Lucas Researching Concept For New Indiana Jones Film
Cycon writes "According to George Lucas, 'The franchise really depends on me coming up with a good idea. And that series is very research-intensive. So we're doing research now to see if we can't come up with another object for him to chase ... hopefully we'll come up with something.' Lucas 'scoffed at the possibility of passing the famed fedora from Ford to Shia LaBeouf,' instead stating, 'if [Harrison Ford] wasn't in it, you'd have to call it "Mutt Williams and the search for Elvis."'"
Lucas whining about "research" is laughable.
Granted, Raiders of the Lost Ark had some interesting stories in it, and did at least deal with some research, but I would say the amount of true "research" in Indiana Jones films has been dropping geometrically.
Indeed, The Last Crusade, other then repeating the Romantic-era story about the grail that so many people already knew, gave no new information and instead focused on the relationship between Indy and his father.
And Crystal Skull -- from what people have told me about it is even worse. Dealing with a completely fictional back story that doesn't represent anything presently known about the crystal skulls, nor anything that is written about widely in popular paranormal literature.
No one is saying that Indiana Jones isn't a fabulous example of those serial movies from the 40s and 50s, but I am arguing that the amount of research is mind-numbingly small.
And who here thinks that this statement:
"The franchise really depends on me"
Isn't just a bit egotistical... *cough*Phantom Menace*cough*
Picture that movie in 3-D! With an NC-17 rating...
The CB App. What's your 20?
If they want to keep Ford in it, then they're going to have to move the setting to a nursing home, which would segue nicely with the Elvis angle.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
Enough said
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiana_Jones_and_the_Fate_of_Atlantis
It seems to me that Lucas' first movie, THX 1138 can be seen as an allegory for his career. The "American Zoetrope" production house he formed with Francis Ford Coppola back in the revolutionary days of the late '60s in San Francisco was all about the independent thinker escaping from the machine of control and exploitation which was the "old boys'" movie studio system at the time.
***SPOILER ALERT***
At the end of the movie, when he has finally escaped and is free of the system (as Lucas is now free and able to produce any movie he chooses from conception through to finished product) the protagonist finds him system alone, in the middle of a barren wasteland. All credit to Lucas for escaping the machine, but it sees his imagination is just as empty these days.
Your Brain + EEG + LEGO Robots = Brainstorms
To anyone who's played Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis, why don't/didn't they make that into a movie? Thought the story line was great and would have made a watchable movie.
711 million worldwide box office.
Harrison Ford looked pretty good in the current film, I think they were just let down by the script and the film still did well.
The main problem for any sequel with the current film is that it gave indy his happy ending, theres nowhere to go with the character....
What about the obvious "Indiana Jones and the Hunt for Duke Nukem Forever"?
I wanted "Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis: The movie" :(
***SPOILER ALERT***
At the end of the movie, when he has finally escaped and is free of the system (as Lucas is now free and able to produce any movie he chooses from conception through to finished product) the protagonist finds him system alone, in the middle of a barren wasteland. All credit to Lucas for escaping the machine, but it sees his imagination is just as empty these days.
Rather than comment on the film ending being a metaphor for Lucas' career and ability, I just wanted to remark that I always found it quite disconcerting that, for once, the film had the bleak ending and the _book_ (Ben Bova's novelization of Lucas' screenplay) had the happily-ever-after. Was never sure which one I preferred.
Karma: Excellent, but still won't get you laid.
I actually set my expectations low, cranked my IQ down and set suspension of disbelief to high. After all it's Indy Jones, you're not supposed to be thinking too much.
I don't mean this as an attack on you, but I *hate* when people say that about movies. "Hey, it's just a fun movie. Turn your brain off and have fun!" No. I'm all for suspension of disbelief, but only when a movie earns it. A good movie (even if it's just a fun movie) sucks you in and makes you to suspend your disbelief. If you have to put effort into suspending your disbelief, then the movie isn't doing its job. If you have to fight with yourself to ignore the stupidity, then it's just a bad movie.
Now believe me, I don't nit-pick. I loved the first Matrix movie, the first Indiana Jones. The original Star Wars trilogy, Pirates of the Caribbean, Spiderman, the recent Batman movies and old Superman movies (1&2). I could go on and on, and all of these movies have their problems. There are things that are physically impossible, and plenty of unexplained plot-holes that you can catch if you're looking at them with a particularly critical eye.
BUT!!! If you watch them in a state of mind that's neutral, I think you'll probably find them to be enjoyable without trying (ok, the Superman movies haven't aged that well). But beyond the enjoyability factor, each of them also has a certain degree of depth and quality. It's clear that they were crafted by some people will skill and talent, and there's some mythological value. They're commenting on our world, our times, our society. They're revealing things about what we think about heroism and life. They wouldn't be enjoyable if they weren't successfully pushing some serious psychological buttons.
So when people think "these sorts of movies are fun, just turn off your brain", I think it's missing the point, and it's being overly-dismissive of the value of *good* fantasy/adventure stories. You shouldn't have to turn off your brain. The movie should convince you to forgive a couple flaws because, ignoring those flaws, it's a damn good piece of work.
So back to the topic at hand: Lucas is currently a crappy film-maker. It seems like he didn't used to be, but he is now. The latest Indiana Jones doesn't earn the suspension of disbelief necessary to forgive its faults. Even before the fridge gets nuked, there's the magnetic crap, the overly-convenient rocket-train, and a nuclear test site that's overly-accessible without warning signs. Not a damned thing in the movie made sense, the characters weren't believable, and the story didn't fit into the Indiana Jones universe.
I think part of the problem is the Lucas has bought into the idea that it's good to make movies where you "turn your brain off and have fun." So rather than making anything good, he makes movies filled with precocious children, lame actions scenes, and characters literally yelling, "Wooohooo!" It's all retarded, and we should just stop giving the man the benefit of the doubt.
I think this is as good a case as any to support short copyright terms. Star Wars should have become public domain 10 years ago, and filmmakers with talent should be allowed to have a go at making a new Indiana Jones story.
And, like the insipid prequel-bashing that goes on here, much of the hate directed at crystal skull was widely undeserved. It had some flaws, but it was still a fun adventure flick.
Xenon, where's my money? -Borno