good. i always liked her best.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
No flash on my work computer, BULLOCKS!
Is it on the site that confirms Karen Allen's return? That is quite an interesting development btw, they've never brought back a girl from the other movies before. The movies were always isolated from each other and you could never tell in what order they happened except that TLC definately took place after ROLA, but I suppose even that is debatable.
Posted by Alcon (Member # 6645) on :
Umm... if you look at their episode numbers it's 23 - Temple of Doom, 24 - Raiders of the Lost Ark, 25 - The Last Crusade. Least ways it is on my box set thingy. Why 20s? Your guess is as good as mine...
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
How would it be debatable? Indy meets characters for the first time in Raiders of the Lost Ark that he is assumed to know well in The Last Crusade.
[Edit--well, maybe just Sallah. But still.]
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
Ooo! Maybe we can get some prequels! That always works well.
Posted by Puffy Treat (Member # 7210) on :
Yeah, it's the latest news item on the site.
I assume The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles were the "earlier" episodes.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by Alcon: Umm... if you look at their episode numbers it's 23 - Temple of Doom, 24 - Raiders of the Lost Ark, 25 - The Last Crusade. Least ways it is on my box set thingy. Why 20s? Your guess is as good as mine...
Did not know this. Perhaps they are including the young Indiana Jones series?
Noeman: That is true, I didn't think about that. But how do you place Temple of Doom anywhere chronologically? (Sallah was also the one that made me see your point)
double edit: The only chronological reference that came to mind was when they were in the catacombs below the library and pass that depiction of the ark, and Indy identifies it as such.
"Are you sure?" *que Ark theme music* "Pretty sure."
Posted by Alcon (Member # 6645) on :
Yeah, I've always heard Temple of Doom refered to as a prequal, and Crusade a sequal.
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
Temple of Doom was definitely set before Raiders of the Lost Ark, and I think that there were fairly solid indicators of this in the movie, but it's been long enough since I've seen it that I'm not sure what they were. It could have just been that the style of dress for westerners was slightly earlier than that in Raiders of the Lost Ark, but I'm thinking that there were more concrete clues than that.
Posted by Bokonon (Member # 480) on :
I would bet the "episode numbers" are a tongue-in-cheek reference to the old pulp serials that Lucas loved (Hence why the original Star Wars was Episode 4).
-Bok
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
It was episode four because he originally conceived it as the fourth episode of nine.
Posted by Bokonon (Member # 480) on :
So he says (and so I've heard he says), but considering how it all turned out, and simply the time between the first three and the last three, leaves me skeptical. That, and the fact that he had no way to know that there'd be anything beyond the first movie.
-Bok
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
Go find a copy of Splinter of the Mind's Eye. The book came out before there was so much as a script for The Empire Strikes Back. And years before the original Star Wars movie was relabeled "Episode Four -- A New Hope". It was just "Star Wars". Did you know that, btw? That when the movie came out, there was absolutely nothing on the screen about "episodes"?
I read the book at the time, and Lucas has a forward in it in which he talks about the nine episode framework.
The book isn't in continuity (how can it be, when it was written before Empire?), but I remember it being fairly good.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
Actually, Lucas now denies that he ever intended to do episodes 7-9. The only proof I know of that he's wrong is the intro to SofME.
Posted by Bokonon (Member # 480) on :
From wikipedia, it also appears that while he had lots of ideas, there wasn't any coherent trilogy scope, not until the first movie got big, anyway.
-Bok
Posted by Puffy Treat (Member # 7210) on :
Articles with direct quotes by Lucas from old articles of Time and Newsweek reviewing The Empire Strikes Back also have him explicitly saying that 9 episodes were planned.
*shrug*
The myth that Lucas had the entire "saga" planned long before he filmed it is one he surreptitiously encourages.
Back on the subject of Indy, I'm getting higher hopes that it'll be fun.
Posted by IanO (Member # 186) on :
That pretty much is the right of it.
Lucas created The Adventures of Luke Starkiller to be a multipart serial, just like Flash Gordon/Buck Rogers- the series that inspired it. At one point, he spoke of 12 movies, then 9. Initially, his idea was that he'd lay the groundwork in the 1st movie, and then other directors would come along bring their own story/interpretation of the genre in the sequels (much like the Bond series), somewhat like a competition. He did say he'd go back and maybe do the last one, to cap the series.
He did speak of doing a sequel that was a prequel, but the backstory was NOT fleshed out much beyond what was in the Star Wars novelization prologue and that it was about Ben Kenobi and Father Skywalker (which is differentiated from the person that we now speak of as Anakin Skywalker).
Before Star Wars came out, but still when he knew he wanted to do a sequel, he commisioned Foster to write Splinter as a such. It was to be somewhat low budget (since he didn't believe he'd get much money from Star Wars). That is what Splinter was, with much input from Lucas. During that time, he came up with the Vader falling into a pit of lava scenario, after killing Father Skywalker and then being hunted down by Father Skywalker's friend, Obi-Wan.
When Star Wars was a hit beyond what anyone imagined, he commissioned Leigh Brackett to write the sequel with him. For the most part, he didn't like where it was going. Yoda was there (to finish the training Obi-wan started- since Obi-wan was initially supposed to survive the first, but then Lucas realized he had nothing to do after the Death Star tractor beam/Vader confrontation, so he decided to kill him off- which Alec Guiness was NOT happy about.) It was interesting, though, that in these drafts, Father Skywalker appears as a force-ghost who, along with Yoda, helps train Luke. But by this time, Father Skywalker's character had become redundant, since we had a force-ghost Obi-wan, force-ghost father, and a live Jedi master, all performing the same roles.
In the spring of 78, he, after Brackett died, came up with the idea that Father Skywalker and Vader were the same (and it fit pretty well, with some ironing out- Father Skywalker and Obi-wan were initially the same age and had fought together as equals during the clone wars- a war Obi-wan dragged Father Skywalker into reluctantly and against his brother's wishes.) This revolutionized the story and changed it from being a loose serialized story, to a saga, albeit one about Luke, NOT Anakin (that wouldn't come about till the 3rd movie and prequels and all the retconning he's done since then.) It gave the movie a new pathos and power and mythical quality. In coming up with this, this changed the prequels from being some simple tale to one of friendship to betrayel. It was then that the prequel plots (rough ones, to be sure- Luke's mother was not really ever imagined) came to be. That was when he tacked on "Episode IV" to Star wars (and later claimed it was always that way, blah blah blah...), once he had an idea for the prequels. And it was when he came up with an idea about the Sequel trilogy. So it would be 3 trilogies. 1 about Obi-Wan and Anakin Skywalker, 1 about Luke, and 1 about Luke's apprentice, the 'Other' Yoda mentioned.
But Empire was so painful in its execution (he and Kirshner butted heads repeatedly, with Kurtz backing up Kirshner) and was costing him his entire personal fortune (and his more important- in his eyes- plans for a filmaking community-Ranch like the one he enjoyed in Northern California in the 70s), that he reigned in the entire thing after Empire. Even though Kirshner was proved right, it was Lucas' money and Star Wars was merely his bank to create what he really wanted. It was also costing him his marriage, since his wife just wanted him to stop and for them to raise a family. So he did Jedi almost out of obligation, using a puppet director, made Leia Luke's sister to tie up the "other" mystery, redeemed Vader, and ended the whole thing. And of course, lost half of everything, since his wife divorced him, and thus lost the independence he had been striving to achieve.
Raiders was really a sequel to the first Star Wars, in terms of what he had wanted to do at the beginning. Loosely based serials where the momentary adventure was what counted. And the sequels to Indy are the same. Even though TOD is a prequel, you hardly notice and no one cares. You don't watch Indy for the saga, but for the adventure.
But, to the topic, it is freaking awesome that Marion will be there. Hope that means the magic will be there again. Never like the other 2 love interests. Marion was a true equal to Indy and gave as good as she got.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Bokonon: From wikipedia, it also appears that while he had lots of ideas, there wasn't any coherent trilogy scope, not until the first movie got big, anyway.
Maybe, but he said in the preface to the original Star Wars novelization (which, incidentally, came out before the movie -- though after the first couple of issues of the Marvel comic adaptation of the film) that the republic fell when Senator Palpatine became emperor and dissolved the Senate. Granted, that's just Rome warmed over, but anyone who read that knew the moment Palpatine showed up who he was.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by IanO: But, to the topic, it is freaking awesome that Marion will be there. Hope that means the magic will be there again. Never like the other 2 love interests. Marion was a true equal to Indy and gave as good as she got.
I agree. But then, I'd watch anything with Karen Allen in it.
Posted by Narnia (Member # 1071) on :
oh, gag! I hated her stinking guts so much!! That's depressing.
I so thought they were going to get Kate Capshaw back. Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lisa:
quote:Originally posted by IanO: But, to the topic, it is freaking awesome that Marion will be there. Hope that means the magic will be there again. Never like the other 2 love interests. Marion was a true equal to Indy and gave as good as she got.
I agree. But then, I'd watch anything with Karen Allen in it.
Thirded. The return of Marion is the first thing about this movie that I've heard of that made me interested in seeing it.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
Yeah. I may go see it in the theaters now.
I used to be a huge fan of Harrison Ford (still love his work up through the 90s), and if you'd asked me 10 years ago I would have gone to see it for him. Or probably even 6 years ago. But in the last 5 years or so... Well, I'm just not such a big fan anymore. They made this movie 6 years too late for me to see it just to see him reprise Indy. Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Narnia, are you SERIOUSLY saying you preferred Kate Capshaw's role? *blink*
Posted by Puffy Treat (Member # 7210) on :
The character who later became known as "Palpatine" was not named as such in the original film's novelization
Oddly enough, the name came from the much-maligned EU material...as did the name of the Imperial Home World.
Back on topic again...yeah! Bringing back Marion actually has me intrigued. While I consider TLC to be the best film out of the series, she was the best heroine. Posted by IanO (Member # 186) on :
actually the name palpatine occurs in the 77 novelization of star wars. but coruscant comes from the eu master, timothy zahn.
Posted by Puffy Treat (Member # 7210) on :
quote:Originally posted by IanO: actually the name palpatine occurs in the 77 novelization of star wars. but coruscant comes from the eu master, timothy zahn.
Do you mean the one Alan Dean Foster adapted?
I have that one, but the Emperor isn't named "Palpatine" in it. Also, the personality and motivation for this version of the Emperor is extremely different from what was eventually seen in the films.
Maybe I have an Apocryphal version? Posted by Narnia (Member # 1071) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: Narnia, are you SERIOUSLY saying you preferred Kate Capshaw's role? *blink*
Maybe not the role, but the actress. I cannot stand Karen Allen as an actress and I couldn't stand her character in Raiders. Her constant screams of "INDY!!" made me want to poke my eyeballs out.
I enjoyed the chemistry Ford and Capshaw had in Temple of Doom, even though Capshaw played a complete nutter. She did not make me want to poke my eyeballs out. I guess that's my only means of measurement at this time. Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Wow. To me, that's like hearing that someone out there wishes Episode III had had more Jar-Jar in it.
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
Yeah, Tom, I severely wanted to choke Capshaw to death and throw her out the window.
If I had been Indy, I'd have left her behind happily.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
To each their own I suppose.
Marion saying, "I'm your goddamn partner!" after helping Indy beat up a bunch of Nazi's and in the process burning down the bar was my first exposure that I am aware of to a very assertive strong feminine character, (besides my mom of course, until then I thought she was a limited edition). When I saw Kate Capshaw in Temple of Doom the contrast was really striking and I can't say I preferred that type of girl.
Is it possible that Indy has his son through Marion and they have become estranged through the years?
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
"I enjoyed the chemistry Ford and Capshaw had in Temple of Doom"
To me, intense, spiteful antagonism is not hawt . I looked at it from the point of view of Indy. I don't find such behavior in my female paramours as hawt at all .
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
quote:Is it possible that Indy has his son through Marion and they have become estranged through the years?
That would totally fit their relationship dynamic. Except for instead of a headpiece to the staff of Ra, I'm thinking it might be that youngster on the far left who was dressed an awful lot like a villain. (Shia Labeouf).
Posted by Puffy Treat (Member # 7210) on :
Shia was originally rumored to be cast as Indy's son, but nothing has been confirmed.
(Some of the older scripts had Indy as a father, but the current script is being kept top secret.)
Posted by IanO (Member # 186) on :
yes, that one. In the prologue, paragraph 5. "Senator Palpatine caused himself to be elected president of the republic." But you're right that he was much different than later portrayed. Lucas has said many times that he was conceived as a slimy Nixon-like politician who was under the control of special interests. But once Vader was made Luke's father, then he was remade into a ruler more evil and powerful than Vader, capable of seducing Obi-wan's friend to the dark side.
Posted by Puffy Treat (Member # 7210) on :
The character isn't named in my copy. *shrug* Then again, this book used to belong to a school library. It may be a different version of the novelization.
Posted by Narnia (Member # 1071) on :
See, I just liked Kate Capshaw in general because she pulled off the cranky damsel in constant distress role really well. I guess it just added to the funny for me, and I loved that.
(Now, as far as ToD in general, the gross-out tactics were not my idea of fun, and the child slavery/torture thing was a bit too dark. Maybe that's why the insane moments with Kate Capshaw's character were rather a relief. Hm. Not sure.)
To me, Karen Allen needed a huge toothpick to get those large chunks of scenery out of her teeth, especially in that opening scene when the bar burns down. I haven't seen it in a while though, so maybe my memories of her performance are...harsh. Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Again, the idea that Capshaw's performance was subtle, while Allen's was scenery-chewing, just boggles my mind. Posted by Narnia (Member # 1071) on :
I never said subtle. Her performance wasn't supposed to be subtle. It was meant to be obnoxious. I just happened to think it was hilarious. Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Puffy Treat: The character who later became known as "Palpatine" was not named as such in the original film's novelization
Oddly enough, the name came from the much-maligned EU material...as did the name of the Imperial Home World.
Maybe they removed it in later editions. I got mine in 1977. And since I haven't read the EU books, that can't be where I heard the name.
Posted by Puffy Treat (Member # 7210) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lisa: Maybe they removed it in later editions. I got mine in 1977. And since I haven't read the EU books, that can't be where I heard the name.
That's the date listed in my old copy. *shrug*
I first remember hearing the name when the Emperor was a mail-away Kenner toy. The original trilogy never mentioned the character by name in the films themselves.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
quote:I never said subtle. Her[Allen's] performance wasn't supposed to be subtle. It was meant to be obnoxious. I just happened to think it was hilarious.
And hot. Karen Allen was smoking up the screen more than Kate Capshaw. I like the idea of the older Allen to go along with the older Ford. I think it'll be too bad if they make Ford's love interest Cate Blanchette.
[ July 30, 2007, 11:30 AM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by Puffy Treat (Member # 7210) on :
quote:Originally posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong: I think it'll be too bad if they make Ford's love interest Kate Blanchett.
Blanchette has been cast in the film, but the "love interest" description is still an unconfirmed rumor.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
Perhaps Kate Blanchette's role in its entirety will be to sit at the front of one of Indy's classes and blink....frequently
----- *hopes SOMEBODY gets what he is referencing.*
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
OH, I do, BlackBlade. That scene has stuck in my mind for years.
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Cry]](graemlins/cry.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)