Let's Talk Indy For A Sec — Page 2

I think Lucas originally intended them to go to the Wookie homeworld ROTJ, but then decided big powerful Wookies took away the David vs. Goliath element in the final battle against the Empire, and so he cut them in half and butchered their name (Wookie - Wook-ie - iewook - ewok). Or is that some BS I was fed? Hard to tell, since most things in Star Wars lore are BS, especially the official stuff (LOL, and that is not even a bash against LFL or Lucas, it is just an undisputed fact).

Their has never been any proof that he scripted the wookie battle on the fourth moon of Utapau, or that The wookies were trained by Ben and Luke to attack the Death Star.

They may have been ideas but they were never written down.

I always thought the ewoks were put in the as a fairy tale motif Like Obi Wan Being in Star Wars, Yoda in empire Strikes Back etc.

We will never really know the truth of the matter but i am sure yoda and ben came from joseph campbell, and the ewoks from the brothers grimm and Bruno Bettleheim.

I have always thought the Ewoks as the Viet Cong and the Empire as the United States was always complete bs.  I mean the battle is turned only when they steal that at-st and use the empire's technology against them. There sticks and rocks do little to nothing.  Yeah, George has said it is about the Human Spirit and all and i get that but he may have fudged things a bit there.

http://starwarz.com/starkiller/scripts/thestarwars_rough_draft.htm

Ground battle with Wookiees and Wookiee pilots flying rebel ships in the 1974 rough draft screenplay. ;)

Didn't the Ewoks come about because Lucas had already established Wookies as intelligent beings, so they wouldn't work as a primative species anymore? That's the story I heard.

Wow.  Just wow.  Why did he let him go through with it?

^^^

Dude that's awesome thanks for sharing.

I refuse to watch the Crystal Skull dvd once was enough thanks (besides the movie doesn't exist in my mind) but now I'm interested in the dvd features. Specifically what is said above and the rest of the movies long development.

That, what I guess is a screen cap, is awesome. I can forsee that being photoshoped numerous times with a multitide of phrases added like "Lucas = Fail"

I'm over criticising Indy 4, I saw it, didn't like it, said what I had to say and moved on. But this sheds new light on things.

My hope on Indy 4 was that Steven would keep Lucas in check. When the movie turned out the way it did I laid blame on Spielberg because the movie seemed to me as lazy if not more as The Lost World and because I couldn't expect anything less from Lucas.

This is just further proof to me that Spielberg wasn't all that interested in making another Indy film and was simply trying to appease Lucas and possibly Harrison. And that's unforgivable, if his heart wasn't in it it shouldn't have been. To suggest the possibility of another director doing it is just as horrible.

I don't know maybe I'm wrong and it's just me, I do after all love Temple of Doom.

spielberg is being totally hypocritical...

tintins story line are just as way out there, and

unbelievable, even moreso, than any indiana jones

story...even 'kingdom of the crystal skulls'.. 

i love tintin also..

but guess what, all 3 of them are cg animated..

so its going to be a cg-fest ...

so, any Lucas haters, you might as well skip all those,

and same with indiana jones fans..

and same with 'lord of the ring fans', because peter

jackson is supposed to work on the second one..

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/6656635.stm

so speilberg, we'll be hitting our foreheads,

waiting to see you screw up tintin or not..

or maybe you should just keep shaking yours..

later

-1

CS said:

How's he being hypocritical?

 sorry, was still editting my post..

paraphrasing spielberg - wants to do more realistic, real plots, real stories, etc..

what he actually ends up doing - complete CG stories, that are completely unrealistic,

and not even close to being like 'indiana jones'..

complaining about the decisions made for those stories by Lucas, and now he's going

to completely screw up the Tin tin stories, which are completely unrealistic to begin

with..

if he wanted to do it right, he should have done real, live action movies, with real

people and do it on film..

instead he's releasing a cartoon cgi trilogy for kids..

hmmmmm.... where have i heard that criticism before?

later

-1

yeah great speilberg..

make a cg movie with a boy, and a 'talking' dog,

that's realism for you...

oh, and have them go to outer space while you're at it..

pot meet kettle..

hypocrite..

i'm glad Lucas kept Spielberg in check for Indy 4,

i can't even imagine what else he would have done to it..

later

-1

CS said:

"We want Tintin's adventures to have the reality of a live-action film, and yet Peter and I felt that shooting them in a traditional live-action format would simply not honour the distinctive look of the characters and world that Herge created."

 

 that has to be one of the weakest, non-sensical, excuses i have ever heard about making a movie in CG.. (and people complain about Lucas?) and not using real actors..

face it, in America, no one cares about tin tin, not even if they get a famous actor, because they

would never be able to find anyone (or maybe Shia Lebouf won't be doing anything, shudder)..

that would want a role like that.. ('talking' dog?????)

so what does he say? he wimps out, and says they'll go the cheap route and use CG..

total cop-out..

good job on losing your credibility spielberg..

later

-1

CS said:

So all CG shows are cheap routes? There have been some that are pretty good CG. 

We complain about Lucas because most of the stuff he's done since the mid 90's has been crap.

 

no, they are not, they might waste a ton of money (on Wall-e), and try to make it

look impressive, but it won't help..

 well spielberg hasn't done anything to impress me since working

on 'poltergiest' back in 1982:

movies he's directed since then...

===========================================================

1983 twilight zone the movie -   huh??? what was the point

1984 indiana jones and the temple of doom - one of the low points of his career, worse than '1941'

1985 color purple - horrible

1987 empire of the sun - boring

1989 always - boring

1989 indiana jones and the last crusade- another black mark, and a hugely subpar failure

1991 hook - failure, but was better than both indiana jones movies

1993 jurassic park - huge failure at adapting the book, good special effects though

1993 schindlers list - boring

1997 amistad - boring

1997 jurassic park lost world - another one of the worst sequels ever, but not as bad as temple of doom

1998 saving private ryan - average

2001 a i - average, but still a failure

2002 catch me if you can - boring

2002 minority report - a mess of a movie

2004 the terminal - boring

2005 munich - boring

2005 war of the worlds - another horrible mess of a sci-fi movie

=====================================

gee, doesn't seem likes done much better to me either in

directing all of those..

i'll leave off all the movies he's produced,

because that will make an even bigger

list of failures..

later

-1

CS said:

All a matter of opinion. Schindler, Empire, Last Crusade, Munich all great films to me.

 

well, your opionion about lucas is the same to me..

i liked all the prequels, and the clone wars,and the

last indiana jones film ... it's all opinion...

so i don't think he's been as bad as some make it out to be. 

 and he's been a lot more succesful than spielberg

has been...if you look at the success of their respective films.

 so you consider 4/18 movies in the last 2 decades is good?

(and like i mentioned, that's only the movies he's directed, he's produced

a ton of horrible movies also), that would make that percentage even lower..

you're right about him directing only 1 segment on 'twilight zone',

it still wasnt' any good...(i'm a huge fan of the original series).

as far as tv goes:

-----------------------

amazing stories - anything but that

and lets not forget 'seaquest DSV'

classics right?

later

-1

CS said:

Oh like: Back to the Future, An American Tail, Memoirs of a Geisha, Flags of our Fathers, Letters from Iwo Jima, Band of Brothers (tv Series), Balto, Tiny Toons, Animaniacs, and Young Sherlock Holmes, Poltergeist, and Men in Black.

All successes.

 

 your opinion again (although i liked tiny toons/animaniacs).. success in what?

movies he's produced, since you seem like you want to know..

============================================

Poltergeist 1982 - good

Gremlins 1984 - average

Back to the Future 1985 - very good

The Goonies 1985 - horrible
Young Sherlock Holmes 1985 - average

An American Tail 1986 - dumb
The Money Pit 1986 - just bad

*batteries not included 1987 - lame

Harry and the Hendersons 1987 - very lame

Innerspace 1987 - average
The Land Before Time 1988 - dumb

Who Framed Roger Rabbit 1988 -excellent

Back to the Future Part II 1989 -terrible

Dad 1989 - can't even remeber this one
Honey, I Shrunk the Kids 1989 -terrible
Arachnophobia 1990 - horrible b-movie
Back to the Future Part III 1990 - yet more bad sequels

Gremlins 2: The New Batch 1990 - still getting worse
Joe Versus the Volcano 1990 - terrible

A Wish for Wings That Work 1991 - can't remember

An American Tail: Fievel Goes West 1991 - flat out dumb

Cape Fear 1991 - boring
We're Back! A Dinosaur's Story 1993 - another horrible sequel

The Flintstones 1994 - terrible
Casper 1995 - terrible
Balto 1996 - lame

Twister 1996 -  decent

Men in Black 1997  - no thanks, average sci-fi

The Last Days 1998 - don't remember

The Mask of Zorro 1998 - subpar
Shooting War 2000 - don't remember
Jurassic Park III 2001 - another terrible sequel
Men in Black II 2002 - the first was bad, but this was even worse
Memoirs of a Geisha 2005 - average
The Legend of Zorro 2005 - subpar sequel 

Flags of Our Fathers 2006  - decent
I Only Wanted to Live 2006 - don't remember

Letters from Iwo Jima 2006 - decent
Monster House 2006 - lame
Searching for Orson 2006 - don't remember

Disturbia 2007 - blatantly bad rip-off of alfred hitchcock
Transformers 2007 - i liked it
Eagle Eye 2008 - terrible rip off of 'enemy of the state

===========================================

yeah, there's a few winners in there..

but he's made a lot more terrible movies, terrible sequels,

bad animation, and other movies, a lot more than Lucas ever will..

he keeps trying though, i'll give him that...

but he has a very tiny percentage of critical and commercial hits...

later

-1

CS said:

Edit Edit: On the subject of Tin-Tin, Snowy doesn't talk.

 

 so , we're just supposed to ignore all those 'thought bubbles' from the book?

that's why i put 'talk' in quotes, because it wasn't literal..

by the way, a play was done, with live actors, it looked

very good:

http://www.tintintheshow.co.uk/default.asp?contentID=601

all the actors looked like the part, i guess Spielberg was

too thick/hard headed to actually try it with real people..

oh well...

later

-1

CS said:

In the animated show he used body language, which is fine by me. Thought bubbles would be strange, talking even more. Might as well invite Dogbert over for a game of chess.

 it doesn't matter what spielberg does with it,

it's already doomed to failure just from his approach to it..

later

-1