The Frank Darabont Script

shenshaw said:
Great point! Couldn't have worded it better myself.
" Concerning the Indy and Saucerman from mars story"...........
Yeah but that story concept is lame, just the title itself is extremely lame! anyway I think the whole ufo idea has been over done, from Alien vs predator to Speilbergs "taken" so im going to let this one go, you guys are probably right, maybe ten years ago it would of worked.
 
Last edited:

Grizzlor

Well-known member
torao said:
someone on the chud boards also explained the tragic of the whole darabont - lucas stand off by remarking on those two's past: that george was sort of darabont's mentor.
Aaand of course we all know that they worked together on the Young Indy stuff.
I like the thought, because it adds some perspective...and complexity...to the situation Darabont finds himself in now.

That was why Spielberg was working with Darabount, because of his past YIJC experience with Lucas. Lucas has given absolutely no explanation for his action on Frank's script. All we have is what seems like Darabount being immediately shocked, humiliated, and frustrated by George pretty well bashing the script. Obviously, if Lucas were able to get another script going, Darabount's strong feelings would be moot. I just don't forsee GL ever being satisfied, for some stupid, arrogant, obsessive reason, with another script enough to ever make this film. It's all pretty sad.
 

Pale Horse

Moderator
Staff member
What if Lucas didn't like what Darabont did with the character? For example, if Frank had made him a washed up alcoholic with a bent for anger and misogyny? Or worse?
 

torao

Moderator Emeritus
Pale Horse said:
What if Lucas didn't like what Darabont did with the character? For example, if Frank had made him a washed up alcoholic with a bent for anger and misogyny? Or worse?

mmmhhhh...sounds good :rolleyes: really.

As long as I don't know the script (personally so to speak ;) ) I consider the chance of Lucas being right at 50 %...who knows....
 

shenshaw

New member
A good friend, and fellow Indy fan, brought this to my attention:

I'm sure most of us have seen the "Making of Indiana Jones" DVD featurettes so many times, that we can quote it fowards and backwards. You'll recall that in TLC Lucas was opposed to Indy Jr and Indy Sr having a relationship with the same girl. It would appear that Lucas had given in, in order to satisfy Spielberg, Connery, and Ford. Also note that there is absolutely no profanity in Star Wars.

Without knowing George Lucas personally, he has seemed to reveal certain aspects of his character through interviews, documentaries, etc... He prefers to not cross certain moral boundaries with his stories. Connery stated "...sleeping with the same woman was a bit of anathema for George..."

My point is this: I agree with Pale Horse regarding this concept of George not being happy with the Indy character from Darabont. I strongly believe that the reasons that Lucas rejected Darabont's draft was because he took Indy's character in a direction that was too "immoral" for George. And THIS time, George didn't want to make the "same mistake again" (I don't think it had anything to do with the action of the story. I bet Lucas was pleased with the action parts of Darabont's script!) It had crossed a hard line for George! And if it was one or two little parts, I don't see Lucas throwing a huge fit; he could just rework little bits. It must've been some HUGE thread of the story hinged around something "immoral" for George to fire Darabont and start over!
 

Pale Horse

Moderator
Staff member
shenshaw said:
It must've been some HUGE thread of the story hinged around something "immoral" for George to fire Darabont and start over!

Immoral, or immortal? I wonder.....
 

indyt

Active member
shenshaw said:
A good friend, and fellow Indy fan, brought this to my attention:

I'm sure most of us have seen the "Making of Indiana Jones" DVD featurettes so many times, that we can quote it fowards and backwards. You'll recall that in TLC Lucas was opposed to Indy Jr and Indy Sr having a relationship with the same girl. It would appear that Lucas had given in, in order to satisfy Spielberg, Connery, and Ford. Also note that there is absolutely no profanity in Star Wars.

Without knowing George Lucas personally, he has seemed to reveal certain aspects of his character through interviews, documentaries, etc... He prefers to not cross certain moral boundaries with his stories. Connery stated "...sleeping with the same woman was a bit of anathema for George..."

My point is this: I agree with Pale Horse regarding this concept of George not being happy with the Indy character from Darabont. I strongly believe that the reasons that Lucas rejected Darabont's draft was because he took Indy's character in a direction that was too "immoral" for George. And THIS time, George didn't want to make the "same mistake again" (I don't think it had anything to do with the action of the story. I bet Lucas was pleased with the action parts of Darabont's script!) It had crossed a hard line for George! And if it was one or two little parts, I don't see Lucas throwing a huge fit; he could just rework little bits. It must've been some HUGE thread of the story hinged around something "immoral" for George to fire Darabont and start over!

Interesting thought. If that is the case, I am glad the script was done scrapped.
 

roundshort

Active member
indyt said:
Interesting thought. If that is the case, I am glad the script was done scrapped.

If anyoen really knows some of George's "friends" in a certain Telluride Ski town, I don't think we would ever chat about immoral . . .
 

Moedred

Administrator
Staff member
Pale Horse said:
a washed up alcoholic with a bent for anger and misogyny? Or worse?
If this is how Darabont wrote Indy, he deserved rejection. Green Mile and The Majestic are glum and boring. I had hoped an action script would deny him space for brooding, but no. This is a multimedia franchise! Indy wastes no day of his life. 5 years of WWII and 10 years of researching his own quest, with plenty of unwritten adventures in between, brings him right into Indy 4, the same guy we knew. So he forgot to settle down. Distracted professors do that. It doesn't make him a jerk.
 

San Holo

Active member
roundshort said:
If anyoen really knows some of George's "friends" in a certain Telluride Ski town, I don't think we would ever chat about immoral . . .
You got some dirt on Lucas? Do tell;)
 

Twilightpro101

New member
Just find it interesting that they continue to drag out this sequel's production because they can't settle down on a script. It shouldn't be that difficult a task as many drafts as they've gone through.
 

Moedred

Administrator
Staff member
San Holo said:
dirt on Lucas?
I'm not interested either, but now I can't stop wondering. If he's been single since '83, shouldn't this billionaire appear prominently in gossip magazines' hottest bachelor roundups? Or maybe he takes the Jedi celibacy thing seriously. Yes, that's definitely it. Case closed.
 

AntiJones

New member
The Frank Darabont Script - What if...

Here's an idea : eventhough the script was rejected by GL, SS likes it and who knows twenty or thirty years down the line, someone (may be son of Frank Darabont or SS) bought over the necessary Indiana jones movie-making rights from GL and decided to do a remake of Indy movies (Holywood does it all the time) and says, "I remember there used to be a script by Frank Darabont which Spielberg liked but didn't get to use it, how about we use that script?'

HF wouldn't be there but I don't mind watching it then.

That point all the more point us to look into the future.

http://raven.theraider.net/showthread.php?t=9983
 

TennesseBuck

New member
I have a feeling lucas rejected the Darabont script because it was more dialogue and humor than action, probably following the coattails of LAST CRUSADE's emphasis on the same. Spielberg probably liked the script so much because of that.

The real question is: would you prefer more dialogue than action in a new Indy film or vice versa?

Indiana Jones and the Web of Gold
http://www.geocities.com/faustus_08520/indianajones4.html
 

torao

Moderator Emeritus
I rather don't want to believe in any kind of speculation as long as we simply don't know...

however...In theory I'd accept and maybe even prefer more CHARACTER than action....

But Indy can only live with a proper mix of the two.

I'd like this mix to be stretched as far to the character side as it goes. But that's all pointless phantasy blah blah. As a matter of fact I've never written an Indiana Jones script. And my knowledge on what actually works with that character and what doesn't probably reaches from limited to zero.
And in that "limited activity" and rather "passive consuming" experience with Indy I gotta say that I'd love to really dive into his dilemmas, weaknesses, his aging persona but still wanna see him kick some asses.
And I want to see that done in the Indiana Jonesesque fashion. Action is that it is so extraordinarily believable, that the triumph and more importantly the failures and weaknesses are credible... Action that is defined by character.



24 Days to go, Steven.
 
Last edited:

James

Well-known member
As much as I once wanted to believe Darabont had written the perfect Indy 4, it's also possible that his idea of where Indy should go would not have matched mine.

I'm not a big fan of the current trend of making everything overly-serious and dramatic. It may make it seem more worthy of internet discussion, but it's just not all that fun. Of course, I have no way of knowing what kind of script Darabont actually wrote, but the impression I always got was that he wrote it as a sequel to Raiders- rather than all three films. In other words, we could've had another Superman Returns on our hands!!! :eek: (No offense to any SR fans here.)

But the Indy films were movie escapism of the purest form, and Lucas was instrumental in the way the trilogy turned out. I may not agree with his post-80's output, but I suppose I can give him the benefit of the doubt when it comes to Indy.
 

Patrick

New member
Why can't they just make a movie? They weren't made to get oscars, they were supposed to be fun, action-packed b-movies, for both the viewers and the people who played in them. I can see them wanting to be good, but there's a limit to that. If you feel that its going to take 18 years for the same people to come up with a movie that fills the shoes for the last one, perhaps you shouldn't toy with people who are looking forward to it.

Not acting out on the idealism of 'its going to be the greatest film ever', goes against moviemaking, I think. In the time its going to take this movie, they could've made another one.

They're putting it up to an impossible standard. One that was above their last ones. I'm not sure why this happened.
 

James

Well-known member
Patrick said:
They're putting it up to an impossible standard. One that was above their last ones. I'm not sure why this happened.

I agree. I think they've now waited so long, they've placed a ridiculous amount of expectations on the film. This is something you would've expected to have happened when preparing the first sequel- but not the third one.

People just want to see this character one last time, and they want it to be fun and enjoyable like the other films. I think the only way they could really screw it up, is by going out of their way to make it too different.
 

Moedred

Administrator
Staff member
More Darabont:

Lilja: What else are you working on? I read that you where involved in the 4th Indy Indiana Jones? How does it feel to work on something like that and then find out that they aren?t going to use your script?

Frank Darabont: Pretty awful. It was a wasted year or more of my life, and I have only so many years to devote. I worked very closely with Steven Spielberg, applied all my passion and skill, and gave him a script that he loved. He was ready to shoot it that very year -- 2003, I think? Maybe 2004? Well, no matter. The point is, Steven was ecstatic. We both were. It was going to be his next film. He told me it was the best script he'd read since Raiders of the Lost Ark. That's a quote, and I'll always treasure it. As a screenwriter, you dream of making a guy like Steven Spielberg happy and excited. Then George Lucas read it, didn't like it, and threw ice water on the whole thing. The project went down in flames. Steven and I looked like accident victims the day we got that call. I certainly don't blame Steven for it. He wasn't in a position to overrule George, and wouldn't have overruled him even if he could. He and George have been close friends for a long time, and they've had an agreement for years that no Indiana Jones film will ever get made unless they both completely agreed on the script. It was just such an awful surprise, after all my hopes and effort. I really felt I'd nailed it, and so did Steven. Yes, as you can imagine, I would rank that very high on my list of professional disappointments. More than that, it was emotionally devastating. For somebody who, as a young man, was inspired to want to be a filmmaker by Steven and George, by movies like THX-1138 and Star Wars and Raiders of the Lost Ark, it was the ultimate kick in the nuts. In fact, it's the main reason I quit my career as a "writer-for-hire" (writing for other people for a living). It's not the only reason, but certainly a main reason. I swore never to go through that again. From now on, my intention is to write only for myself on projects that I produce or direct. You know, I am trying to turn it into something positive. When life hands you a blow like that, I think you should move on as well as you can, or you risk becoming an embittered ****head. I'd rather do the former and not the latter. The experience did get me to refocus my energies on my directing career, which for me always came second to writing. Now it comes first. So maybe it was a blessing in disguise.
 
Top