An Indy that had constantly had fantastic, Saturday matinee serial-type adventures (with the supernatural as often as not) every day of his life since he was in kindergarten would be too great a stretch in believability; it's also difficult to conceive how such a person would ever have developed enough of a passion for an intellectual pursuit like archaeology to have made a career of it, and Indy's motivations and passions wouldn't be there. The show we did get, on the other hand, lays out the foundation the character needs to be able to be what he is and do what he does in the movies.
Hear, hear. YIJC takes a wildly different track in exploring the character than the theatrical movies do; but it's the same character. I like the Chronicles because it's a different kind of fantasy from the films...who wouldn't want to travel the world, meet important people, and learn as much as Indy does over the course of the series?
By being a different kind of experience, the Chronicles also adds to the thrill of the supernatural elements of the films. The character is grounded in reality (even if it is in a fantastic, famous-person-of-the-week fashion) in the series--this makes the black magic of the Temple of Doom more horrible, the Ark more unique, and the Grail more miraculous than they would be if Indy had been running accross stuff like that up for decades. (This is part of the reason I tend to dislike the Expanded Adventures stuff.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agent Spalko
That's why season 3 could have been the best and certainly the most interesting.
Well, let's not overgeneralize here. As much as I love the Chronicles, if season 3 had been made, it would have been more of the same, mostly. The Stockholm episode alone would probably have led even more people to ridicule the series. What we Indy fans really regret not having is the three Raiders prequel episodes made, but even those would have been in the exact same format as the first two seasons. Season 3 would have been neat, but it's not the Holy Grail of Young Indy.
But did we really need to see that? Did we really need to see Anakin Skywalker as a spoiled slave brat pod racing on Tatooine either? No. Lucas could have started the Prequels with Episode II with Anakin already established as a Jedi and it would have been a lot more interesting. You don't need to give us his whole life story from the moment of birth. That's a lot of dull and extraneously unnecessary exposition that puts audiences to sleep.
I guess that's a matter of perspective. The Phantom Menace was my first Star Wars film. I was 10 years old. I had heard of the series pretty much all of my life, but never got around to watching the originals. And I know many will find this hard to swallow, but, aside from the hype at school, it was seeing Jar Jar Binks' antics in one of the TV spots that made me want to see the film in the first place. *ducks and covers head*
So when I went to see the film on a hot June day in 1999, I was curious, but wasn't sure what to expect. IT. BLEW. ME. AWAY. To me, it was just so outlandishly cool, yet close to home at the same time. That pod race probably had the same effect on me as the trench run from the original Star Wars or the opening scene of Raiders did for my elder generation. It was The Phantom Menace that got me away from cartoons and into films, and eventually, spawned my interest in filmmaking. Of course, over the years, I discovered much better films, but The Phantom Menace (and... yes... Jar Jar) holds a special place in my heart.
Each of the Star Wars films are very flawed, both technically and acting-wise, but they're still pretty damn fun and thought-provoking. I'd say that's how I feel about most of George Lucas' works. Young Indy also has its flaws, but its pros far outweigh its cons IMO. I see what Lucas was trying to achieve, and that helps me appreciate things more and ignore any faults that he makes.
In a way, I feel bad that Lucas has alienated some of his fans. But. I came to love Indiana Jones because of the series, and I'm also going to start pursuing a History degree in the near future. I learn best by seeing and hearing things.
There is also a magic to that time period that I think Lucas was so bent on trying to portray. The way things changed constantly, how WWI completely changed the world we live in, what it would be like to grow up when there was so much hope for the future.
I don't think Lucas alienated fans so much as he challenged them. He gave us a different viewpoint so we would look at Indy in a different way. I appreciate that Lucas is daring enough to give us different takes and interpretations of Indiana Jones and Star Wars.
I looking foward to seeing how Indy will be portrayed in Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.
I don't think Lucas alienated fans so much as he challenged them. He gave us a different viewpoint so we would look at Indy in a different way. I appreciate that Lucas is daring enough to give us different takes and interpretations of Indiana Jones and Star Wars.
I looking foward to seeing how Indy will be portrayed in Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.
Good point. I also like that Indy is not stagnant, that he changes with who he's with, what he's learned, etc.
I love that Lucas follows his dreams and takes us with him!
I don't think Lucas alienated fans so much as he challenged them. He gave us a different viewpoint so we would look at Indy in a different way. I appreciate that Lucas is daring enough to give us different takes and interpretations of Indiana Jones and Star Wars.
I looking foward to seeing how Indy will be portrayed in Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.
The opposite of Lucas' approach is the Hollywood approach, which is: "If X makes money, then more X will make more money!"
In other words, if Hollywood had control of the Indiana Jones franchise, the TV series would have had a teenaged Indy chasing Nazis (even though he's a teen during the 1910s and 1920s ) and running from boulders. Also, we would probably have had about three or four additional film sequels by now, and Hollywood would probably be in pre-production on a remake starring Matthew McConaughey.
The opposite of Lucas' approach is the Hollywood approach, which is: "If X makes money, then more X will make more money!"
In other words, if Hollywood had control of the Indiana Jones franchise, the TV series would have had a teenaged Indy chasing Nazis (even though he's a teen during the 1910s and 1920s ) and running from boulders. Also, we would probably have had about three or four additional film sequels by now, and Hollywood would probably be in pre-production on a remake starring Matthew McConaughey.
*yak* They would have been in a Hollywood back lot with green screens.
Like him or not, Lucas is an artist. Art and criticism go hand in hand. That's not to say that he hasn't made some weak films, but he hit gold the Star Wars OT, and Young and ''Older'' Indiana Jones. In fact, YIJC is my favorite work of his, next to the films. I believe it tells us the true story of Indy's youth.
I guess that's a matter of perspective. The Phantom Menace was my first Star Wars film. I was 10 years old. I had heard of the series pretty much all of my life, but never got around to watching the originals. And I know many will find this hard to swallow, but, aside from the hype at school, it was seeing Jar Jar Binks' antics in one of the TV spots that made me want to see the film in the first place. *ducks and covers head*
So when I went to see the film on a hot June day in 1999, I was curious, but wasn't sure what to expect. IT. BLEW. ME. AWAY. To me, it was just so outlandishly cool, yet close to home at the same time. That pod race probably had the same effect on me as the trench run from the original Star Wars or the opening scene of Raiders did for my elder generation. It was The Phantom Menace that got me away from cartoons and into films, and eventually, spawned my interest in filmmaking. Of course, over the years, I discovered much better films, but The Phantom Menace (and... yes... Jar Jar) holds a special place in my heart.
Each of the Star Wars films are very flawed, both technically and acting-wise, but they're still pretty damn fun and thought-provoking. I'd say that's how I feel about most of George Lucas' works. Young Indy also has its flaws, but its pros far outweigh its cons IMO. I see what Lucas was trying to achieve, and that helps me appreciate things more and ignore any faults that he makes.
Ah! That exlains EVERYTHING! You're from the Prequel Generation. I grew up with the originals. It always facinates me how your generation sees them differently from ours. I just thank my lucky stars that I grew up when I did because I was the right age at the right time to have experienced all the great movies like Star Wars and Raiders of the Lost Ark first hand. Everything just clicked. Then I saw Phantom Menace and that was the second greatest travesty of my life. I was literally shell-shocked for days afterward and manically depressed. So that really puts it all into perspective why you would like Young Indy so much. You were just the right age for that show. I couldn't stand most of it. And I tried. I really really tried. I watched it every week and taped every episode. And I'll take it the way it was aired, not more Lucas revisionism on the edited DVDs.
Ah! That exlains EVERYTHING! You're from the Prequel Generation. I grew up with the originals. It always facinates me how your generation sees them differently from ours. I just thank my lucky stars that I grew up when I did because I was the right age at the right time to have experienced all the great movies like Star Wars and Raiders of the Lost Ark first hand. Everything just clicked. Then I saw Phantom Menace and that was the second greatest travesty of my life. I was literally shell-shocked for days afterward and manically depressed. So that really puts it all into perspective why you would like Young Indy so much. You were just the right age for that show. I couldn't stand most of it. And I tried. I really really tried. I watched it every week and taped every episode. And I'll take it the way it was aired, not more Lucas revisionism on the edited DVDs.
Me, personally, I can't get enough of it (YIJ). I think it's better than the films in some ways, because it goes much deeper into the character of Indy than any of the films do; his motivations, his ideas and how he became who he was; We also get to learn more about Henry, Sr. which I like. It's got enough action to make me happy, and it's good for when I want Indy but something deeper than the adventures of the films. Cause really--when all things are considered--Indy is a character, but the YIJ series (and LC, even though I have some qualms with that film) turns him from being a two dimensional character into a three dimensional one.
Also--the series leaves enough of his life out (the 20s and early '30s) to leave a great deal of mystery to Indy. We don't know what he did in the '20s, or how he went from being "it belongs in a museum" to ''fortune and glory, kid", but we can see the makings of that by 1920. We learn him off at a stage where he's toughened by war, and showing signs of cynicism but he hasn't quite reached it yet.
We don't see the whole affair with Marion nor do we see Abner, which are the biggest ''mysteries'' of the Indy series. We don't see his early archaelogical adventures (Except for the Mexico, and Peacock's Eye episodes), but we do see his first brush with the supernatural, we see how he became so resourceful, how he learned the many languages he knows and where he got his mastery of ancient cultures, we see what he learned during the war and in his years as a spy, most importantly we see why he became an archaelogist.
The beginning of LC lays the groundwork for the the treasure hunter Indy, and the YIJC fills in the rest of the details and also shows us the other side of Indy.
Ah! That exlains EVERYTHING! You're from the Prequel Generation. I grew up with the originals. It always facinates me how your generation sees them differently from ours. I just thank my lucky stars that I grew up when I did because I was the right age at the right time to have experienced all the great movies like Star Wars and Raiders of the Lost Ark first hand. Everything just clicked. Then I saw Phantom Menace and that was the second greatest travesty of my life. I was literally shell-shocked for days afterward and manically depressed. So that really puts it all into perspective why you would like Young Indy so much. You were just the right age for that show. I couldn't stand most of it. And I tried. I really really tried. I watched it every week and taped every episode. And I'll take it the way it was aired, not more Lucas revisionism on the edited DVDs.
But The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles goes, if anything, in pretty much the opposite direction of the Star Wars prequels, so that can't account for it.
Moreover, I'm very much of the original trilogy era; I saw all the Star Wars and Indiana Jones movies in theaters when they were new, and I've been a longtime fan of all Lucas's works - not just Star Wars and Indiana Jones, but American Graffiti, THX 1138, you name it. And I am of the opinion that The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles is, on average, not only the best Lucas creation of the last 25 years or so, but one of the triumphs in his entire filmography.
See that's just it. I see a direct correlation with the blandness of Young Indy and the Prequels because they were both produced by Rick "kiss-ass" McCallum. That guy is such a tool for Lucas. Star Wars was good when you had guys like Gary Kurtz producing who would stand up and tell George when he had a stupid idea. That's why Star Wars and Empire were good. But when George insisted on Ewoks and making Return of the Jedi more kid-friendly, that's when Kurtz and Lucas parted ways. I should have seen what was coming while watching Young Indy as insight into what to expect from the Prequels.
See that's just it. I see a direct correlation with the blandness of Young Indy and the Prequels because they were both produced by Rick "kiss-ass" McCallum. That guy is such a tool for Lucas. Star Wars was good when you had guys like Gary Kurtz producing who would stand up and tell George when he had a stupid idea. That's why Star Wars and Empire were good. But when George insisted on Ewoks and making Return of the Jedi more kid-friendly, that's when Kurtz and Lucas parted ways. I should have seen what was coming while watching Young Indy as insight into what to expect from the Prequels.
See that's just it. I see a direct correlation with the blandness of Young Indy and the Prequels because they were both produced by Rick "kiss-ass" McCallum. That guy is such a tool for Lucas. Star Wars was good when you had guys like Gary Kurtz producing who would stand up and tell George when he had a stupid idea. That's why Star Wars and Empire were good. But when George insisted on Ewoks and making Return of the Jedi more kid-friendly, that's when Kurtz and Lucas parted ways. I should have seen what was coming while watching Young Indy as insight into what to expect from the Prequels.
I've seen a lot of negativity directed at Rick McCallum. But he does his job of producer, and does it extremely well. He kept everything on-time and on-budget with YIJC and the prequels (I assume everything went smooth on Radioland Murders as well... it's hard to find any behnd the scenes stuff on that film).
Here's the question everyone needs to consider: Would you criticize your boss (even constructively)? No, most people simply do their jobs and go on with life. McCallum has admitted a couple of times (in his trademark PR-esque style) that some elements of the prequels were half-baked. But he just sees it as Lucas' creative domain, and doesn't try to interfere. McCallum does throw ideas out there, but he doesn't say "George, are you crazy?", or anything like that. Neither does Lucas' best friend Steven Spielberg (well, Spielberg probably does jokingly).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raiders112390
Me, personally, I can't get enough of it (YIJ). I think it's better than the films in some ways, because it goes much deeper into the character of Indy than any of the films do; his motivations, his ideas and how he became who he was; We also get to learn more about Henry, Sr. which I like. It's got enough action to make me happy, and it's good for when I want Indy but something deeper than the adventures of the films. Cause really--when all things are considered--Indy is a character, but the YIJ series (and LC, even though I have some qualms with that film) turns him from being a two dimensional character into a three dimensional one.
Also--the series leaves enough of his life out (the 20s and early '30s) to leave a great deal of mystery to Indy. We don't know what he did in the '20s, or how he went from being "it belongs in a museum" to ''fortune and glory, kid", but we can see the makings of that by 1920. We learn him off at a stage where he's toughened by war, and showing signs of cynicism but he hasn't quite reached it yet.
We don't see the whole affair with Marion nor do we see Abner, which are the biggest ''mysteries'' of the Indy series. We don't see his early archaelogical adventures (Except for the Mexico, and Peacock's Eye episodes), but we do see his first brush with the supernatural, we see how he became so resourceful, how he learned the many languages he knows and where he got his mastery of ancient cultures, we see what he learned during the war and in his years as a spy, most importantly we see why he became an archaelogist.
The beginning of LC lays the groundwork for the the treasure hunter Indy, and the YIJC fills in the rest of the details and also shows us the other side of Indy.
Last edited by Adamwankenobi : 05-03-2008 at 11:34 PM.
I understand that Star Wars and Indy are George's babies but the problem is that Lucas is a very stubborn man and he's gotten so powerful that everyone is afraid to challenge his decisions for fear of losing their jobs. So when George says, "Hey, what do you guys think about Jar-Jar?" his employees are gonna say "Yes, George. He's wonderful." You need someone who will challenge those ideas and say "George, honestly, it won't work. Here's why..." Obviously Kurtz and Lucas had their creative differences and Lucas won out. I still have utmost respect for Gary Kurtz as a producer. I have none for McCallum. When I went to the first Star Wars Celebration and he told the audience that Episode I was going to be the greatest Star Wars movie ever I knew he was full of it. Like Steve Sansweet, he's a Lucasfilm PR puppet.
I understand that Star Wars and Indy are George's babies but the problem is that Lucas is a very stubborn man and he's gotten so powerful that everyone is afraid to challenge his decisions for fear of losing their jobs. So when George says, "Hey, what do you guys think about Jar-Jar?" his employees are gonna say "Yes, George. He's wonderful." You need someone who will challenge those ideas and say "George, honestly, it won't work. Here's why..." Obviously Kurtz and Lucas had their creative differences and Lucas won out. I still have utmost respect for Gary Kurtz as a producer. I have none for McCallum. When I went to the first Star Wars Celebration and he told the audience that Episode I was going to be the greatest Star Wars movie ever I knew he was full of it. Like Steve Sansweet, he's a Lucasfilm PR puppet.
See that's just it. I see a direct correlation with the blandness of Young Indy and the Prequels because they were both produced by Rick "kiss-ass" McCallum. That guy is such a tool for Lucas. Star Wars was good when you had guys like Gary Kurtz producing who would stand up and tell George when he had a stupid idea. That's why Star Wars and Empire were good. But when George insisted on Ewoks and making Return of the Jedi more kid-friendly, that's when Kurtz and Lucas parted ways. I should have seen what was coming while watching Young Indy as insight into what to expect from the Prequels.
But Young Indy is nothing like the prequels; as I said, it's closer to being their polar opposite than it is to being like them.
Young Indy is not bland. It's deep, it's rich, and it's full of wonderful things you don't even recognize because you've never tasted them before, so you turn your nose up at them without actually giving them enough of a chance.
Young Indy, by enriching the Indy character and helping us understand his origins, helps ground the series even through its most fantastic, and thus actually makes the movies even better than they already were on their own. It's an amazing show, and that you can't appreciate it... well, to each his own, but you're missing out on a wonderful, beautiful, terrific, glorious piece of work, and it's sad.
I met Sansweet last May at Celebration IV. Being able to talk to him in person, he seemed to be a very genuine guy. I asked him two questions that made him squirm though: What's Lucas' exact stance on The Star Wars Holiday Special, and when are the original Droids and Ewoks cartoons coming out on DVD.
I keep kicking myself in the shins though that I didn't ask him about the original YIJC episodes and the George Hall bookends. I was in a daze that day, as it was my first time in LA, and I didn't get much sleep the night before (flight arrived late, had to meet another group at a specific hotel, had to get food, etc., and by the time we went to sleep that night around 4 a.m., we had about two hours to sleep before driving to the convention center through all that crazy traffic!).
We already covered that. Must we bring that back up?
Yes. I want to know what you see bland about it, and how it correlates to the SW prequels, cause imo they don't seem very like other than the fact that they're prequels. But that's a very vague and common similarity.
But Young Indy is nothing like the prequels; as I said, it's closer to being their polar opposite than it is to being like them.
Young Indy is not bland. It's deep, it's rich, and it's full of wonderful things you don't even recognize because you've never tasted them before, so you turn your nose up at them without actually giving them enough of a chance.
Young Indy, by enriching the Indy character and helping us understand his origins, helps ground the series even through its most fantastic, and thus actually makes the movies even better than they already were on their own. It's an amazing show, and that you can't appreciate it... well, to each his own, but you're missing out on a wonderful, beautiful, terrific, glorious piece of work, and it's sad.
Believe me, I'd like to appreciate it and like I have said, I have really really tried. Never missed an episode. Have them all on tape. Have the DVDs. I can't appreciate them because they are so mind-numbingly boring most of them like watching Indy taking a dump in the African bush. My image of Indy is the Man With The Hat in Raiders who emerges from the shadows this daring and brash adventurer, not a guy who is best friends with T.H. Lawrence. I mean come on! Teddy Roosevelt taught him how to shoot a gun for Christ's sake! I didn't want or need to know that.
Believe me, I'd like to appreciate it and like I have said, I have really really tried. Never missed an episode. Have them all on tape. Have the DVDs. I can't appreciate them because they are so mind-numbingly boring most of them like watching Indy taking a dump in the African bush. My image of Indy is the Man With The Hat in Raiders who emerges from the shadows this daring and brash adventurer, not a guy who is best friends with T.H. Lawrence. I mean come on! Teddy Roosevelt taught him how to shoot a gun for Christ's sake! I didn't want or need to know that.
But it's not like there's no action in them. There's a good quantity of action in the series. We do see Indy kicking as* and getting into gun fights at different points. Why shouldn't Indy be friends with T.E. Lawrence? Indy ends up being a pretty well known guy himself, at least within the world of the series. (Even known by those far off in Pankot). He's also known by the government, which is they first contact him in Raiders.
Indy in the YIJC is brash and daring; he just hasn't (with some exceptions) gotten the adventurer-treasure hunter part down yet. But since it is a prequel telling the early life of the character, you can't expect him to come out of the womb knowing a dozen languages and carrying a whip on his hand. That all comes from somewhere; and that's what YIJ is.
Believe me, I'd like to appreciate it and like I have said, I have really really tried. Never missed an episode. Have them all on tape. Have the DVDs. I can't appreciate them because they are so mind-numbingly boring most of them like watching Indy taking a dump in the African bush. My image of Indy is the Man With The Hat in Raiders who emerges from the shadows this daring and brash adventurer, not a guy who is best friends with T.H. Lawrence. I mean come on! Teddy Roosevelt taught him how to shoot a gun for Christ's sake! I didn't want or need to know that.
Well, see, Lawrence and Roosevelt were pretty adventurous guys in their own right, and in real life to boot, and I think Indy hanging with them is cool as all get-out, certainly not boring. Even most people who don't care for him meeting them don't care for it because they just think it's kind of hokey to have had this character meeting all these famous people, not because there's anything innately boring about them. The show is filled with adventure; it just largely has a different style and tone than the adventure of the movies. It's still very much in keeping with them, though, and also lets us know the character in a way that makes his movie adventures much more interesting and engaging.
It was obvious a while ago I can't "make" you appreciate the show; it apparently just flat-out doesn't appeal to your tastes. That's too bad, but ultimately Ok; nothing appeals to everyone. I just want you to be aware it's not because the show is innately bad, or boring, or whatever, as there are lots of people who find it wonderful. It's just a shame you're not one of them.
Like I said, did we need to see snot-nosed Anakin getting into fights with Young Greedo or getting bullied by Sebulba or finding out that Boba Fett was some Kiwi clone? Explaining everything ruins some of the mystery of those characters. For all we know Boba Fett could have been some alien creature with an ambiguous past. When we meet Indy in Raiders (or for those of us old enough to remember our first introduction to Indy) he was this bold, shady guy and didn't know too much about him. He was like Clint Eastwood's Man With No Name. Same with Boba Fett. You take away that ambiguity of their character and their personage and it taints your perception. When I watch Empire Strikes Back now with the new dubbed lines by Temeura Morrison, I see Fett as that little clone kid from Kamino, not some cool mysterious mo-f'n bounty hunter. And like I said, everytime I watch Indy shoot the Cairo Swordsman I think of him as that little boy in Africa learning how to fire a gun with Teddy Roosevelt. We didn't need to see that. We can PRESUME that he learned how to fire a gun at some point without having to show or explain it. It's extraneous exposition and it's trite and dull.
It was The Phantom Menace that got me away from cartoons and into films, and eventually, spawned my interest in filmmaking. 
Of course, over the years, I discovered much better films, but The Phantom Menace (and... yes... Jar Jar) holds a special place in my heart.
) and running from boulders. Also, we would probably have had about three or four additional film sequels by now, and Hollywood would probably be in pre-production on a remake starring Matthew McConaughey. 
I was in a daze that day, as it was my first time in LA, and I didn't get much sleep the night before (flight arrived late, had to meet another group at a specific hotel, had to get food, etc., and by the time we went to sleep that night around 4 a.m., we had about two hours to sleep before driving to the convention center through all that crazy traffic!). 
