Crabapple Cove

Nightmare Before Christmas, Tim Burton’s earlier stop-motion film, has something of a cult following. I am not a part of that cult. I remember being bored by it in the theater — most especially by Danny Elfman’s lackluster songs. On balance, Corpse Bride is quite a bit less engaging than “Nightmare”. If “Nightmare” has anything going for it, it’s its charming premise — the King of Hallloween having to sub in for Santa Claus. It’s a Rankin Bass holiday special with Burton’s particular brand of cheery gothic creepiness. “Bride” does not have a similarly engaging hook. It’s neither a good film nor a particularly bad one either — it just kind of lays there in that muddy middle region. And Elfman’s score is no better here than it was in “Nightmare”.

Corpse Bride is not anywhere near as bad as The Aristocats, but I’m about ready to see a good animated film now.

The first ten minutes of Juno feels like it belongs in a totally different movie. The dialogue is so stylized that it pops out at you — and I don’t mean that in a good way. Writer Diablo Cody seems to have had an agenda: 1) Create a hip, crazy new venacular 2) Have The Kids embrace said venacular 3) Watch as venacular spreads like wild fire and 4) Be the coolest ex-stripper turned writer in history. Well, thankfully, The Kids haven’t embraced Codyspeak (at least not that I’ve seen) and — after those overly quirky opening minutes — the writer settles down to tell a sweet, good-natured story which is free of both treacle and an overt political stance.

If you haven’t seen Juno yet, stick it out through those first ten minutes. It gets good after that, I promise.

As most of you probably know, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull had a long, rocky road to the screen. Over the last decade or so, several writers were brought onto the project and none of them ever came up with a script that brought a consensus amongst the Big Three (Lucas, Spielberg and Ford). That’s understandable, wouldn’t you agree? The Indiana Jones films occupy a rarified place in cinema history — at least one of them is a bonefied classic. So, we could certainly forgive the creators of that iconic character for wanting to take the time to get things just right. Except something went horribly wrong on the way to the multiplex. “Crystal Skull”’s most disappointing feature is its rather anemic and, frankly, nonsensical screenplay. Whatever the movie’s other virtues, it’s difficult to believe that Lucas and company thought that David Koepp’s script was ready for prime time.

One of those other writers who worked the Lucasfilm salt mines prior to Koepp’s version getting the green light was Frank Darabont. Darabont (who started his career on the staff of The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles) has written and directed such films as The Shawshank Redemption, The Green Mile and The Mist. His version was called Indiana Jones and the City of the Gods. Word is, both Ford and Spielberg loved his take on things and were ready to proceed, but it was Lucas who put the kibosh on it for reasons which still remain murky. Anyway, “City of the Gods” was consigned to the scrap heap and the Big Three were forced to go back to the drawing board. Well, perhaps not all the way back to the drawing board. Even before “Crystal Skull” was released, Darabont was saying publicly that its striking resemblance to “City of the Gods” had him concerned. In fact, he thought that it looked close enough that he was considering going to the Writer’s Guild of America to seek screen credit. I haven’t heard whether or not he has done this, but his candor on the matter was very intriguing to me.

So, where am I going with all this? Well, as these things often do, Frank Darabont’s script for Indiana Jones and the City of the Gods leaked itself onto the internet yesterday. I’ve read it and I thought I’d throw in my two cents. First off, let me just say that Darabont could and should seek redress with the WGA. Koepp apparently lifted things from “City of the Gods” whole-cloth for “Crystal Skull”. Not just the overall structure, but whole scenes and set pieces. The truth is, I’m wondering what Koepp did at the end of the day and I’m resentful toward him for collecting what I’m sure was a handsome paycheck for borderline plagiarism and hack work. What’s different between the two stories then? Well, a lot of things, but two things which will probably be of interest to all you fans out there: 1) There’s no Mutt Williams. Dr. Jones has no son as far as Darabont’s story is concerned. 2) Karen Allen is actually given something to do in “City of the Gods” — she’s more active in the narrative and she’s more like the Marion Ravenwood you all remember from Raiders of the Lost Ark. This latter bit is a real shame to me given that I believe Marion to be, by far, the most interesting female in any of the prior three movies and it would have been nice to see her do more than stand around and mug for the camera (which, don’t get me wrong, Karen Allen does really well, but come on already). Also, the villains are different here too — while it’s still the Russians, there’s no Cate Blanchett. Now as much as I enjoy Ms. Blanchett, I did find her character in “Crystal Skull” to be a little on the cartoonish side. While he doesn’t quite make them compelling enough for my tastes, I do believe that Darabont gives us better (or at least more plausible) villains in his take on things. Really, that’s the primary thing he brings to the table versus David Koepp — his script makes sense. It’s lean, it’s tight and it’s got some snappy patter to boot.

I guess it’s pointless to ruminate over what might have been, but I’ve got to say that in almost every way, “City of the Gods” is a better Indiana Jones story than “Kingdom of the Crystal Skull”. One or two more polish drafts and Darabont would’ve given us an Indy IV that wouldn’t have been nearly as polarizing. I’d pose the question ‘What in the hell was Lucas thinking?’ but that’s become somewhat of a cliche in recent years, hasn’t it?

If you’ve paid any attention to this site over the years, you probably know that I like to rag on DreamWorks Animation. Their movies are generally soulless — bogged down with obnoxious behavior and pop culture references which serve no other purpose than popping you out of the story. Well, I’m about to say something I never thought I would say: Kung Fu Panda is good enough that Pixar could have made it. That’s a left-handed compliment to be sure, but Pixar set the bar that everyone else doing this type of film has to clear. And “Panda” directors Mark Osborne and John Stevenson manage to clear it. The movie has appealing characters, its sentiment is well-earned, the action is fantastic, and it’s quite possibly the best looking CGI movie to date. In fact, I think Kung Fu Panda is probably the best animated movie since Brad Bird’s The Incredibles.

For once I’m giving a DreamWorks movie an unreserved recommendation. Cue the apocalypse.

I blame David Koepp for most of the problems with Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull — and, believe me, the film has more than its fair share of problems. With movies like Mission Impossible (a flick which, I swear to God, should come with Cliffs Notes) and Jurassic Park: The Lost World as part of his resume, Koepp strikes me as a very workman-like screenwriter. His stuff lacks pizazz and, often, simple logic. The latter is certainly true of “Crystal Skull”. Despite the characters giving the appearance of knowing what they’re talking about, I defy anyone (most particularly Koepp himself) to explain to me the plot of this movie. It can’t be done. To put it simply, not all of the details of this little romp interconnect. Raiders of the Lost Ark, by way of contrast, is simple, lean and it makes perfect sense. Frankly, I’m a little shocked that Lucas, Spielberg and Ford would go forward with a shooting script this sloppily put together. After a nineteen year absence from the screen, you’d think they’d want to take a few more months to make sure their story was a little more air-tight.

That all sounds like a “pan”, doesn’t it? Well, it isn’t entirely. For all of its shortcomings, “Crystal Skull” does still have a lot to recommend it. At least two of the action scenes are top-notch, the actors all acquit themselves well, and there are moments of pure nostalgic joy. Indiana Jones deserved a more auspicious return to cinema screens, but his latest adventure is still worth at least one trip to the multiplex this summer. You out there: you know you’re going to see it regardless of the reviews and the good news is you’ll have a fine time despite occasionally pausing to scratch your head in baffled disappointment.