Indiana Jones 4

[J.R. Hudson]

I hear you on this, but I don't totally agree. I am among those who feel that Raiders is in a class by itself and the other two are basically unwatchable junk.

That said, I agree with your assessment of Lucas' role.

However, it's not like everyone else was powerless here. I mean, nobody put a gun to Spielberg's head and made him do this. He doesn't need the money. And as for Ford, if he really disagreed, he could have just refused. I mean, without him there is no Indiana Jones. So what would they do? I guess it's not out of the realm of possibility that Lucas would just digitize Ford into it, but...

So though I agree with you, I also feel like the others are just as culpable.

But to the question of making the movie better, it's one issue in my view. And this issue pervades Temple and Last Crusade too. They just did not take it seriously.

The thing that made Raiders so great was it was A-list filmmaking applied to B-list material. Same thing with Jaws. Same thing with Empire. Same thing with the new Battlestar. Spielberg took it seriously as a filmmaker. His shots were extremely precise and exceptionally well chosen from beginning to end. He was very very careful about the whole thing and took it as seriously as a film as he would he current "serious" films.

From Temple on, that vanished. The use of montage, the compositions, the performances and writing, the casting of weird and marvelous actors like Ron Lacey and Karen Allen, all went out the window. The characters ceased being real people in a real world and immediately turned into puppets saying dumb stuff for cheap laughs and doing preposterous things in a horrendous minstrel show.

It's evident in how they wrote women through the series:

You went from Marion, who was a Bone Fide "Dame" in the vein of the great "Dames" of the 30s and 40s, someone who could hold her own against Jones, to whatever her name was in Temple, whom they wrote with basically one character trait: "Scream loud at gross shi*." And by the time you got to Crusade, the woman was reduced to a fetishized Nazi sex doll who poo pooed not only Indie, but his dad too( Yeesh, that gives me the willies. )

So my answer to making this better is just take it seriously on a filmmaking level, from story on up to production, and have some emotion for your audience beyond contempt. I've said it many times, the reason this is so awful is not that they tried and failed, it's that they didn't even try in the first place. They knew they didn't have to, because we would all spend the money anyway.

YES YES YES YES YES

They stopped trying right around Temple of Doom; specifically with SHORT ROUND beating the **** out of THUGGIES. Aside from making Short Round do that, I loved TEMPLE ...

Part 3 was one of the lamest films I have ever seen.

Ia agree with Mark; they stopped trying a long time ago.

 

[Batutta]

From Temple on, that vanished. The use of montage, the compositions,

On this, I disagree. Spielberg's technique on Temple and Last Crusade is top notch. It's the writing that is weaker, some of the casting (Willie Scott and Alison Doody) and the tone that is sillier. That said, those two scripts, if not as sharp as Raiders, are structurally sound, unlike Crystal Skull which is just a mess.

 

[Mark Harris]

On this, I disagree. Spielberg's technique on Temple and Last Crusade is top notch. It's the writing that is weaker, some of the casting (Willie Scott and Alison Doody) and the tone that is sillier. That said, those two scripts, if not as sharp as Raiders, are structurally sound, unlike Crystal Skull which is just a mess.

Yeah, I just don't see it. Compared to say the opening sequence in Raiders. You know when he whips the gun out of the guy's hand, you never actually see that happen. He puts together like 5 completely unrelated shots to make you think that happened. That's pure montage and the kind of thing I mean and missed in the other two. It demonstrates a mastery of film language. The other two felt more to me like just pointing the camera at stuff. Know what I mean?

I mean, in the opening of Temple, I felt like we were going to get the same, with that diamond ice bucket scene, but it quickly degenerated to me.

Damn, I used to have a write up on these stuff. I think I deleted it. But I had broken down all of the sequences where he did this kind of stuff. It's pretty striking.

As for writing, in Crusade, am I the only one here who thinks it stupid that Indie acquired EVERY SINGLE defining trait in ONE DAY????

 

[Mark Harris]

YES YES YES YES YES

They stopped trying right around Temple of Doom; specifically with SHORT ROUND beating the shi* out of THUGGIES. Aside from making Short Round do that, I loved TEMPLE ...

Part 3 was one of the lamest films I have ever seen.

Ia agree with Mark; they stopped trying a long time ago.

A pig just flew by my office window!

 

[karapetkov]

Alison Doody

I disagree.

And Last Crusade is almost as good as Raiders, IMHO.

 

[karapetkov]

a fetishized Nazi sex doll

TOTALLY fitting the era and the matters within the story.

What do you think Nazism was, anyway?

NOT fetishized, maybe?!

LOL.

Yes, the real character of Marion is the best way to go, but I disagree that the Nazi doll is not a successful character.

She bears her own line of conflict that gets resolved at the end. And also successfully complicates things for Jones, which can't be bad, can it?

The female character in Temple is stupid and doesn't bring anything to the story.

But the main flaw of Temple is that ridiculous kid character. The same as little Anakin in Phantom Menace, who builds starships at the age of 5 or whatever. (WTF?!)

I'm sure that Lucas is behind the kid-idiot characters in both movies.

 

[staticrevenger]

On this, I disagree. Spielberg's technique on Temple and Last Crusade is top notch. It's the writing that is weaker, some of the casting (Willie Scott and Alison Doody) and the tone that is sillier. That said, those two scripts, if not as sharp as Raiders, are structurally sound, unlike Crystal Skull which is just a mess.

actually, you should READ the Raiders script. if they had shot the Indy that was on the page, there would be no sequels. And Indy would be known as the guy with the huge feather in his hat.

 

[filmguy123]

Indy 4 took a "Batman & Robin" approach when it should have taken a "Batman Begins" approach. No one in their right mind will argue that Batman Begins is realistic, it's definitely OUT THERE... but the writers, director, cast, etc. took it very seriously lending credibility to it and giving it a serious tone... much like Raiders.

It's not just the over-the-top stuff, its the EXECUTION of the over-the-top stuff.

Dare I say, that even leaving in some of the most absurd scenes which were TOO far over the top to beging with (monkey swinging, ants carrying the hat, driving off the cliff onto the rubber tree, the three waterfall drops, fencing between cars), that had these been handled in a more serious, "Batman Begins" - esque fashion, they could have actually been acceptable?

The power of how something is exectuted cannot be denied. I can actually picture the ideas and scripting for these scenes being tweaked and done differently enough to the point where I would leave still not liking them, but not hating them.

 

[filmguy123]

Also, I've spent much time pointing out the negative things in the film and criticzing it, but there were about 20 minutes of pretty good material stretched thinnly over that 2 hours.

Take the motorcycle chase through campus. I've heard mixed things on this, but I for one thought this was very true to Indiana Jones as a whole. The pacing on it just felt right, and had the cinematagraphy/the look better matched the original trilogy, this would have been ALMOST spot-on.

Ford getting pulled into the car, a little over the top but yet about the right level for a Last Crusade type of action scene, with a touch of ToD. But I liked it, and I thought the punches/kicks in the car were perfectly paced and the kick to the face where the guys head goes on the horn, and then Indy pops back out the other side was all perfect. I liked all the touches driving through the courtyard with the cold war protest and "better dead than red" coming onto the car windshield and hitting the statue of Marcus. Indy's look towards Shia after that reminded me of Indy becoming like his dad, which was a subtle touch and I though a perfect look.

I loved the library scene and thought it felt very Indy-ish, from the concept to the execution (showing everyone calm in the library, and then the cycle enters, sliding under the table, the little conversation with the student. Silly/ridiculous, but not TOOO much. Reminded me a bit of Indy popping out of the sewer in the middle of the outdoor restaurant in Venus.

Definitely not something you'd have seen in Raiders, but there's no denying it had a Last Crusade action scene kind of feel to it, with perhaps a subtle touch of ToD to it.

This was the one scene in the movie I dug. And if the whole film was in this vein, I'd have left with a positive experience, despite the drastic change in art/cinematography style.

 

[filmguy123]

actually, you should READ the Raiders script. if they had shot the Indy that was on the page, there would be no sequels. And Indy would be known as the guy with the huge feather in his hat.

I've read the Raider's script some time ago; did we read the same one? I may have just forgotten, and I was younger then - but what are you referring to?


ALSO - is there any more info on Darabont's screenplay? Someone mentioned it revolved around Atlantis. I'd LOVE to read or learn more about this screenplay, as I always thought it must have been AMAZING after i heard Lucas hated it.

 

[Weston]

On this, I disagree. Spielberg's technique on Temple and Last Crusade is top notch. It's the writing that is weaker, some of the casting (Willie Scott and Alison Doody) and the tone that is sillier. That said, those two scripts, if not as sharp as Raiders, are structurally sound, unlike Crystal Skull which is just a mess.

i agree.

 

[karapetkov]

An GOOD Indy film about Atlantis is all that matters.

Fans of the game?

 

[J.R. Hudson]

The only reservation I had about TEMPLE was Short Round beating up thuggies. That's it.

I loved the dark tone (much like The Empire Strikes Back) and scoffed at the critics who cried about that. I thought the entire film rocked; not Oscar caliber, but the highest level of Popcorn Caliber (which is a good thing).

The opening in Club Obi Wan (But I did always wonder how his friend was hot by a gun and stood still, not realizing it), the palace, the ceremony, the min chase and the bridge climax ...

A killer film. I got lost on INDY 3 with the following:

Marcus Brody

Going from serious and cautionary to complete nimcompoop

The Father / Son fireplace scene "Junior ? Dad ? Junior ? Dad !"

The airplane flying through the train tunnel

The Hitler scene

The young Indy of River Phoenix and the whole opening I was not stoked on

The dude stamping in the library and then being confused as Indy banged the marble floor everytime he stamped a letter.

-

Just bad.

===============

If I did INDY I would have done the following:

Keep it in WW2 era but move it to the South Pacific and bring in the Japanese Imperial Army.

Keep it in a seriously adult tone (Still PG-13 but harder)

Keep the action sequences plausible; much in the same vein as Band of Brothers approach

I would bring in American G.I.s (Think James Bond in the SPY WHO LOVED ME when the the end firefight happened; it wasn't all Bond, he had an entire army helping him

Lose the gas and silly one liners; these ruin films.

-

I once thought that tying in the Nagasaki or Hiroshima blast would be a gnarly climax.

 

[filmguy123]

An GOOD Indy film about Atlantis is all that matters.

Fans of the game?

Yes, I *loved* the game back in the day.

Regardless of the game, I think the Atlantis would have been a great fit for an Indy 4. And even with Lucas' insistence on aliens, I think that would have fit in just fine with the rumors of Atlantis having been such an advanced civilization. I think it could have worked great if they were a bit (read: a lot) more subtle about all of the alien themes, but still had it being based around a civilization rooted in alien technology or something... "Indiana Jones and the City of the Gods", the gods being the aliens... but the alien theme taking a backseat to the historical and archeological themes.

 

[karapetkov]

I got lost on INDY 3 with the following:

Marcus Brody

Going from serious and cautionary to complete nimcompoop

Agree.

The Father / Son fireplace scene "Junior ? Dad ? Junior ? Dad !"

Agree, but otherwise the father-son thing was good.

The airplane flying through the train tunnel

Agree.

The Hitler scene

It's absurd, but also VERY ENTERTAINING.

The young Indy of River Phoenix and the whole opening I was not stoked on

Tasty popcorn.

The dude stamping in the library and then being confused as Indy banged the marble floor everytime he stamped a letter.

Yeah, that scene is complete absurdity, but it TOTALLY ROCKS.

A bit of popcorn humor.

Of course, nothing can beat the scene where Indy shoots the saber master.

That's a million-dollar-scene, which happened very spontaneously.

Raiders is the gem, no doubt about it.

I recently re-watched it three-times-in-a-row-again ,... superb! rogar-BigGrin(DBG)

 

[filmguy123]

Hudson,

Even though I think most people, myself certainly included, that Raiders is hands down the best film in the series, I didn't have such a problem with Last Crusade.

I agree with many of your points about the film, but those weren't points of hate for me. I think we're flip flopped on Crusade and Doom - Crusade being great popcorn fun, but Temple being weak in many ways like you feel Crusade was weak in. The things that bugged me in Crusade:

- Marcus got a bit too silly
- Some of the setup for scenes seemed weaker and not as well setup (Raiders had just a handful of segments that were extremely carefully setup and played out, Crusade jumped a bit too quick)
- Little things bugged me, like Indy getting stuck on the side of the tank with his bag strap. First, he couldn't have gotten stuck like that, second he had no problem climbing back up, third the tank was going about 10mph, 4th, he could have easily slipped out, run and got back on
- The rubbing of the tablet would have been destroyed when submerging in petrol. Oh, and the lost catacomb probably would have been found since it opens into a sewer system.
- Marcus got a bit too silly
- etc etc

However, I really enjoyed the movie a lot, I laughed a ton, it was super entertaining, and none of that was a big enough deal to pull me out of the experience. THe father-son relationship was well done, unlike the the Ford-Shia relationship which lacked any depth.

BUT, I see where you are coming from for sure. Just surprised you liked ToD more than Crusade! But fair points on all accounts.

I like your ideas about how you would have set the 4th one - interesting! And reading ideas like that, and thinking of all the time they had to develop things and all talent involved just kills me to think of what the 4th Indy could have been. I honestly think it COULD have been on par with Raiders... sigh.

 

[filmguy123]

I actually LOVED the scene with the librarian stamping the books as Indy hits the ground! And the X-marks the spot joke(s)... very clever.

 

[Batutta]

Lose the gas and silly one liners; these ruin films.

I assume you meant gags. I was watching Empire of Dreams recently, and when Kershner was talking about his approach to Empire Strikes back, he said he wanted humor, but not gags. This is the line Spielberg and Lucas crossed with the Indy sequels and the Star Wars Prequels, from merely having wise-cracking humor, to juvenile gags.

 

[karapetkov]

Yes, I *loved* the game back in the day.

Regardless of the game, I think the Atlantis would have been a great fit for an Indy 4. And even with Lucas' insistence on aliens, I think that would have fit in just fine with the rumors of Atlantis having been such an advanced civilization. I think it could have worked great if they were a bit (read: a lot) more subtle about all of the alien themes, but still had it being based around a civilization rooted in alien technology or something... "Indiana Jones and the City of the Gods", the gods being the aliens... but the alien theme taking a backseat to the historical and archeological themes.

Atlantis is THE THEME for an Indy movie.

We saw too much aliens in the recent years: Signs, War of the Worlds, the AVP vomits, and none of them was really any good.

Contact was brilliant, but it's not popcorn.

And if Lucas wants so much these aliens, they can hide them into the plot as the ancient "gods" of the atlanteans or something.

They tried to exploit this idea in AVP, but it was ridiculous. Such immense stupidity.

...

Atlantis is HUGE, so much potential there.... it's like the Ark,.. it's an arch-tale of humanity, which roams around from millenia and is super-fundamental...

I think I'll write a script for it and I'll take Spielberg as a hostage, with one single condition: to direct my script for Atlantis, but without Lucas in the project.

While Paramount considers my offer, we'll discuss the script with Mr. Spielberg and maybe we'll invite Darabont for a cup of coffee.

Bbut if Lucas shows up, by any chance, I'll be forced to use my Jedi powers on him.

(uses the mind trick)

"You don't need to produce any more Indiana Jones movies, others could do better. You can go to sleep now".

.....

Mm-yeah.

 

[Batutta]

Hudson,

Even though I think most people, myself certainly included, that Raiders is hands down the best film in the series, I didn't have such a problem with Last Crusade.

I agree with many of your points about the film, but those weren't points of hate for me. I think we're flip flopped on Crusade and Doom - Crusade being great popcorn fun, but Temple being weak in many ways like you feel Crusade was weak in. The things that bugged me in Crusade:

- Marcus got a bit too silly
- Some of the setup for scenes seemed weaker and not as well setup (Raiders had just a handful of segments that were extremely carefully setup and played out, Crusade jumped a bit too quick)
- Little things bugged me, like Indy getting stuck on the side of the tank with his bag strap. First, he couldn't have gotten stuck like that, second he had no problem climbing back up, third the tank was going about 10mph, 4th, he could have easily slipped out, run and got back on
- The rubbing of the tablet would have been destroyed when submerging in petrol. Oh, and the lost catacomb probably would have been found since it opens into a sewer system.
- Marcus got a bit too silly
- etc etc

However, I really enjoyed the movie a lot, I laughed a ton, it was super entertaining, and none of that was a big enough deal to pull me out of the experience. THe father-son relationship was well done, unlike the the Ford-Shia relationship which lacked any depth.

BUT, I see where you are coming from for sure. Just surprised you liked ToD more than Crusade! But fair points on all accounts.

I like your ideas about how you would have set the 4th one - interesting! And reading ideas like that, and thinking of all the time they had to develop things and all talent involved just kills me to think of what the 4th Indy could have been. I honestly think it COULD have been on par with Raiders... sigh.

I think the problem with Crusade goes beyond nitpicking, which all the films can be subjected to. There is a fundamental lack of narrative drive to the movie which stems from the way the story is set up and the stakes involved. At the end of the first ACT in Raiders, the fate of the world hangs in the balance. If the ARK falls into the hands of the Nazis, they could be invincible, and personally for Indy, discovering the Ark would make his career. In Crusade, when he first hears about the cup of christ, he calls it "an old man's dream". The only thing that pushes him forward is when he finds out his father is missing, a strong personal reason, but for an action adventure film, not quite as electrifying as the fate of the world hanging in the balance.