would be strange, yet enigmatic, if it ended with Spielberg saying, "Fast doors closing are fun." (!)
Montana Smith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2011, 07:09 PM   #191
Moedred
Administrator
 
Moedred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: California
Posts: 4,892
Raiders of the Lost Story Arc

Here's the Belfast film fest info...
https://belfastfilmfestival.ticketso...6513477/events
Moedred is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2011, 07:42 PM   #192
Dr. Gonzo
IndyFan
 
Dr. Gonzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,854
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moedred
Raiders of the Lost Story Arc

Here's the Belfast film fest info...
https://belfastfilmfestival.ticketso...6513477/events
Interesting...
Dr. Gonzo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2013, 12:01 PM   #193
Moedred
Administrator
 
Moedred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: California
Posts: 4,892
No time to read the transcript? Here's a 4-hour audio version to take on the road!
From the mailbag:
Quote:
When I first read the RAIDERS STORY CONFERENCE transcript back in 2009, I thought it was better than most classes taught on scriptwriting. Highlighting the power of creative collaboration, you realize how much Lucas, Spielberg and Kasdan needed each other to make the perfect the movie. I passed it around and tried to get people I know who are big fans of RIDERS to read it -- but you probably know how that goes. They only read a few pages or none at all. So then I thought if only it was on tape...like a book on tape...with music and sound effects.
Well, it took a few years to get around to it. But last year I started a new film podcast called The Hollywood Gauntlet and we decided to bring the original document to life. We recorded the voices -- without any imitation -- just casually read. Then added layers of music, sound effect and clips from the film. We do not charge or profit from any of our shows. They are created to spread the love and education of cinema.
http://www.hollywood-gauntlet.blogsp...onference.html
Moedred is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2014, 07:59 PM   #194
Moedred
Administrator
 
Moedred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: California
Posts: 4,892
http://sploid.gizmodo.com/1548822362
"Thanks to Moedred's Journal for the transcription."
Moedred is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2015, 02:25 PM   #195
Moedred
Administrator
 
Moedred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: California
Posts: 4,892
It's being discussed heavily on Reddit right now...
http://www.reddit.com/34xcwj
Moedred is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2015, 11:23 PM   #196
IAdventurer01
IndyFan
 
IAdventurer01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Wish I knew....
Posts: 1,045
I saw that thread, read the link, and thought: "Moedred ... I know that guy. And I read this exact page before when posted at the Raven."

Must be nice to be temporarily Reddit famous!
IAdventurer01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:47 AM.