Raiders of the Lost Ark: The Adaptation

jonerik writes "Ain't It Cool News has an article on one of the more fascinating fan film projects ever conceived: A shot-for-shot remake of "Raiders of the Lost Ark" filmed in Biloxi, Mississippi between 1982 and 1988 by Eric Zala, Jayson Lamb and Chris Strompolis. What's particularly amazing is that the trio began filming the project when they were twelve and finished six years later when they were eighteen. Now, fifteen years after the project was completed, word of the film's existence has gotten out and audiences who have seen it have reportedly been stunned by the trio's ingenuity, with none other than "RotLA" director Steven Spielberg giving Zala, Lamb, and Strompolis a big thumbs-up. The complete film isn't available online, but a trailer that gives a bit of the feel of the finished project can be viewed. The Austin Chronicle also has a story on the project."

Comments

talk about dedicated fans

[curtlewis]

that's alot of work just to duplicate your favorite film and it's not like they'll make anything from the effort other than the satisfaction of having done it.

But then, back in my teens in the mainframe and paper tape days, I wrote my own version of the ever popular Star Trek game. I didn't need to, I could play the original all I wanted. Even the source code was available. But I thought I could do the same job in a more easily understood manner. So I coded up a virtually identical version. It was much less code and alot easier to read, although the original was a little faster.

So I guess remaking something you like just because you can must be some kind of teen geek ritual.

Re:talk about dedicated fans

[isomeme]

Back in Ye Olde Days, this was a standard part of being an apprentice artisan. Before you got set loose to create new designs, you had to practice recreating old ones until you could do it perfectly. I think there's a lot to be said for this system, and it's rather cool that a certain kind of geek imposes it on him- or herself as if by instinct.

Re:talk about dedicated fans

[KrispyKringle]

I don't know; I think it really depends on the art or skill. For example, repainting something from the Old Masters means that, at the very least, you will master the physical techniques if not the creative or visual rendering aspects. Recoding a video game--when you have the source--until you can do it perfectly probably amounts to memorizing the code. Being able to understand the code, and, more importantly, being able to design code to fulfill unexpected needs, is far more important.

What really strikes me about this is that in a shot-for-shot remake, with, it looks, even the same camera angles, you are doing what amounts to copying the strokes in an Old Master's painting. Stroke-for-stroke, or shot-for-shot, allows no individual expression in depicting the scene; at the very most the actor learned a little while trying to do an exact copy of Harrison Ford's acting style.

Acting and cinimetography (granted, not that demonstrated in, say, Armageddon) are individual expressions of an artistic creativity. Copying the work of someone else requires skill, but not the same sort.

That said, I think these guys just did it because they were young fanboys. Nothing wrong with that. But I wouldn't call it high art, either.

legality

[ianmalcm]

Wheres the MPAA? Now that this fan film is known, gaining mass popularity, and may become mildly successful, will there be legal ramifications for copyright infringement?

Shot for Shot remake, certainly the Writers guild will have something to say.

A brilliant piece of work though. Puts Hardware Wars to shame.

Re:legality

[MisterMook]

Since when did the creators of a work have ultimate say so on the legality of a work once a corporate lawyer got involved? I'd say that Spielberg might give them all ice cream, but if the lawyers sniff trademark infringement they'll act faster that you can say crack o'the whip to send someone to seize all the copies. It isn't right and it isn't the way it should be, but it stands a pretty good chance of being the way things lay down.

Re:How about a DVD?

[aussersterne]

Thumb your nose at the MPAA and get what you want at the same time... I bought both series on DVD on eBay years ago. They're Hong kong "bootlegs" but are basically re-encoded versions from other recordings (i.e. widescreen laserdisc) mastered to region 0 DVD. The Star Wars DVDs in particular are very, very nice indeed and most everyone who sees them asks how I managed to get an advance copy of the "real" Star Wars DVDs.

Of course, if the "real" versions ever come out, I'll get them as well, but in the meantime, everyone's always turning up asking to watch my copies.

Also picked up Barton Fink and a couple of other unreleased-on-DVD films this way...

Ingenious?

[Sancho]

Am I the only one who thinks that a shot-by-shot remake of a movie is far from ingenious? Hell, when Gus Van Sant did it with Psycho, he was criticized for making it too identical. It's cool that they did it, and were able to manage it on what we must assume is a fairly small budget, but I think the hype over this thing is getting way out of hand.

Re:Ingenious?

[Anonymous Coward]

I think more than anything else, people are cheering it on because of the ingenuity displayed by these kids in filming this movie. Low budget movies like that are far more impressive than stale Hollywood remakes precisely because they are low budget - people have to improvise. Surely you would not see the remake for the plot or anything new - it's a remake, you've seen it before. It's just something that makes me step back and marvel at what can be accomplished if you are dedicated enough.

Re:Ingenious?

[Greg@UF]

When you read the article, Speilberg praises the boys' "vast amounts of imagination and originality".

That's good enough for me.

Besides, these kids were *kids* - not Gus Wossname with millions of bucks and a full production crew.
Kudos to the kids !

others were supressed, nice to see this one live

[dirvish]

This is a prime example of a copy of a previous work as a beautiful thing. Immitation really is the greatest form of flattery. It is terrible that works like this are normally supressed by copyright laws that don't serve the populance. The point of laws is to serve the populance. Clearly supression of creative expression serves no one. It is encouraging to see that Spielberg gave them a thumbs up on this project, but I don't doubt he would sue the pants off of them it he thought their project would harm his extensive bank roll. And who can really blame him if he did, he would just be taking advantage of the ludicrous law of the land. Who knows how many other cool projects like this have/will never seen/see the light of day as a result of corporate america's tight grip on the world.

Re:Copyright Violation!

[dirvish]

true enough. Spieldberg gave them the thumbs up, but who owns the rights to the movie they copied?

Fantastic Job

[Soulslayer]

I saw this last Saturday. One of the most entertaining movie going experiences I ever had.

These guys did every sequence in the movie save one. After some frightening messing around with explosives they opted not to attempt the flying wing sequence despite having access to an aircraft and the part of the bald mechanic already cast.

Every other scene is there though and done with impressive skill given their ages and the era in which they made it.

This I would enjoy seeing

[zakezuke]

When we go and pay our $7.00 for slightly less then 2hrs of entertainment, less we forget the fact that the fact that amature fan spinoffs done by essentually students can provide entertainment. While they can't nessicarly match the production quality of hollywood's almost endless budget, there is alot more to a media then it's production value, content is a factor too.

Starship Exeter [www.starshipexeter.com] is one example of fan based work. Based on classic star trek, their one release actually has a somewhat decent story as well as capturing that late 60's sci-fi theme while by todays standards is considered most cheezy. If you can get over the wind in the boom low quality film and shacky camera man, it's a worth see.

Now, i'm not nessicarly going to say that this is going to be any good... but it should prove to be entertaining at the very least. More so then alot of things targeted tward the typcial 12 year old. I intend to watch it, if for nothing else but to use as an example, "Look at what these 12 year olds did... hollywood you have no excuse".

Anyone have it?

[Beowulfto]

I live in middle of nowhere and will never get to see a screening, so if anyone has a copy, please get a torrent version out there for me.

Some friends of mine did a similar project. It wasn't a shot for shot re-make, but an original story called Indiana Jed. Was a lot of fun for high-school students to make, and sure beats the heck out of playing computer games for hours on end. Take a look at Indiana Jed

I think this proves one of my beliefs

[Knife_Edge]

That you can accomplish anything you want if you devote an average of fifteen minutes a day to it. That might take a while for bigger undertakings (do you suppose these guys averaged 15 minutes a day working on this for six years? I bet it might even be a little less than that). But fifteen minutes a day is such a small commitment that if you want to accomplish anything at all faster, just devote an hour a day to it over a period of time.

The only trick is knowing what you consider worth making an extended effort for. That takes vision. All the implementation takes is dedication.

Was at the first premiere.

[dafragsta]

It was insane. People wrapped around the Alamo two wide. The adaptation is very true to the film while still being very creative. I mean, how would you have done this stuff when you were twelve? I wish I had the ability to finish things I start like these guys. The Q&A's should've been filmed for the DVD special features. It was almost as entertaining listening to these guys describe how the risked life and limb and broke the law numerous times. Tbey basically played with guns, blew things up, got plaster molds stuck on their heads, (NOT dental plaster either) and lots of other stupid stuff kids do.

Four words in closing. The fire is real.

Parody/copyright shenannigans

[silmarildur]

There are obviously many parodies and knockoffs that have been released as retail products, such as spaceballs, and a large majority of Weird Al Yankovicz's songs. Does anyone know about how copyright law applies to these situations? Does one have to first license the material, then make whatever they want, or do they have to license it and get a final product approved, or, can they just do whatever they want and pass it off as a parody? If the latter was true, it would be interesting to see some sort of Hong Kong Starr Worrs or something with the exact same movie, word for word, but with actors in goofy costumes. I dunno, im kinda losing focus here, but i would be interested to hear details about this if available. Later.

AMON TOBIN

[humuhumunukunukuapu']

the background music to the trailer is Amon Tobin... They may be geeks, they may love this movie too much...but they at the least have GREAT taste in music... god i wish the rain would stop -me

Re:I hope someone posts it on Kazaa

[zakezuke]

Ummmm

George Lucus ISN'T Stephen Spielberg. Lucus is to Media what Sco is to linux. For those who can't remember, Lucusfilm sued Battlestar Galactica because of multi-points of similuarity between it and Star Wars.

But even George Lucus has a sence of humor, according to this site [http://www.nitcentral.com/askchief/ac980522.htm]
"I remember the guy who made a Star Wars parody, Hardware Wars, got a letter from Lucas' lawyers warning him about copyright infringement, and he sent them a letter saying, "your boss liked it", and he included a copy of a letter from George Lucas saying how much he liked the parody. He never heard from the lawyers again."

So, strictly speaking if the director of the orgin work likes it, it really helps.
[why sue Galactica and not hardware wars, this is beyond me, oh perhaps because lucus wanted the money, and new hardware wars made no money]

While you are correct, the artical seemed to emply that Mr. Spielberg liked the derived work planed to see it on opening night.

However, I don't know other copyright holders that may have an interest in this work.

According to [http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/079 2157648/qid=1054714539/sr=8-2/ref=sr_8_2/102-48059 13-1769756?v=glance&s=video&n=507846#product-detai ls]

Raiders of the Lost Arc is chapter 24 in the complete adventures of Indiana Jones. So there might be an author that still holds a copyright somewhere, but who knows.

I would suspect that that Spielberg would be willing to atleast co-operate with the kids if they decided to release this either on P2P systems, TV, or video, at least give them a whos who to contact.

I am not a Raders of the Lost Arc geek... perhaps someone who knows more about the specifics can shed some light on the details.