Indiana Jones

[RealBronco]

I am not sure if you have seen the Criterion version of The Hidden Fortress.

The first thing to note about that DVD is an interview with Lucas who specifically states in his own words, that Star Wars was taken directly from Hidden Fortress.

The second thing to notice watching The Hidden Fortress itself how many scenes are actually identical, or close to identical to scenes in Star Wars.

IE: The opening scene of both movies involve the same "droid/side kick" characters walking through a desert. One character complaining to the other.

that is one of the many examples.

I understand the mythology aspect of story telling. I also understand that most of our modern tales are based on ancient tales. I was not arguing that point.

I just think people give Lucas more credit than he deserves for Star Wars (the film itself.)

I contend that if it was not for Kurisawa's film there would not be a Star Wars series as we know it for people to love today.

I'm not knocking Star Wars. I am a fan of episodes 4,5,6. I just think that it is worth mentioning, and knowing where the movie stems from.

Here I will say again that if Lucas says he blatently took images, scenes and characters from one movie, renamed them and put them in his own world, then i don't think we should be arguing that fact.

Further, if you wanted to be really technical, as MasterShake has chosen to be, then we owe every one of our favorite heroic tales to ancient mythology. And that isn't even close to being wrong...in fact the majority of film today probably could be traced back to those origination stories.

every story has already been told...it's only a matter of how you choose to retell it that will determine whether you get seats in the theatre or people reading your book. that's all it really boils down to.

i'm not sure if i've made myself clear..i tend to get confusing, but basically you can't get caught up in saying that everyone steals from everyone, and being general about it...because that's just inevitable. but if you have a guy that says: "yeah, basically i liked that movie so much that i wanted to write my own version of it...and essentially keep it the same way, we'll even have to guys walk through the desert and have one complain the whole time, only mine will be two robots and my setting will be space instead of Asia (or whatever).

if moviegoers really cared or knew that we've been watching The Odyssy over and over and over and over again for centuries, then there never would have been plays written by Shakespeare, and Hollywood wouldn't be doing so hot.....but that's if moviegoers really cared and obviously Hollywood has realized the majority public of moviegoers doesn't care about watching the same movie again and again and again.


huh?

[MasterShake]

I don't want to sound like a Lucas apologist or anything. I enjoy the Star Wars movies for what they are, and I would NEVER defend Lucas as a director or screenplay writer. He is, however, a good storyteller. He always said that Star Wars was more of a visual movie than anything, and if it was up to him they would be silent movies driven by musical scores (which would be fine given some of the dialogue he comes up with ). My response to Poindexter was merely pointing out that Lucas is not trying to pull the wool over our eyes and pretend that he isn't influenced by Kurasawa, so if that was his reasoning for calling him a hack than it was a bit off the mark IMO. As I stated earlier, there's plenty of reasons to call Lucas a hack (bad directing, questionable dialogue, overuse of special effects, etc.) but I think that his storytelling is not one of them.

Oh, and Devil Spawn the original script for the new Indy was "Indiana Jones and the Saucer Men From Mars". Theres even an inside joke line about it in the movie!

And Real Bronco, I guess in a roundabout way we agree about Lucas being a good storyteller, but a horrible director. You sound well versed on Joseph Campbell (cracks knuckles) so I won't need to post the 57 page paper I wrote on him in regards to filmmaking for my Directed Film Studies class. And with that, I bid you good day sirs!

Who'd a thunk an Indiana Jones thread would turn into a summit on mythological influences on modern cinema?

[Max Power]

I didn't like it either. It started off promising with the warehouse scene at the beginning, but it was all downhill from there. I thought it was way too formulaic and predictable how the kid turned out to be Indy's son also. Great special effects, weak dialogue, uninteresting plot.

[MasterShake]

I didn't like it either. It started off promising with the warehouse scene at the beginning, but it was all downhill from there. I thought it was way too formulaic and predictable how the kid turned out to be Indy's son also. Great special effects, weak dialogue, uninteresting plot.

My friend brought up an interesting point about how if any of the other Indy sequels were released today (Doom, Crusade) that they would be given the same negative reviews with people. I can agree with that, especially Temple of Doom. The raft scene where they fall safely to the mountain from a crashing plane is almost as bad as the atomic bomb fridge scene. I also agree that the first 2/3 were much better than the last part, but I still liked the movie enough. I still HATE that monkey scene in the new one though. This summer is still turning out better than last though, and we still have Hulk, Dark Knight, Get Smart, and a lot of other promising movies to go!

[slick7]

I found a place that's showing it in English with Spanish subtitles. YAY!!! I plan on seeing it this week sometime.

[MasterShake]

I found a place that's showing it in English with Spanish subtitles. YAY!!! I plan on seeing it this week sometime.

Cool! Be sure to post a review. People seem to love it or hate it!

[Elway]

I enjoyed the movie. I went in knowing it would be an Indiana Jones movie, and to expect certain flaws and that there would be a suspension of belief needed. Par tof going was that you expect to see these things in an Indy type of movie.

It was good to see Indy and Marion, would have liked to see Sallah.

I thought the fridge scene was a lit extravagent and really not needed, other than for them to show a big explosion.

I went in not expecting great art and I got out what I expected, an older Indiana Jones. I liked how they gave a slight nod to the prior movies in several spots. To me it was a popcorn flick like they intended.

[RealBronco]

i just don't get why they felt the need to CG scenes that really didn't need them.

also, why can't Hollywood come up with an original, stunning, worthwhile alien?

i guess it's Spielberg who has the stereotypical mindset on aliens.

ugh. i dunno...it was alright...but i just kept wondering why they even made a 4th one...

my favorite part was the split second of the shot of the Arc of the Covenant.

Also:

MS, I may be interested in reading that essay of yours. Perhaps I'll hit you up.

[MasterShake]

i just don't get why they felt the need to CG scenes that really didn't need them.

also, why can't Hollywood come up with an original, stunning, worthwhile alien?

i guess it's Spielberg who has the stereotypical mindset on aliens.

ugh. i dunno...it was alright...but i just kept wondering why they even made a 4th one...

my favorite part was the split second of the shot of the Arc of the Covenant.

Also:

MS, I may be interested in reading that essay of yours. Perhaps I'll hit you up.

I agree. CG is a powerful tool, but it can get a little ridiculous. For example in Indy I could have done without the CG gophers at the beginning, but I really did enjoy the ant scene which was really well done. Actually, I think I read somewhere that ILM only did about 200 CG shots for this movie (including digital sets), and a lot of it was still miniatures and practical effects. Actually I just googled a good article here:

I

’ve come to a funny realization: My constant complaints against CGI are somewhat akin to complaints against blogging. Yet, while I admit that my writing isn’t quite the same as print journalism and film criticism of the past, I also don’t cost a ridiculous amount of money relative to the cost of modern special effects.

Anyway, I don’t need to defend or justify my existence as compared to the way things used to be, yet it’s certainly necessary for the people at ILM to defend their use of CG rather than old-fashioned matte paintings and models for Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. Especially considering how many reviews, both positive and negative, harp on the fact that Indy’s world doesn’t look like it used to.

So, perhaps in anticipation of all the nostalgic moviegoers who leave the theater this weekend wondering why all the locations and creatures looked so bad, the Associated Press has a story on the making of the latest Indy installment, complete with plenty of prematurely defensive quotes from visual effects supervisor Pablo Helman:


The first three Indy films were gritty, sweaty and tactile affairs, largely because everything onscreen physically existed somewhere. Not so with “Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull” — though that was almost the case.

When first approaching the latest “Indy,” director Steven Spielberg considered dusting off his old-school approach.

“He thought maybe we should just go back to the way we did things before, like matte paintings on glass and things like that,” said visual effects supervisor Pablo Helman. “We entertained that idea for a little bit, but we realized we could serve the story better by using our digital tools.”

Or is it really to serve the spectacle? Apparently ILM constructed 450 effects shots for the film, which is just 150 shy of Transformers, a movie about transforming robots. Still, Helman claims all the CG in Kingdom of the Crystal Skull are “completely reality based.”

That is if your reality includes a blooming atomic mushroom cloud, seemingly endless Area 51 warehouse, vicious monkey army, the City of Gold, thousands of man-eating ants and sundry otherworldly things. All those locales and critters were created by Helman and his ILM team for “Crystal Skull,” making up the film’s 450 effects shots … more than you might expect from a flesh-and-blood character from the 1950s.

That’s exactly what I would have said had the AP writer not beat me to it. And in response, I could have probably also written Helman’s seemingly formulaic defense of his work:

“The only reason why they weren’t using computer-generated effects back then is because they weren’t invented yet, but they were using the most up-to-date technology at the time,” said Helman, who finished his work on “Crystal Skull” in mid-April. “So it only follows that we would do the same thing now.”

So, on that note, I steer you in the nostalgic direction of the video above showing us the making of Raiders of the Lost Ark (continued here and here and here).

http://blog.spout.com/2008/05/23/indiana-jones-and-the-defense-of-450-cg-effects-shots/

[Southstander]

I saw it today, and I thought is was as good as the other 3.

[maruske845]

I thought it was worth watching.

not the best or the worst

[slick7]

I went in with low expectations but I enjoyed it. The ending left a little to be desired. "Where'd they go?"
"The space between space" ?????????

I agree with Elway, it was nice to see Marion, and I thought Shia did a good job. It was a good 2 hour escape no more no less. Not a movie I'd see twice or buy on dvd.

One good thing about seeing a flick here is ticket prices. 45 pesos. Roughly $4.50.

I'm really looking forward to The Dark Knight now.

[Ohio Broncos]

I know I'm late to the party, but I had to throw in my two cents.

I absolutely hated it. It seemed to lack the pace and the energy of the previous three Indy films. Harrison Ford seemed to be off his game somehow. I don't know how to explain it, but it seemed like Ford forgot how to act like Indy.

And the plot? Why is the plot centered around aliens? Ridiculous. The previous three were centered around religion (or in the case of ToD, a cult). The whole alien angle just skewed too far away from what made the previous three movies classics.

Thanks a lot, George Lucas. You took a dump on another one of my favorite movie franchises.

[L.M.]

There will be a FIFTH Indiana Jones film in 2020 starring Harrison Ford (currently 75), directed by Spielberg, and with creator George Lucas in the background as executive producer. Disney owns all the rights now, including distribution wrested away from Paramount so of course they're going to milk this popular old cash cow for all its worth!

From Wiki:

The introduction of Mutt Williams (Shia LaBeouf) in Kingdom of the Crystal Skull led to speculation that LaBeouf will take over the franchise from Ford.[23] In an interview with IGN, "Spielberg indicated that LaBeouf has to make multiple Transformers movies before he can move over and take on the fedora and bullwhip of Indiana Jones."[24] The actor himself said, "Am I into it? Who wouldn't be? I don't think that's reality. It's a fun rumor."[25] Ford said he would return for a fifth film if it does not take another twenty years to develop,[26] while Spielberg responded it would happen "only if you [the audience] want more".[27] In an interview with Time, when asked about passing the fedora to LaBeouf in the next film, Ford said, "What are you talking about? It's mine. I would love to do another Indiana Jones movie. George Lucas is working on an idea now. Shia can get his own hat. I earned that hat."[28]

At the 2008 Cannes Film Festival, Lucas made a further suggestion that there would be a fifth film, revealing an idea "to make Shia LaBeouf the lead character next time and have Harrison Ford come back like Sean Connery did in the last movie." At the time Last Crusade was filmed, Connery was only 58 years old. Lucas also said that age need not be a factor, as Ford was "65 and did everything in this movie. The old chemistry is there, and it's not like he's an old man. He's incredibly agile; he looks even better than he did 20 years ago, if you ask me."[29] In August 2008, Lucas was researching potential plot devices, and stated Spielberg was open to the idea of the fifth film.[30] He also changed his mind about continuing the series with a spin-off, joking "Indiana Jones is Indiana Jones. Harrison Ford is Indiana Jones. If it was Mutt Williams it would be Mutt Williams and the Search for Elvis or something."[31] Two months later, Ford stated that he would not return if the fifth film was an animated film like The Clone Wars, because "I'd hate to see it reduced in any way from the movies that we have done and the way we have done them." He also called Lucas' concept for the fifth film "crazy but great".[32]

When asked how being married to Marion Ravenwood and having a son would affect the character in a fifth film, Ford only replied: "He's seen something. Remember those are the only witnesses to what he's seen. That's kind of interesting."[33] In January 2010, Ford said, "I think it would be interesting to advance the understanding of the character, as we always have had that ambition throughout the series. I think it would be interesting to deepen the relationship between he and his son and play on that relationship... It's full of opportunity. The series is full of opportunity."[34]

The possibility of Indiana Jones 5 continued to be discussed through 2009 and 2010. Reports speculated in June 2009 that the next installment would start filming in 2011 with a plot involving the Bermuda Triangle,[35] although these rumors were later described as "completely false" by Frank Marshall on his Twitter page.[36] Speaking to BBC journalist Lizo Mzimba in June 2009, LaBeouf confirmed that "Steven [Spielberg] just said that he cracked the story on it [the fifth film], I think they're gearing that up."[37] Lucas stated he was working on the film as of December 2009.[38] In November 2010, Ford said that he and Spielberg were waiting for Lucas to present an idea to them.[39] In March 2011, the Deadbolt website interviewed Karen Allen and asked her about the fifth film's status. "What I know is that there's a story that they like", said Allen, "which is a huge step forward. I heard this about six months ago, that they have a story that they like and they're working on it."[40] In July 2012, Frank Marshall indicated that the film was unlikely to be announced in the near future, saying: "I don't know if it's definitely not happening, but it's not up and running... It's not on until there is a writer on the project. There is no writer on Indy."[41]

In October 2012, The Walt Disney Company acquired Lucasfilm, thereby granting Disney ownership rights to the Indiana Jones intellectual property.[42][43] However, Paramount Pictures continued to own distribution rights for the film series.[44][45] On December 6, 2013, Walt Disney Studios purchased the remaining distribution and marketing rights to future Indiana Jones films, while Paramount will retain the distribution rights to the first four films, and will receive "financial participation" from any additional films.[46][47][48] Although a new film installment was not announced with the deal, Disney CEO Bob Iger has expressed an interest in monetizing the franchise across Disney's various company divisions.[49] Studio chairman Alan Horn has said that a fifth Indiana Jones film would not be ready for at least two to three years.[50]

In a May 2015 interview with Vanity Fair, Kathleen Kennedy confirmed plans for a fifth film, stating another film "will one day be made inside this company. When it will happen, I'm not quite sure. We haven't started working on a script yet, but we are talking about it."[51] In October 2015, Spielberg told Yahoo! Movies Ford will likely reprise his role in the fifth Indiana Jones film.[52]

On March 15, 2016, Walt Disney Studios announced that the fifth film would be released on July 19, 2019, with Ford reprising his role, Spielberg directing, Koepp writing and Kennedy and Marshall acting as producers. George Lucas was initially not going to be involved with the film.[53][54] However, during a press event for Disney's The BFG, Spielberg confirmed that Lucas will be returning as executive producer, stating "I would never make an Indiana Jones film without George Lucas. That'd be insane."[55] Marshall has stated that the film would be a continuation of the events following Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.[56] On June 9, 2016, Spielberg confirmed that John Williams will be returning to compose the score.[57] On April 25, 2017, the official Star Wars website updated the film's release date to July 10, 2020.[2] On September 4, 2017, Koepp revealed that the Mutt Williams character played by Shia LaBeouf will not return in the movie.[58]

Both Spielberg and Iger discussed the fifth film, with Spielberg stating that Indiana Jones would not be killed off. However, Iger said the future of the franchise with Ford is unknown, but that the fifth film "won’t be just a one-off.”[59]

On January 19, 2018, Deadline.com reported that Spielberg is eyeing the fifth Indiana Jones film as his next project following the release of Ready Player One, which is due for release in March 2018.[60] According to Variety, the film will begin principal photography at the start of 2019.[61] On March 19, 2018, it was confirmed by Spielberg that filming would begin in April 2019 in the United Kingdom.[62]During an April 2018 interview with The Sun, Spielberg said “This will be Harrison Ford’s last Indiana Jones movie, I am pretty sure, but [the franchise] will certainly continue after that." Spielberg was asked about the future after Ford, if a female could possibly take over the lead role. "We’d have to change the name from Jones to Joan. And there would be nothing wrong with that” Spielberg said.[63]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiana_Jones_(franchise)#Future