The Offical KotCS Magazine

We're discussing Lucas' competancy as a filmaker and how it pertains to Indy. He has proven himself completely inept as a writer and director. The Prequels demonstrate this and are tediously boring. I present evidence of Pod-Racing and Jar-Jar to the Chewbacca defense.
 
Raiders112390 said:
Obviously, something clicked with Koepp's script in order for him to recently say that while he didn't like the idea of ''little green men'', Koepp's story was good and provided what was in his opinion a very interesting take on it.

So he would never do a film like ''that'', which was probably Saucermen (which imo was not crappy in it's concept but instead in it's execution, dialogue, etc. The general concept was good, but it was handled very cheesily) but he's agreed to do this one now. Something had to be different in order for him to like it. Obviously Ford has a strong opinion about what would work in Indy and what wouldn't.

They fought for nearly 20 years over this one maguffin and how it was handled; something had to have worked well with Nathanson's and Koepp's scripts in order for Ford and Spielberg to decide to do it after refusing to for so long. It wasn't like there was a dire need for it be made, so there had to be some other factor there.

Because Koepp threw in the elements of the Lost City and the elements of Raiders to "Indyfy" it.
 

Jr_1981

New member
Agent Spalko said:
We're discussing Lucas' competancy as a filmaker and how it pertains to Indy. He has proven himself completely inept as a writer and director. The Prequels demonstrate this and are tediously boring. I present evidence of Pod-Racing and Jar-Jar to the Chewbacca defense.

Well then it's a good thing he didnt write or direct this film :)
 

Raiders90

Well-known member
Agent Spalko said:
Because kept threw in the elements of the Lost City and the elements of Raiders to "Indyfy" it.

Well, obviously it was ''Indyfied'' enough for Spielberg and Ford to agree that it was a film and script worth producing. They could've said a final no and just cancelled it outright. After pondering it for so long, it's obvious they weren't just going to jump at any crappy script handed to them. If that was the case, we would've had Indy 4 in 1996.

All these years, the story's been that if they found the right script, it would be made. That was of ultimate importance. If they didn't, oh well. But it's being made, so they must've found the right script.

Meaning that this film and the script must be good enough for them to consider it worthy of producing and worthy of letting it stand as what may be the final chapter of the Indy story.
 

Jr_1981

New member
Agent Spalko said:
It's still HIS STORY. HIS IDEA.

I find it to be a rather interesting story, like others, I enjoyed the concept of Saucer Men From Mars, just found the execution rather lacking.
 
No it was Ford's ultimatum after George rejected Darabont's script saying that if they couldn't come up with a script by 2008 he would never play Indy again.
 

Raiders90

Well-known member
Jr_1981 said:
I find it to be a rather interesting story, like others, I enjoyed the concept of Saucer Men From Mars, just found the execution rather lacking.

Agreed. The general concept of Saucer Men was great--But the way it was executed was total crap. It's all a matter of execution.
 

Raiders90

Well-known member
Agent Spalko said:
No it was Ford's ultimatum after George rejected Darabont's script saying that if they couldn't come up with a script by 2008 he would never play Indy again.

If they couldn't come up with a script that they would all agree upon. The problem wasn't that there wasn't a script; there were plenty of canned scripts. The problem was coming up with one they'd all agree on by 2008. Obviously, they did. It was a compromise, as was almost everything else in the story of Indy. Lucas got to keep his general premise, as was the case with the previous three films; Ford and Lucas kept whatever else they saw fit and probably added in elements to make it even better, like in the previous movies.
 

Raiders90

Well-known member
Agent Spalko said:
PROOF Lucas has LOST IT!!! The prosecution rests.

?

How is the fact that Indy, and Raiders, and LC, and ToD his own ideas, characters and visions, proof that he's lost it? Just because the Star Wars prequels were weak doesn't mean that every thing he touches afterward shall be the same.

Again, in the SW PT, he had complete creative control. Even Ford, and probably Spielberg know the PT sucked. Indy is their baby too, they're not going to let him ruin it. In this film, his control is limited to the same role it was in the previous three. It was, after all, his stories and ideas which drove the last three.

As I recall, it was Lucas who first presented "Indy" to Spielberg. Lucas wanted to make Indy a womanizer, Spielberg wanted to make Indy a drunk (it may be the other way around), a compromise was made and Indy ended up being both a treasure hunter and teacher. It was Lucas who had the idea of the Ark of the Covenant. It was Lucas who had the idea to make the Holy Grail the MaGuffin of LC, which Spielberg rejected until he got his way.
 
Because he hasn't come up with a good idea since.

I just told my friend there was no prologue in Indy and here's what he had to say:

EVERY INDY HAS A PROLOGUE!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That is bull**** on the docs Speilberg and Lucas talk about opening the films with Indy's previous adventures, no pat roach, no prologue? this indy is going to be lame
 

Jr_1981

New member
But there is a prolgoue. Indy is kidnapped by the Russians to force him into helping them find something. Sounds like a third act to me.
 
Jr_1981 said:
But there is a prolgoue. Indy is kidnapped by the Russians to force him into helping them find something. Sounds like a third act to me.

That's about as lame as opening World Is Not Enough with Bond walking across the street with a briefcase. LAME!!!!!!!
 

Raiders90

Well-known member
Agent Spalko said:
Because he hasn't come up with a good idea since.

I just told my friend there was no prologue in Indy and here's what he had to say:

A) He hasn't worked on anything since the Star Wars prequels.
B) I don't care what your friend says. Pat Roach doesn't figure into an Indiana Jones movies' quality. He's dead, unfortunately. It's not as if he was passed over in favor of someone else. The film would've had to have been made without him, because he's dead. I don't believe he was in LC anyway except for that deleted scene, I may be wrong though.
 

Raiders90

Well-known member
Agent Spalko said:
That's about as lame as opening World Is Not Enough with Bond walking across the street with a briefcase. LAME!!!!!!!

Why is it lame? After all, we don't know how Indy was captured. It's the last part of an another adventure which somehow leads into him being captured by the Soviets, and has something to do with the main plot of the movie, just as Belloq was in the teaser adventure and became a major figure in Raiders. And you can say he was captured in LC, because he's being held by Panama Hat's goons while at the end of another adventure. ToD's ''teaser adventure'' is directly connected with the main film, and doesn't really act as a prologue as it is the events of the teaser, if you will, which directly lead to the events of the later movie and indeed are connected with it directly. It is Indy's escape from Shang-Hai which leads to him getting on the plane which ends up taking him to India.
There's eventually a point when a film either keeps rejurgatating the same formula over and over and becomes stale or does something a little different.
 

joelwatts

New member
I think there still will be a prologue, if the movie starts with the hangar 51 scene. And since it has been quoted that Indy settles down and decides to end adventuring, but is brought back on one last adventure, or something like that. So there must be some separsation between the opening scenes and the main part, even if the beginning is relate to th main plot.
 

Raiders90

Well-known member
joelwatts said:
I think there still will be a prologue, if the movie starts with the hangar 51 scene. And since it has been quoted that Indy settles down and decides to end adventuring, but is brought back on one last adventure, or something like that. So there must be some separsation between the opening scenes and the main part, even if the beginning is relate to th main plot.

Well, in ToD, the beginning was related to the opening plot. It is Indy's escape from Shang Hai which brings him to India, through accident or fate. The teaser of Raiders is related to the main plot through Belloq.
 
Top