Indiana Jones 5

[jimidini]

Originally Posted by aiman04

And interesting that Spielberg mentioned about choosing a genre, what does that mean? Maybe it won't be about religious artifacts, voodoo cults or inter-dimensional beings, could it be about ghosts?

Source

Lucas wanted to go with a haunted Mansion for Indiana Jones 3, so...

[Himmel]

I wonder if Ford will make them kill him off.

[Walts Ghost]

Originally Posted by HimmelBlau

I wonder if Ford will make them kill him off.

You know, he might. He's said before he does want his characters killed off down the line. Could explain why they dumped the old Indy bookends, minus Ford's, from the Young Indiana Jones DVD sets.

[Zivouhr]

Originally Posted by levcore

Nah, Indy was always serialised adventures, I'd be happy for some interesting young blood to take the reigns and have some exciting new adventures

Agreed that once Harrison Ford retires from acting, it's another actor to play the part or no more Indiana Jones further adventures at all. I understand fans get attached to an actor, but James Bond 007 is a perfect example of how a film series can continue to work with new actors playing the same role but with a different style while still honoring the core character.

If Sean Connery was the one and only James Bond, imagine all of the cool 007 movies we would have never gotten after Diamonds Are Forever, Never Say Never Again...

[Gizz]

Originally Posted by klauswhereareyou

He was nothing more than fat boy comic relief that screamed out Jonesy every two seconds and then stupidly revealed "oh no I'm a bad guy, no I'm a good guy, no I'm a bad guy." He was a lame character that I could never see Jones relying on during WWII as a spy like the back story tells.

He was one of the worst things about the film.

[Gizz]

Originally Posted by Aerodude73

pretty much agree - yea, he was good in the new SW, "BUT", how much ACTION did he really engage in? A "Few" scenes of him running, not Leading a story like we usually expect from him as Indiana Jones. I don't know, it could work, but at some point, how old is too old? When the actor (whomever it it), is 80, 85? I mean, come on...

I agree they have left it to late and I love films well I like the 4th one but you have to let things go.

[levcore]

Originally Posted by HimmelBlau

I wonder if Ford will make them kill him off.

I think they will have Mutt kill him in a shocking twist on a bridge across a canyon.

[levcore]

Originally Posted by Zivouhr

Agreed that once Harrison Ford retires from acting, it's another actor to play the part or no more Indiana Jones further adventures at all. I understand fans get attached to an actor, but James Bond 007 is a perfect example of how a film series can continue to work with new actors playing the same role but with a different style while still honoring the core character.

If Sean Connery was the one and only James Bond, imagine all of the cool 007 movies we would have never gotten after Diamonds Are Forever, Never Say Never Again...

Exactly. They need to find someone with Ford's effortless charm which is no easy task but if it's an unknown so be it.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Zivouhr

Agreed that once Harrison Ford retires from acting, it's another actor to play the part or no more Indiana Jones further adventures at all. I understand fans get attached to an actor, but James Bond 007 is a perfect example of how a film series can continue to work with new actors playing the same role but with a different style while still honoring the core character.

If Sean Connery was the one and only James Bond, imagine all of the cool 007 movies we would have never gotten after Diamonds Are Forever, Never Say Never Again...

It's funny though, people have said "Indy is not Bond" re: recasting but the irony is that the character was seen as Lucas and Spielbergo's rebuff to Bond (something further alluded to with the opening of Temple of Doom where Indy's wearing that classic white Tux). I'm not saying that they meant for the character to be represented by an ever-revolving cadre of actors over the years, but Indy is such a timeless kinda character and there's such a rich amount of history and myth that can be explored so it'd be a shame if it just stopped when Ford did.

People say they're sick of WWII blah blah but I'm not, and if further adventures saw Indy getting into scrapes during his time with OSS then I'd be well up for that! We've already had two guys playing the younger Indiana Jones and the world didn't cave in, so let's have Ford's last hurrah - which could POSSIBLY involve some sort of flashback style narrative so as to introduce his new younger counterpart - and then move on from there.

[klauswhereareyou]

If they do end up doing a reboot at some point, I can see them just deciding to have the films take place in contemporary times.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by klauswhereareyou

If they do end up doing a reboot at some point, I can see them just deciding to have the films take place in contemporary times.

Weirdly enough, I was thinking the same thing as I was typing the above post. I'd hate to see that happen though, part of Indy's appeal to me is his timelessness (the movies having generally been set 40 or 50 years behind the modern day when they were made) so if he were updated to modern times then they might as well call him Nathan Drake or Dirk Pitt and be done with it.

[dgoswald]

If they are going to introduce someone to take on the mantel of Indy, I think they should go for one of his students. They should riff on the old Raiders / Crusade door-opens-into-classroom scene, but instead of Donovan walking into the room, have the yet-to-be protege making his entrance.

[chip75]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Weirdly enough, I was thinking the same thing as I was typing the above post. I'd hate to see that happen though, part of Indy's appeal to me is his timelessness (the movies having generally been set 40 or 50 years behind the modern day when they were made) so if he were updated to modern times then they might as well call him Nathan Drake or Dirk Pitt and be done with it.

I'd be terribly disappointed if they moved the series into the present day. I love all the period stuff with a twist (it's a shame Captain America only got one adventure in the '40s) and the idea that they moved Kingdom into the '50s style B-Movies wasn't bad (although half the films I seem to watch from the '50s seem to take place in a one location!) and the era was a good fit for Indy. I don't think they need to jump into the '60s for the new one, but a smaller story without huge CGI set-pieces would be preferable.

[dgoswald]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Weirdly enough, I was thinking the same thing as I was typing the above post. I'd hate to see that happen though, part of Indy's appeal to me is his timelessness (the movies having generally been set 40 or 50 years behind the modern day when they were made) so if he were updated to modern times then they might as well call him Nathan Drake or Dirk Pitt and be done with it.

We could still get Indy 5 deal with Nazis even if the film is set in the 50's or 60's. The writers could craft a story around the Nazi hierarchy escaping to South America - as they did - and going to ground, and we could see a dedicated top-ranking Nazi wanting to hit back at the world one last time with a religious artifact in tow, or something. Of course, they'll have to gloss over the fact that the Americans also took in many, many German scientists and officials who were put to work in NASA and on other government projects.

[baheidstu]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

It's funny though, people have said "Indy is not Bond" re: recasting but the irony is that the character was seen as Lucas and Spielbergo's rebuff to Bond (something further alluded to with the opening of Temple of Doom where Indy's wearing that classic white Tux). I'm not saying that they meant for the character to be represented by an ever-revolving cadre of actors over the years, but Indy is such a timeless kinda character and there's such a rich amount of history and myth that can be explored so it'd be a shame if it just stopped when Ford did.

People say they're sick of WWII blah blah but I'm not, and if further adventures saw Indy getting into scrapes during his time with OSS then I'd be well up for that! We've already had two guys playing the younger Indiana Jones and the world didn't cave in, so let's have Ford's last hurrah - which could POSSIBLY involve some sort of flashback style narrative so as to introduce his new younger counterpart - and then move on from there.

I wouldn't be averse to a decent re-casting of Indy. And I agree, that for me part of the appeal was the 1930s setting of the original trilogy. These films were inspired by 1930s movie serials, so that is a natural setting for them. There's a romanticism about that time period that is part of the appeal of the films. Even an update to the 60s wouldn't work for me as it would be too modern.

[dallywhitty]

Kingdom of the Crystal Skull was rubbish so lulduncurr in regards to a new one. I've always thought the reception to these films was disproportionate anyway. 1 and 3 get more love than they deserve whereas Temple of Doom gets too much hate.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by chip75

I'd be terribly disappointed if they moved the series into the present day. I love all the period stuff with a twist (it's a shame Captain America only got one adventure in the '40s) and the idea that they moved Kingdom into the '50s style B-Movies wasn't bad (although half the films I seem to watch from the '50s seem to take place in a one location!) and the era was a good fit for Indy. I don't think they need to jump into the '60s for the new one, but a smaller story without huge CGI set-pieces would be preferable.

That's my one great regret about Cap on screen, I'd have loved to see him kick ass in WWII some more.

Originally Posted by baheidstu

I wouldn't be averse to a decent re-casting of Indy. And I agree, that for me part of the appeal was the 1930s setting of the original trilogy. These films were inspired by 1930s movie serials, so that is a natural setting for them. There's a romanticism about that time period that is part of the appeal of the films. Even an update to the 60s wouldn't work for me as it would be too modern.

I liked what they did with the look of the '50s set Crystal Skull though. They didn't even try and ape Dougie Slocombe's photography from the original trilogy but went for something that had more of a classically filtered look (all gauzy textures and star filters) and IMO it works really well.

[dgoswald]

Originally Posted by dallywhitty

Kingdom of the Crystal Skull was rubbish so lulduncurr in regards to a new one. I've always thought the reception to these films was disproportionate anyway. 1 and 3 get more love than they deserve whereas Temple of Doom gets too much hate.

ToD is a shade better than LC, IMO. I only realised this quite recently when I watched all 3 on Blu-ray for the first time on consecutive nights. ToD is different to 1 and 3, but good-different. Arguably, it has some of the most memorable action set-pieces and best dramatic moments out of the films either side of it (rubber dinghy aside).

[Geoff D]

Temple might just be my favourite nowadays, it's like some deliriously dotty comic book come to life. I raved about it on my most recent rewatch, when the BBC were showing them over Chrimbo: https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...7#post11655977

[stvn1974]

Originally Posted by klauswhereareyou

If they do end up doing a reboot at some point, I can see them just deciding to have the films take place in contemporary times.

Indy using Google maps would suck.