Search

This site requires that JavaScript be enabled and the Flash plug-in be installed. If you already have Macromedia Flash Player 8 installed, then you may continue browsing the site.

TheFeed

Review: Darabont's 'Indiana Jones IV'

Posted by Mike D'Alonzo - Wednesday, June 11, 2008 3:42 PM

Frank Darabont's script for Indiana Jones IV, entitled Indiana Jones and the City of the Gods, is an archaeological wonder in its own right. However, we've received a bootleg copy of the script that's making its way around the internet, which is reported, but not confirmed, to be the real thing. We read it, and it seems pretty legit, or the person who is faking it is a terrific screenwriter. Either way, here's a review.

CAUTION: SPOILERS EVERYWHERE - IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN 'INDIANA JONES AND THE KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL, READ THIS AT YOUR PERIL.

First off, the script is largely the same, storywise, focusing on the discovery of the crystal skull, as well as the lost city in Peru where the Gods were thought to live, only to discover that these "gods" were aliens with a culture advanced thousands of years beyond our own.

Also, Marion Ravenwood is in the script. In fact, she's featured even more prominently than in the actual film. And, yes, she and Indy end up married in the end. Oxley's there, as well as a double-crossing friend, and, to my surprise, the "nuking the fridge" sequence and the giant ants are there, as well.

However, also in this script are Dr. Henry Jones, Sr. and Sallah, making awesome cameo appearances that really help cement the whole history of Indiana Jones, and tie the whole saga together.

What's not in the script? Well, Shia LaBoeuf's character, Mutt, for one thing. There's no mention of a son and no appearance of one either. Now, while I didn't necessarily think that Mutt's character was one of the most egregiously awful things about the movie, his absence definitely makes room for more character development on Indy's part, and it allows the story to shine through, in opposition to the constant 'wink-wink-he's-his-son-but-neither-of-them-know-it-yet' portions of Crystal Skull that drove me nuts.

This script is awesome in exactly the places that Crystal Skull was lame. Just those few flips in the sequence removed all of the punch from this really excellent, well thought out, super exciting script, and rendered it vacuous and boring. In other words, Spielberg and Lucas chose the right story, but they neutered it to focus on the wrong things.

There are at least three awesome action sequences in this script, including a fighter plane chase that would have blown the doors off the theater had it actually happened on film. In addition, the double-crossing friend is a Russian, which makes the whole America vs. the Soviet Union thing work a lot better. Oxley's character isn't like a family pet, and there are some nods to the Indiana Jones mythology that really work well here.

Perhaps the biggest difference in the script is the treatment of Marion Ravenwood. First off, she doesn't spend the entirety of the story standing in the background grinning like she's happy to have a job. She's the Marion we came to know and love in Raiders of the Lost Ark, and her story arc is so much more believable in this script that it's a night-and-day experience.

Also, the aliens are mean. They're a legitimate threat, not fascinating, but terrifying, and there's an implication that they have been the reason that humans believe in God for the past several thousand years. The resolution of the plot is so much more satisfying here than in the actual film, and the script just shows that Lucas and Spielberg were too soft to make the choices that turned the plot a little dark and/or scary.

At the end of the day, Indiana Jones and the City of the Gods is 100% a better script than the one that was shot for the film. This would have been the right way to close out the series, and it would have been a return to form that no one could have expected, instead of a movie that everyone places just above the abysmal Temple of Doom in the Indy canon.


Comment(s)


Posted by cruzzercruz - Wednesday, June 11, 2008 3:31 PM
I liked Indy IV. I think I'm the only person in the WORLD

Posted by TheRufio - Wednesday, June 11, 2008 3:32 PM
I liked Indiana Jones and The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.

Posted by changbang - Wednesday, June 11, 2008 3:43 PM
Wouldn't this be Indy V, not IV??

Posted by ZeMightyGorilla - Wednesday, June 11, 2008 3:44 PM
Great script review. Thanks for this!

Posted by mberko1 - Wednesday, June 11, 2008 3:58 PM
Temple of Doom was 10X better than crystal skull, hands down.

Posted by jargy1 - Wednesday, June 11, 2008 4:35 PM
Temple of Doom is better than the goofy Last Crusade, I don't care what anyone says.

I thought Indy 4 could have been a LOT worse. My biggest complaint wasn't with the story, but with the excessive CG. They used it in places it wasn't even necessary and it looked horrible. I expect better from ILM. I do think Mutt's character was foolish. He added nothing and that was the mistake they made there.

Also, I blame Lucas for any bad points. Spielberg has proven himself time and again to be a director that doesn't back off on content. Did you even SEE Saving Private Ryan? Lucas is the one who held this movie up for the last 5 years or so by constantly being unhappy with the way the story moved forward. And just think about the past. Which is more likely to screw up? The guy who brought us Howard the Duck or the guy who brought us Jurassic Park? At least Harrison Ford turned in the kind of performance we wanted. Just as I predicted though, LaBeouf was completely wrong for his part.

Posted by blindsideofthesun - Wednesday, June 11, 2008 4:44 PM
Last Crusade was a classic return to the form that Crusaders of the Lost Ark had after Temple of Doom went off in its own oddball direction.
Anyone else that dares put Temple of Doom above the masterpiece that was the Last Crusade should have their still beating heart ripped out as they are plunged into the pit of lava which they love oh so much.
'Nuff said.
Advertisement

Posted by nautilart - Wednesday, June 11, 2008 4:44 PM
i really would like to read this script as i was disappointed with the movie i feel it would be a good read

Posted by AltairDarknight - Wednesday, June 11, 2008 4:45 PM
I still can't accept the fact that it has space aliens in it. New script or not....

Posted by mberko1 - Wednesday, June 11, 2008 4:54 PM
Last Crusade is my favorite too but there really was NOTHING good about crystal skull; not Ford's performance, effects, story, NOTHING. Ford had no emotion or comedic timing like the ogs. Yeah Aliens were the biggest turnoff

Posted by KitFisto94 - Wednesday, June 11, 2008 4:59 PM
I think I am one of seven people who consider IV to be the second best Indy film. I actually liked the Mutt character and I thought he was a good addition to the franchise. Keep in mind, however, that Sean Connery and John Rhys-Daives were approached to be in Indy IV. Connery(Henry Jones Sr.) was enjoying retirement too much and John Rhys-Daives had a scheduling conflict. So Mutt was basically a replacement character.

Posted by QuinnCinema_USC - Wednesday, June 11, 2008 5:22 PM
Has anyone else notice a change in Lucas's philosophy? In the first three Indy films, there was spirituality and religion. In the fourth, he disproves religion with sci-fi, that we've just been worshiping aliens.

In the original Star Wars, the Force was spiritual connection in all things (God) but in the prequels, the Force was just bacteria in the blood.

Why the shift?

Posted by ZeMightyGorilla - Wednesday, June 11, 2008 5:26 PM
Love it or hate it, Temple of Doom is by far the goofiest of the Indie films. From Kate Capshaw's over-the-top performance, to Short Round saying "I love you Indy!", the movie is pretty absurd. And who can forget Indie being turned eveil and hearts being ripped out of chests.

Personally, I kinda enjoy temple of Doom, but it really does not fit well into the Indie canon. Crystal Skull was pretty weak overall, but I don't think Shia/Mutt is to blame. The main problems were: the ridiculous tarzan sequence, Karen Allen having nothing cool to say, and Ox having nothing cool to do.

And speaking of that Tarzan sequence, everyone blames George Lucas. however, the true fault lies with Spielberg. He is the genius who put that lame-ass gymnastics sequence in Jurassic Park 2: The Lost World. This is basically the same sort of thing-- totally ridiculous and unbelievable.
Advertisement

Posted by MikeTheGreekGod - Wednesday, June 11, 2008 5:37 PM
Seriously, they should turn this script into Indy 5, just to satisfy the rest of us from the disappointing Indiana 4. They should just erase the film from time, make another one with City of Gods script, and have that as Indiana Jones 4 instead

Posted by ZeMightyGorilla - Wednesday, June 11, 2008 5:39 PM
They should have ignored this Crystal Skull crap and done a script on the Lost City of Atlantis (as was rumored). that would have been WAY cooler.

Posted by vistra - Wednesday, June 11, 2008 5:48 PM
ditto @ kitfisto

i liked indy iv a lot ... i think the script d'alonzo liked would have pleased the critics plenty and alientated the people that go to movies to enjoy them ... the last thing i want from an indy movie is an alien life based critique on why people believe in God

Posted by MikeTheGreekGod - Wednesday, June 11, 2008 5:53 PM
Seriously, they should turn this script into Indy 5, just to satisfy the rest of us from the disappointing Indiana 4. They should just erase the film from time, make another one with City of Gods script, and have that as Indiana Jones 4 instead

Posted by thewesman - Wednesday, June 11, 2008 6:47 PM
"I have the SCRIPT, therefore it is WAAAY BETTER than the movie you common people got to see. There was lots of cool stuff that I will explain vaguely to convince you that the script was better. hahaha."

Please. This is ridiculous. This movie was just as outlandish, fun, and entertaining as the other ones.

Posted by Riko11 - Wednesday, June 11, 2008 6:54 PM
For me Raiders and Crusade are different when compared to Temple and KOTCC. The first two fall under the genre of action adventure, and allowed us to explore the mysteries along with Indiana. The second two I would categorize as fantasy, where the viewer has to take leaps of faith to stay immersed in the story. Though I enjoy Raiders and Crusade more, I can't say I hate the others, I just prefer one over the other.
As far as the script went, I like the idea of Maryon being a more powerful character. In the end I'm just glad a new generation was able to experiance some of the magic I felt when I watched Crusade for the first time.

Posted by Arteska - Wednesday, June 11, 2008 7:36 PM
Geek culture really stinks right now and this kind of thing is the main reason why.

Posted by changbang - Wednesday, June 11, 2008 7:44 PM
oh, so this is just what his version is of the indy movie after indy 3?

Posted by jcb231 - Wednesday, June 11, 2008 7:50 PM
I thought Skull and Temple were both pretty entertaining. Not near the action highs of Raiders and Crusade, but still good movies. I have Temple on DVD and plan to purchase Skull when it comes out.

I'm not the only one who likes these. It's become hip to bash the heck out of Skull. To hear people talk you'd think this was the next Battlefield Earth, but there's a lot that like it. I know people that make fun who haven't even seen it...what sense does that make? I think fan expectations were just way too high. Skull is an entertaining adventure movie, nothing more, nothing less. It's not the 2nd coming and never claimed to be.

Posted by jcb231 - Wednesday, June 11, 2008 7:51 PM
Does Skull have goofy moments? Of course, but all 4 Indy movies do. Or did you not roll your eyes a little when faces melted in claymation glory, Shorty was stretched between 2 mine cars, Indy drives into a fresh bomb crater, or a German fighter plane glides wingless through a tunnel giving the pilot just enough time to react comically as he passes Indy and Pops before exploding?

Posted by jcb231 - Wednesday, June 11, 2008 7:52 PM
These are comic adventure movies based on the goofy over the top feeling of old pulp serials. To look at the 3 moments held up as the silliest by most fans...Shia swinging through the trees was silly as all heck, but no moreso than any Tarzan movie from back in the heyday of the genre. Indy surviving a refrigerator blast was insane, but not more of a stretch than him managing to survive a fall from a plane in a raft. The Aliens are just another form of the supernatural/mystical element that has been in all the movies...folks just tend to think Christian God magic is more believable than Interdimensional Alien magic.

Posted by jcb231 - Wednesday, June 11, 2008 7:53 PM
I agree that Marion could have been fleshed out, and I would have preferred to see Indy get the action scenes that were given to Mutt, but other than that there's not much I would have changed about Skull. I felt like I got my $$'s worth and I look forward to a possible Indy V. I just hope they manage to get a script approved before Ford's in the old folks home!

Posted by lostfanboy16 - Wednesday, June 11, 2008 8:00 PM
Whats wrong with Aliens.

Posted by Cronk_Juice89 - Wednesday, June 11, 2008 9:02 PM
Ok. There were only two issues with Crystal Skull. The unnecessary cg moments (specifically the swinging with the monkeys) and the fact that it wasn't done sooner. I feel like it kept the timing and humor very well it was classic indy and ranks with raiders and crusade. Temple was worse than this, and look at the bright side. Spielberg prevented Lucas' influence from making this a true travesty and pissing all over the classic franchise like Episodes 1 and especially 2 were to Star Wars.

Posted by RifePrime - Wednesday, June 11, 2008 9:02 PM
I don't get all the Crystal Skull bashing. I thought the movie had the same Indy spirit I remember from the other films. Yeah, there were hokey parts in it (the fridge part most egrarious to me) but it was very entertaining.

Posted by evilmario007 - Wednesday, June 11, 2008 10:27 PM
that sounds better than supid shai leboufs "your a,teacher?" hes the worst part in the movie! and temple of doom is good, better than this crap! and lucas is like "this movie is only for those who enjoy the series" how can we enjoy it if they take out what made indy indy?

Posted by KitFisto94 - Wednesday, June 11, 2008 10:38 PM
How is this not an Indiana Jones film? It follows the same basic formula as Crusade and Raiders, with a little bit of Temple. You have the youthful sidkeick (Mutt/Short Round). He starts off on an adventure, returns to Marshall College, and starts on another great adventure, there is a chase scene, a big reveal, an awesome death scene, and a light-hearted ending. I feel it followed the Indy formula very well and doesn't deserve all the bashings you all are giving it.

Posted by ZeMightyGorilla - Wednesday, June 11, 2008 11:21 PM
Good points KitFisto. Crystal Skull definitely fits the Indiana Jones mold that we know and love. I think the real disappointment lies not in the formula, but in the execution. As I've stated before, Marion is really mishandled-- instead of the spitfire who debuted in Raiders, she is now reduced to a grinning fool, with nothing witty to say and nothing impressive to do. Also, the haracter of Oxley is really quite poorly developed-- his intelligence/coherence changes to fit the demands of the script-- either he's a silent, crazed lunatic, or he's a haunted-yet-intelligent sidekick.

Crystal Skull is not a great film, but it's not nearly as bad as people are making it out to be. That said, Darabont's script (which I have read) would have made for a much better film.

Posted by thedailies - Wednesday, June 11, 2008 11:47 PM
i gotta say this smells bogus. all of it just sounds way too coincidental. didnt they nix the darabont script years ago? just seems mighty unlikely it would surface conveniently after the movies release.

david koepp, screenwriter of the crystal skull, adapted war of the worlds, spider-man, mission impossible, and jurassic park. hes not some lackey spielberg dug up to rip off darabont's old ideas. and the chances of spielberg and lucas taking what darabont offered and hiring a new guy to tweak those few plot points are slim.

just my two cents.

but i would love to read what darabont really wrote.

Posted by jargy1 - Thursday, June 12, 2008 12:13 AM
Drop Mutt, take out the ants, the Tarzan crap, make Marion important again, and give Indy a couple of more fighting scenes and it was a good Indy movie. As it stands, it's probably my 3rd favorite. I stand by my statement that Last Crusade is too silly and not adventure enough. To the jerk off who said I should burn in lava and have my heart ripped out, go violate your mother. I'm sick of being attacked on these comments for not agreeing with the masses. I'm allowed to have my own opinion and I never bash anyone else's. TheFeed, you guys need to get some monitors for this kind of stuff. Not letting us cuss is one thing, but when someone can tell me to go die because I think a movie was poorly made, that's a bit much. Sessler should mention that when he gets on his soapbox.

Posted by thedailies - Thursday, June 12, 2008 12:14 AM
i gotta say this smells bogus. all of it just sounds way too coincidental. didnt they nix the darabont script years ago? just seems mighty unlikely it would surface conveniently after the movies release.

david koepp, screenwriter of the crystal skull, adapted war of the worlds, spider-man, mission impossible, and jurassic park. hes not some lackey spielberg dug up to rip off darabont's old ideas. and the chances of spielberg and lucas taking what darabont offered and hiring a new guy to tweak those few plot points are slim.

just my two cents.

but i would love to read what darabont really wrote.

Posted by Garsha420 - Thursday, June 12, 2008 5:44 AM
I don't know about anything else but this movie seemed rushed besides the points all the other people in here made. Besides Shia Lebouef's character wasn't half as entertaining as Shortround. Plus at least Shortround had relavance in the story. All movie's nowadays have CGI in them so that's not a big surprise. I wish they had not tried to hurry this one's release and had got more fan feedback before dropping a steaming pile. FYI to ILM america obviously likes Shia Leboef but not enough to squeeze him into every blockbuster for the next 15 years. I still rate all the Indy movie's in order, might put Last Crusade before Temple of Doom though, and yes Crystal Skull is definetly dead last but still deserves an honorable mention. Oh and please if you're posting on a "fan" page at least get the title right.

Posted by DrRotwang - Thursday, June 12, 2008 5:52 AM
"Crystal Skull"'s worst sin is that it's BORING. Not that it has aliens in it, not that it has Mutt in it, not that Irina Spalko talks like Natasha Fatale.

It's a pulp movie but it's DULL.

No, I'm not one of those people who try to be hip by being cynical. I'm a dyed-in-the-wool genre dork, and nothing pleases me more than fun, exciting, sparkling adventure stories...but they have to be fun, exciting and sparkling.

Which, I sadly felt, "Crystal Skull" was not.

Where does one read this Darabont script?

Posted by BlueHawaiiSurfe - Thursday, June 12, 2008 7:30 AM
This guy had me until I read "movie that everyone places just above the abysmal Temple of Doom in the Indy canon."
Seriously?!?!? The great thing about this series is that each film stands on it's own as a great TYPE of movie. They could never make ANOTHER Raiders but they did a great job of capturing an Indy story with a different feel each time. Abysmal Temple of DooM??? You must be on crack.

Posted by BlueHawaiiSurfe - Thursday, June 12, 2008 7:34 AM
Yeah, where do you get this script?!?!

Posted by gravy666 - Thursday, June 12, 2008 7:49 AM
Sounds kinda good, I like it for the most part. But I would take out the nuke scene and the end where Indy and Marion marry/take out Marion entirely. I think there should be a new girl in every movie. I would also make Indy seem like he's gonna go adventuring for another ten years or so- to me, Indy getting married is like telling us that the series is over. But I guess having a returning character isn't too bad.

Anyway, I would rather see that script become a movie in some sort of 'real' Indy IV.

Posted by patrick005 - Thursday, June 12, 2008 8:08 AM
You know the crystal skulls actually exist in real life. One of the popular theories thrown around is of an alien origin for them. There's no reason why Spielberg/Lucas, and now apparently even Darabont, shouldn't have put Aliens in the movie. It's no different than using mystical explanations for the Ark of the Covenant or the Holy Grail.

Posted by WalkingCarpet - Thursday, June 12, 2008 8:41 AM
The script sounds pretty cool. I actually liked Indy IV, but that's just me apparently. I think that it could've been better. I think that Mutt was a good character, but Marion definitely needed to be handled better. Way better. And the flying saucer at the end was a bit much for me. The temple should've just exploded at the end or something. But once again, that's just me. And I didn't find the um, "Tarzan" scene to be all that big of a deal. It was kinda stupid, but it didn't ruin the film or anything for me.

Posted by thedailies - Thursday, June 12, 2008 11:37 AM
i gotta say this smells bogus. all of it just sounds way too coincidental. didnt they nix the darabont script years ago? just seems mighty unlikely it would surface conveniently after the movies release.

david koepp, screenwriter of the crystal skull, adapted war of the worlds, spider-man, mission impossible, and jurassic park. hes not some lackey spielberg dug up to rip off darabont's old ideas. and the chances of spielberg and lucas taking what darabont offered and hiring a new guy to tweak those few plot points are slim.

just my two cents.

but i would love to read what darabont really wrote.

Posted by ZeMightyGorilla - Thursday, June 12, 2008 2:32 PM
It's not bogus. just read any major movie news website and they will confirm that the script just leaked to the internet yesterday morning. the source of the leak seems to be unknown, but several sites have seen it (Aint It Cool News, Rotten Tomatoes, etc...)

Posted by Druidblue - Thursday, June 12, 2008 4:43 PM
Would be hard to pass the franchise off to Shia, as they intend to do, to take over as Indy if he wasn't in the script. That's one of the delays in rewriting the thing in the first place.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with Indy IV. It's an OUTSTANDING movie that outshines most others in all of the usual areas for a Spielberg and Lucas outing: Plot, acting, effects, pacing... it's all here and all good.

The problem is, the younger generations are jaded. They simply will never find anything that pleases them, ever. A large part of that is that they have such impossibly high expectations for things.

I'm so very glad I'm not jaded- I'd rather be the one enjoying the vast majority of all the entertainment products I partake of, rather than this loud young crowd who simply love to hate everything.

Posted by alekog - Thursday, June 12, 2008 7:10 PM
http://thinkhowithink.blogspot .com/2008/05/top-9-reasons-tha t-indiana-jones-and.html

Great Indy IV review.

Posted by thedailies - Thursday, June 12, 2008 8:00 PM
i gotta say this smells bogus. all of it just sounds way too coincidental. didnt they nix the darabont script years ago? just seems mighty unlikely it would surface conveniently after the movies release.

david koepp, screenwriter of the crystal skull, adapted war of the worlds, spider-man, mission impossible, and jurassic park. hes not some lackey spielberg dug up to rip off darabont's old ideas. and the chances of spielberg and lucas taking what darabont offered and hiring a new guy to tweak those few plot points are slim.

just my two cents.

but i would love to read what darabont really wrote.

Posted by thedailies - Friday, June 13, 2008 12:23 PM
i gotta say this smells bogus. all of it just sounds way too coincidental. didnt they nix the darabont script years ago? just seems mighty unlikely it would surface conveniently after the movies release.

david koepp, screenwriter of the crystal skull, adapted war of the worlds, spider-man, mission impossible, and jurassic park. hes not some lackey spielberg dug up to rip off darabont's old ideas. and the chances of spielberg and lucas taking what darabont offered and hiring a new guy to tweak those few plot points are slim.

just my two cents.

but i would love to read what darabont really wrote.

Posted by Brawler94 - Sunday, June 15, 2008 7:52 PM
I liked Indy IV as a movie, but it really was'nt up to Spielburg's or Lucas's standards, or the Indy series's, either. I hate that the 3rd(the best , in my opinion) and 1st, there is substantial proof that God and Jesus Christ exist, and in the 4th, it disprooves it with some alien bull &#!%.The Mutt character was not to blame(even though I think Shia was only put in to attractfans from his other movies), because as I said before, It was THE ALIENS! The small Asian boy was better than Mutt though.

Posted by Brawler94 - Sunday, June 15, 2008 8:04 PM
I liked Indy IV as a movie, but it really was'nt up to Spielburg's or Lucas's standards, or the Indy series's, either. I hate that the 3rd(the best , in my opinion) and 1st, there is substantial proof that God and Jesus Christ exist, and in the 4th, it disprooves it with some alien bull &#!%.The Mutt character was not to blame(even though I think Shia was only put in to attractfans from his other movies), because as I said before, It was THE ALIENS! The small Asian boy was better than Mutt though.

You must Login or Register to post.