Didn't Robert Zemeckis ever come to mind!?!?(NM)

[ Reply ] [ The Indyfan Forum ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Short Round from 1Cust239.tnt8.fort-lauderdale.fl.da.uu.net on November 11, 1999 at 05:32:02:

In Reply to: Re: Kasdan is the man, and so is Lucas posted by Indiana Joe on November 11, 1999 at 00:46:53:

: : Agreed. The success of his films have created the perception of Lucas as a creative genius - and while the man deserves some credit, he certainly is not the big guy on campus that he thinks he is - I mean, come on - putting Trenches of Hell on the same level as Saving Private Ryan?!?!?!

: : : I think we give Lucas too much credit for Indy. He was not as involved with the creation of this character as he was with the "Star Wars" mythology. I think Lucas only created the bare bones skeleton of Indiana Jones and Spielberg, Ford and screenwriter Lawrence Kasdan were responsible for turning him into a flesh and blood hero.

: Many hands had nearly equal shares in the making of Indy, to be sure, but it was still Lucas, after all, who set the (big stone ;-) ball rolling. He came up with the initial idea, and the character is his - not Spielberg’s, not someone else’s.

: : : In an article on the making of "Raiders" Kasdan told how it was he who named every character in "Raiders" with the exception of Indy. Lucas or Spielberg said it was Kasdan who fleshed out the story for "Raiders" and few could argue that it is one of the best adventure scripts ever written. (If I can find that article I'll post it)

: Kasdan is indeed a highly gifted writer, and his contributions surely made “Raiders of the Lost Ark” better. I certainly agree with all the praise heaped upon him here, and will say that I’d love to see him get a crack at the fourth film (certainly more than Huyck, Katz, or Boam). I would like to add, though, that Philip Kaufman also made some pretty darn significant contributions (it was his idea to make the Ark of the Covenant the object of the chase, I believe), and I’d love to see him work on the film as well, if another collaboration could give us anything like “Raiders”.

: : : With films being such a collaborative medium, the success of Indy can't be attributed to Lucas alone.

: Well, yes and no - without Lucas, there would be no Indy, period, after all, so however good everyone else’s contributions, they wouldn’t have gotten to make them without him.

: : : Lucas can, however, be held responsible for the lackluster "Young Indiana Jones Chronicles." It was his decision to turn it into educational TV and have our intrepid adventurer interact with every person of any historical significance whatsoever during the early 1900's. His decision to tone down the action in favor of trying to teach history.

: Lucas certainly can be held responsible for “The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles”, but that’s to his credit. The series was a worthwhile and admirable venture - even if one finds it boring, or untrue to the formula of the films, it has lofty ambitions, and at least some of its merits are uncontestable. Incidentally, I don’t think he tried “to turn it into educational TV and... tone down the action in favor of trying to teach history”; as I understand it, “Young Indy” came to be exactly the other way around. From all I’ve read of the show’s beginnings, it started out as a strictly educational historical documentary project that might not involve Indy at all, and was to be a software multimedia project, not a TV series. Apparently, Lucas decided to insert Indy (the way we know him) as a sort of narrative figure into the project, to help make it more interesting for schoolkids, since Indy could briefly discuss various historical topics. As the idea progressed, Indy gravitated more and more to the center of the project, and his adventures became more intertwined with the historical material, until it was a filmic series about him.

: : : Just like with "Star Wars" I'm afraid that Lucas has lost touch with the true meaning of these two movie series and I think the farther he stays away from Indy IV, the better it will be for all of us.

: Well, the “true meaning” of these two movie series is for Lucas to determine, or to alter if he chooses - and no, I’m not saying that will necessarily make for a better film, or one that we’ll like more, but it’s his right to take his creation wherever he sees fit. My main concern with Lucas’s involvement is that it wouldn’t be enough - I feel he turned over too much responsibility for Indy to Jeffrey Boam on “Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade”, and while the film is a fine one indeed (on the whole, a better film than “Temple of Doom”, I’ll agree), I’m afraid I don’t quiiiiite like Indy himself in it as much as I do in the other two.

: Personally, I wouldn’t mind seeing Lucas make the film without Spielberg, as I think Spielberg might direct another film in this series in a more routine, by-the-numbers echo of his past style, without investing the kind of creativity he put into the first ones - not that he wouldn’t care, mind you, but that after doing some of the movies he’s done in the years since “Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade”, I wonder if he would really try to make the same kind of investment he did in those other films - and if so, would he try to justify it by taking Indy in some other direction, farther from “our” Indy than Lucas has done, and if so, would it be a good way to go? I’m sure, though, that Lucas simply wouldn’t make another Indy feature film without Spielberg directing.

: Just MHO, of course, and I certainly don’t pretend to know everything...

: - IJ





Follow Ups:



Post a Followup:

Name:    
E-Mail:  
Subject: 
Comments:

Optional:

Link URL:   
Link Title: 
Image URL:  


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ The Indyfan Forum ] [ FAQ ]