Indiana Jones - I believe this is worthy of its own thread.

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
One of my favorite lines in the whole series:

"Mos Eisley Spaceport... you will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy"

Fuck, I miss you 1976 George Lucas.
 
Utoo said:
^ 35 by the release in 1977. I don't know when they started filming, but it wasn't that much before.


I'm psyched for this. I'm nervous about the sci-fi "The Blob," "Creature From the Black Lagoon," etc. references, but I trust Spielberg & Ford's judgement....if it took them 15+ years to agree with a Lucas script, it has my attention.


Why is everyone so quick to take Darabont's side in this? Are we not forgetting this is the guy who gave us the bloated wannabe important Green Mile and the freaking Majestic?

Just because Lucas isn't a good writer on his own doesn't mean he can't recognize when someone else's script isn't working. I don't think he would shit all over it without some kind of reason.

Bottom line is that Indy is Lucas's baby, and I like his seemingly objective analysis of the trilogy in the Vanity Fair article, especially his comments about Last Crusade, which is ridiculously overrated. It sounds to me like he's trying to put elements in the film that will make it more like Raiders, which is really the only great film in the trilogy anyway. This is a bad thing? However, the "MacGuffin" that he's come up with for Crystal Skull is either going to be really cool, or really bad.

I loved reading Lucas talk about the difference between Indiana Jones & Han Solo, and why Ford was so perfect for both. I don't know how you can read this and still be so cynical about the guy.
 
I would agree with you, but what about when Spielberg says it was the best screenplay he had seen since Raiders? I'm not sure if he meant purely Indiana Jones or screenplays in general, but it's all the same. As much as you dislike Spielberg, I think Lucas has made more wrong decisions over screenplays in his career than Spielberg has. I'll take saccharine endings (A.I., Schindler's, Private Ryan) over complete messes (Episodes I and II).

Either way, they're both ridiculously talented filmmakers, even if they have their flaws, and I'm convinced they will do their best to deliver a good Indy movie.
 
lazarus said:



Why is everyone so quick to take Darabont's side in this? Are we not forgetting this is the guy who gave us the bloated wannabe important Green Mile and the freaking Majestic?

Just because Lucas isn't a good writer on his own doesn't mean he can't recognize when someone else's script isn't working. I don't think he would shit all over it without some kind of reason.

Bottom line is that Indy is Lucas's baby, and I like his seemingly objective analysis of the trilogy in the Vanity Fair article, especially his comments about Last Crusade, which is ridiculously overrated. It sounds to me like he's trying to put elements in the film that will make it more like Raiders, which is really the only great film in the trilogy anyway. This is a bad thing? However, the "MacGuffin" that he's come up with for Crystal Skull is either going to be really cool, or really bad.

I loved reading Lucas talk about the difference between Indiana Jones & Han Solo, and why Ford was so perfect for both. I don't know how you can read this and still be so cynical about the guy.

I'm not quite sure why you quoted me in reference to "taking Darabont's side." :scratch:

I agree with just about everything you said, though I'll stand by the belief that Lucas is much better at the big picture and the results are best when others are left to the details. If I recall the bonus disc to the Indy dvd set correctly, Lucas had a larger hand in the story & script for Temple than he did for Raiders or Crusade (or was it that he was less reigned in by Speilberg on that one? i forget). Lo and behold, Temple is by far the weakest of the three. And no need to mention the Star Wars prequels in detail... And yes, while he does sound very erudite commenting on the layers in the films and the nuances that make them great over other films, that doesn't translate into his ability to write dialogue, nor the gorgeously stale performances he's managed to direct.
 
Last edited:
LemonMacPhisto said:
I'll take saccharine endings (A.I., Schindler's, Private Ryan) over complete messes (Episodes I and II).


That's just like, your opinion, man.

You're also comparing three serious dramas against popcorn films. But when the final moments of a film misstep so badly, it leaves a much worse taste in my mouth, as opposed to a clunky film that picks up steam as it goes along and finishes strong. Despite the overload of cross-cutting between four separate story streams in Phantom, Lucas still knows how deliver a big time third act. I don't feel a need to defend the same in Clones, as it probably has the most entertaining one of the whole saga. Arena battle-->Clones/Jedi vs. Droid full-scale war-->Dooku vs. Anakin/Obi-Wan/Yoda is just non-stop action bliss.
 
lazarus said:



That's just like, your opinion, man.

You're also comparing three serious dramas against popcorn films. But when the final moments of a film misstep so badly, it leaves a much worse taste in my mouth, as opposed to a clunky film that picks up steam as it goes along and finishes strong. Despite the overload of cross-cutting between four separate story streams in Phantom, Lucas still knows how deliver a big time third act. I don't feel a need to defend the same in Clones, as it probably has the most entertaining one of the whole saga. Arena battle-->Clones/Jedi vs. Droid full-scale war-->Dooku vs. Anakin/Obi-Wan/Yoda is just non-stop action bliss.

But when I don't care about what happens at that point, then why should I even watch it, you know?

You win for using a Lebowski quote though.
 
No, that's my favorite scene of the entire prequel trilogy right there. No joke.

I do mock the "into the security monitors you go, only pain you will find" line.
 
Only pain you will find, if you do any more prequel bashing.


aotc_1210.jpg




"This party's over!"
 
There's plenty to like in the prequels, but far more to dislike.

Mace, Palpy, Yoda, Obi-Wan... pretty much all of the Sith/Jedi stuff are excellent.

Then there's Anakin... oh boy.
 
Utoo said:

Lo and behold, Temple is by far the weakest of the three.

I may be the only one in the world to think Temple of Doom is the best....
 
Jake Lloyd isn't the focus of The Phantom Menace, and though he has a few flat line readings, for the most part he's serviceable and doesn't drag the film down as much as Jar Jar does (and even he falls into relief a bit with repeated viewings).

If we're talking Hayden, I think he's good on Coruscant ("Tell us now!"), great on Tattooine, and saddled with some really bad dialogue on Naboo. I thought it was agreed that he improved on Sith, and while he wasn't perfect, he had some very good moments.
 
lazarus said:
I thought it was agreed that he improved on Sith, and while he wasn't perfect, he had some very good moments.

He did improve. A little. But if you're starting at absolutely terrible, than a little improvement only brings you up to pretty bad.
 
lazarus said:
Jake Lloyd isn't the focus of The Phantom Menace, and though he has a few flat line readings, for the most part he's serviceable and doesn't drag the film down as much as Jar Jar does (and even he falls into relief a bit with repeated viewings).

If we're talking Hayden, I think he's good on Coruscant ("Tell us now!"), great on Tattooine, and saddled with some really bad dialogue on Naboo. I thought it was agreed that he improved on Sith, and while he wasn't perfect, he had some very good moments.

I have more of a problem with Hayden than Jingle All the Way Anakin. While I agree he was better in Sith, there's still some extremely cringe-worthy scenes / dialogue exchanges, mostly after he's "Vader" (not to mention the 6 second turn to the Dark Side, which can be debated, I know, but still hastily done).

My other favorite scene in Sith is the switch between Anakin and Padme looking outside the windows at the apartment and Temple. So simple, yet beautiful, you know?

I think Sith is as good or better than Jedi, with the rest of the prequels firmly below that line and I'll just leave it at that. Maybe some day I'll enjoy Menace and Clones more, but not now. They're not completely terrible, but disappointing.

the tourist said:


I may be the only one in the world to think Temple of Doom is the best....

Yep.
 
Last edited:
LemonMacPhisto said:

:yes:

:lol:

Temple. :tsk: When I sit friends down to get them into Indy, I show them Raiders and then Crusade. I leave Temple for them to discover if they want. It's kind of like Passengers, but without Miss Sarajevo, Beach Sequence, Your Blue Room, and the argument that it's creative.


As for the Prequels, I'm too tired to write a lot...though I'm in LMP's camp.
 
Temple Of Doom = :down:

OT Star Wars discussion: Clones by far is the worst of the entire saga :tsk: From the convoluted story, poor acting, poor direction and CGI overload I can think of very little which is redeeming...

Possibly the asteroid chase between Obi-Wan and Jango Fett for the seismic charges alone but even it is pretty awkward...

At least the first one had Darth Maul and the third one had all the dramatic pay-off and nostalgic scenes that correspond with Episode IV...
 
Yes, it was CGI overload, but it was all done SO well. Compare the creatures that attack the heroes in the arena to ANYTHING in Lord of the Rings. The difference is staggering.

I do admit that I wish Lucas would have used real actors for the clones, at least in the closer shots. That said, they looked great too. I mean, how else would you even do something like the Coruscant scenes? You know how expensive that would be to construct all that stuff?

And I don't think I need to mention the job the animators did with Yoda, which blows Gollum out of the water.

You found the story convoluted, I found it intriguing, and it was fun for me to untangle the webs of conspiracy that were woven.

Darth Maul was a bit overrated, in my opinion. His fight scenes were cool, but to me the totally tense conversation between Obi-Wan & Jango in the Fetts' apartment is an example of creating a villain with some actual meat to him.

And I don't really understand the complaints about the direction, at least if you're talking in terms of composition and pacing. The action scenes were tight as usual, and there were some great iconic moments on Tattooine, as well as during the arena battle on Geonosis.
 
elevated_u2_fan said:
Temple Of Doom = :down:

Why does everyone hate Temple of Doom so much?? In my opinion it has the best dialogue because it's wittier. And because it's darker and doesn't involve Nazis.
 
the tourist said:


Why does everyone hate Temple of Doom so much?? In my opinion it has the best dialogue because it's wittier. And because it's darker and doesn't involve Nazis.

Kate Capshaw, not having a clue what the Sankara or Shankara stones were, the random kid (who I liked, but gets less likable upon repeat viewings), and Kate Capshaw.

Unlike Raiders, which was like an awesome b-movie action serial, Temple of Doom seemed like something you'd see on Sci-Fi with higher production values, you know? Not to say it's completely terrible, but it is the weakest of the three for me as well.

The opening sequence at Club Obi-Wan is spectacular, but it literally is all downhill from there.

Plus, Kate Capshaw's character is so immensely detestable and disgusting. God, I prefer the Nazi chick who banged his father.

lazarus said:
Yes, it was CGI overload, but it was all done SO well. Compare the creatures that attack the heroes in the arena to ANYTHING in Lord of the Rings. The difference is staggering.

I do admit that I wish Lucas would have used real actors for the clones, at least in the closer shots. That said, they looked great too. I mean, how else would you even do something like the Coruscant scenes? You know how expensive that would be to construct all that stuff?

And I don't think I need to mention the job the animators did with Yoda, which blows Gollum out of the water.

You found the story convoluted, I found it intriguing, and it was fun for me to untangle the webs of conspiracy that were woven.

Darth Maul was a bit overrated, in my opinion. His fight scenes were cool, but to me the totally tense conversation between Obi-Wan & Jango in the Fetts' apartment is an example of creating a villain with some actual meat to him.

And I don't really understand the complaints about the direction, at least if you're talking in terms of composition and pacing. The action scenes were tight as usual, and there were some great iconic moments on Tattooine, as well as during the arena battle on Geonosis.

The problem is that everything is great in concept, but flawed in its delivery.

For every great Jango/Obi-Wan scene, you have an incredibly annoying Boba saying something stupid: "THERE HE IS, DAD! FI-AHHHH!"

Obi-Wan's mystery, while cool at first, seems to drag and isn't really solved. I loved Count Dooku's character a lot, and the supposed duality, but he's dispensed so quickly in Sith (almost like Lee's character in LOTR).

I love the CGI work, it's well-done, but the problem with having so much of it is that in the end, you have actors reacting to green screen. How hard is it to look believable and genuinely in peril when you're running on green mattes all day, reacting to characters who aren't there, or running to places you can't see? CGI, like how it's used in Coruscant, is absolutely beautiful and perfect. You have real sets with real actors (with the exception of Yoda), with CGI supplementing the physical world created around them. Back to the Factory Scene, you're not marveling at whether or not Anakin or Padme will escape, but just how good the CGI looks; to me, that's the flaw of the entire prequel series, style over substance.

Then again, you can disagree, which I hope you do, because it makes things interesting and you enjoy the series a whole like more than I do.
 
Last edited:
Well, the droid factory is like the most extraneous scene in the entire trilogy, maybe the saga. It was added as a reshoot (god only knows why), and should hardly be the basis for which to judge the whole film.

Also, I thought Obi-Wan did a great job interacting with Dex in Dexter's Diner, the Kaminoans ("That's...why I'm here!" FTW), and Yoda. Same with Liam Neeson, who actually sold Jar-Jar more than Ahmed Best did.

I mean, you can either focus on this shit, or the characters. The problem is that ILM is so far in front with this shit, you can't help but marvel at and admire the work, and yes, it can be distracting. But I guarantee you kids who don't give a shit about real vs. CGI ate it up, and future generations aren't going to give a shit either, and the same goes for comparing the analog OT to the prequels.
 
I'm hoping that someone I can look back on this and enjoy it like you do, but for now, I just can't.
 
Back
Top Bottom