Indiana Jones 5

[imsounoriginal]

Originally Posted by chip75

The main problem with Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skull is the MacGuffin is the entire story, it drives the entire film from the first scene to the end of the movie.

The MacGuffin's importance is seen as a major attraction by Lucas, whilst Hitchcock thought it was just a tease to more consequential things. Lucas's attitude seems to have changed over the years as the original three movies MacGuffins were quite unimportant to the overall story (Indy loses two of them and gives the stones back to the villagers), but by the time he wrote KotCS it was of paramount importance.

Not sure what you mean by this, since Indy is chasing the Ark, the Stones, and the Grail all the way through to basically the penultimate scenes of their respective movies. They're hugely important to moving the plots of the OT movies forward.

[chip75]

Originally Posted by imsounoriginal

Not sure what you mean by this, since Indy is chasing the Ark, the Stones, and the Grail all the way through to basically the penultimate scenes of their respective movies. They're hugely important to moving the plots of the OT movies forward.

A MacGuffin can lead right up to the end of the movie (and lead the plot) and still not be what the movie's about. For example, the Holy Grail is Last Crusade's MacGuffin, but the real story is about Indiana Jones and Henry Jones Sr., the MacGuffin sets them (and us the audience) on a path to the reconciling their differences.

With KotCS (which I enjoy quite a lot) it's basically all the movie's about, there isn't much more to it, or what is there isn't explored to much satisfaction.

[Geoff D]

I think Crystal Skull does that, it's just more ham-fisted in the execution of it, like Indy right at the end when he says "their treasure was knowledge" or whatever it was. And having gained a son in the meantime that's his true quest in the film, even though he doesn't know it until the end. It's more similar to Last Crusade in that respect than people may think.

[klauswhereareyou]

I like Crystal Skull, but my main beef with it is there are just too many characters along for the ride. I could have done without the John Hurt and Ray Winstone characters.

[tob]

Originally Posted by klauswhereareyou

I like Crystal Skull, but my main beef with it is there are just too many characters along for the ride. I could have done without the John Hurt and Ray Winstone characters.

Ray Winstone was the only good character in that mess of a film.

[chip75]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

I think Crystal Skull does that, it's just more ham-fisted in the execution of it, like Indy right at the end when he says "their treasure was knowledge" or whatever it was. And having gained a son in the meantime that's his true quest in the film, even though he doesn't know it until the end. It's more similar to Last Crusade in that respect than people may think.

It has the other bits, but as you said they're not handled as well as the other movies, so unless we're 100% invested in those inter-dimensional-beings our interest will wane. The MacGuffin is from the first scene as well, there's nothing else to the movie, Raiders has the great opening, which introduces Belloq and Indy, Temple of Doom has the nightclub scene, Last Crusade has the cross with young Indy. It would have been nice to have re-introduced Indiana Jones on another adventure before we got to Area 51 and the main-villainess.

As I said I think it's more of a difference between how someone like Hitchcock saw the MacGuffin and how Lucas sees it. Perhaps the main difference between Kingdom and the other movies is that the non-MacGuffin stuff had more heart.

It also has a weird disparity between action scenes, the bike/case in the beginning is a wonderful series highlight compared to the CGI mess of the jungle chase. I think Kingdom is a fun movie, but it could have been done slightly differently.

[richieb1971]

Crystal skull had too many kiddie stunt scenes with machine guns going off all over the place without any sense of realism.

I expected Bruce Campbell to turn up any minute.

[chip75]

Originally Posted by tob

Ray Winstone was the only good character in that mess of a film.

I was shocked when I saw him. He'd really let himself go after Beowulf ...

[klauswhereareyou]

Originally Posted by tob

Ray Winstone was the only good character in that mess of a film.

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.

[ZoetMB]

Originally Posted by wonkavision

Ford got much slack for looking so old in Crystal Skull...he will only look older for the 5th installment. It would be nice to see a different actor play Indy.

Looking old was the least of his problems in Crystal Skull. It was a terrible movie and Ford acted liked he was impersonating Harrison Ford doing Indy. He was so much better in The Force Awakens and I'm hoping that's the actor we get in the new Indy film.

What we don't really know is whether the film is Ford playing Indy throughout or whether he's doing a wraparound ala "The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles" and another younger actor will be in the body of the film. It's probably Ford throughout, but you never know. The film needs a killer script that makes sense and a fully engaged Spielberg. It has to take place in the 1960s, so that's limiting. As I've written elsewhere, I can picture something that takes place deep in the Amazon.

I don't want any aliens, Nazis or Russian spies. We've seen enough of that. It should not match the beats of any of the previous films. It needs to be fresh and different.

[Hardback247]

I highly recommend this article:
http://whatculture.com/film/10-reaso...l-that-bad.php

[ZoetMB]

Originally Posted by IndyMLVC

And how are you going to write out Indiana's SON?!?

Easy. Father and son had another falling out and son went off, got married and is an accountant in Pittsburgh. Or they didn't have a falling out, son followed into father's footsteps, got his degree in archeology and is teaching in Italy or is on a dig in Iraq. Or, son went on a dig and died in an accident or joined the military and died on duty.

I don't even think you'll see Karen Allen in the new film.

[chip75]

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

Easy. Father and son had another falling out and son went off, got married and is an accountant in Pittsburgh. Or they didn't have a falling out, son followed into father's footsteps, got his degree in archeology and is teaching in Italy or is on a dig in Iraq. Or, son went on a dig and died in an accident or joined the military and died on duty.

I don't even think you'll see Karen Allen in the new film.

In keeping with the portraits of Henry and Marcus used in Kingdom, Mutt's picture on Indy's desk would be a still from the film. I suggest the one with him getting hit in the balls ...

[ZoetMB]

Originally Posted by klauswhereareyou

Hope this film takes place in the 1960's and Indy goes on adventures with young film makers George Lucas and Steven Spielberg in Southern California.

That would be very meta. Does Indy re-locate the arc of the covenant in a movie studio warehouse?

Originally Posted by imsounoriginal

Could Indy show up at Woodstock? That'd be great.

He's not Forrest Gump.

Originally Posted by Gentle Star

I want Indy V to start with Indy on the phone with Mutt, checking up on how he is doing in school, making sure he is finishing college.
Then I want Jones to team up with Tarzan in the jungle, where they swing on the vines together, yelling the Tarzan-yell to their hearts content, so Spielberg can get that shit out of his frikkin' system!

You joke about that, but as I wrote elsewhere, Indy teaming up with the "real" Tarzan as conceived by Philip Jose Farmer in "Tarzan Alive" could be quite great. I've always thought of the Indy films as being very Burroughsian. But as Farmer and the man who was Tarzan explain in "Tarzan Alive", he never swung on vines because he'd be too heavy. That was made up by ERB.

Originally Posted by Abby is Q

I just realized that history could possibly end up sending Indiana Jones to 'Nam in the next movie. Oh dear god...

Although, if we get a 70-year-old Indiana Jones in his underwear freaking out and doing tai chi in his hotel room I may be on board.

If you think of Vietnam as a place with an ancient culture, jungle and lots of artifacts, it could be a great location for an Indy film. If it coincides with the war, the war could serve as a backdrop and a challenge for whatever Indy is doing. He could even wind up saving a bunch of civilians from bad guys, whether they're Vietnamese, Chinese, Cambodian or Americans.

[doctor_who]

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

Easy. Father and son had another falling out and son went off, got married and is an accountant in Pittsburgh. Or they didn't have a falling out, son followed into father's footsteps, got his degree in archeology and is teaching in Italy or is on a dig in Iraq. Or, son went on a dig and died in an accident or joined the military and died on duty.

I don't even think you'll see Karen Allen in the new film.

Well that was easy.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by chip75

It has the other bits, but as you said they're not handled as well as the other movies, so unless we're 100% invested in those inter-dimensional-beings our interest will wane. The MacGuffin is from the first scene as well, there's nothing else to the movie, Raiders has the great opening, which introduces Belloq and Indy, Temple of Doom has the nightclub scene, Last Crusade has the cross with young Indy. It would have been nice to have re-introduced Indiana Jones on another adventure before we got to Area 51 and the main-villainess.

As I said I think it's more of a difference between how someone like Hitchcock saw the MacGuffin and how Lucas sees it. Perhaps the main difference between Kingdom and the other movies is that the non-MacGuffin stuff had more heart.

It also has a weird disparity between action scenes, the bike/case in the beginning is a wonderful series highlight compared to the CGI mess of the jungle chase. I think Kingdom is a fun movie, but it could have been done slightly differently.

Hmmm. I see what you're saying but the opening for me works just as well as an action-packed teaser as well as being part of the Search For The MacGuffin™. There's no reason in my mind why it can't fulfil both aspects, and I don't think Lucas did it because he was so MacGuffin-obsessed as you say - he was heavily involved with the other three Indy movies, after all - it's more that there was so much ground to cover given the length of in-world time that had elapsed since the last movie.

So they leapt in with both feet, starting this movie's story in earnest whilst simultaneously expounding just what Indy had been up to (working for the OSS in WWII with Mac, then having stayed on with the US Govt at Area 51, assisting with the Roswell crash etc). Personally I think it's pretty damned efficient at setting up those aspects of the film.

Besides, the opening of Raiders doesn't pertain to the Ark but it's still got Belloq who renews his rivalry with Jones later in the movie, so I don't think it's as divorced from proceedings as you think it is. Remove that opening and all of a sudden it's like "who's this Belloq guy and why does Indy hate him?". Yes, I know this point doesn't pertain to your KOTCS MacGuffin dislike specifically but I thought it worth mentioning.

[baheidstu]

I love Indiana Jones, I think Harrison Ford is one the greatest movie stars of all time, I even liked KOTCS to a certain degree and cut it a great deal of slack, that being said the idea of an Indy pushing 80 years old in another adventure fills me with dread. Maybe some people will hope this will exorcise their distate for the last film but I think they will be sorely disappointed. They need to cash out now before they lose all their credibility in a futile attempt to recapture the glory days of the 80s.

[aiman04]

Spielberg has also consistently kept the door open for another Indiana Jones movie. In a 2011 interview, the director told EW: “It’s up to George. We already have agreed on the genre of the fifth movie, we already have a concept in mind. I don’t know where George is at with the story. When George writes the story that he’s happy with and can defend, he’ll call me and say, ‘I’m ready to send this to you.’ But until the phone rings on that subject, because we talk all the time about every other subject, until the phone rings on the Indy 5 subject, there is no Indy 5 until George says there is.”

That was in 2011. But that means Lucas did work on the story before his retirement. I hope they use his story, though I'm not putting my hopes up so high. 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

[Walts Ghost]

Wouldn't be the first time they thought about it. One of the older scripts for the third film started with Indy in a haunted castle in Scotland.

I'm really not thinking Lucas is involved at this point though.

[Aerodude73]

Originally Posted by baheidstu

I love Indiana Jones, I think Harrison Ford is one the greatest movie stars of all time, I even liked KOTCS to a certain degree and cut it a great deal of slack, that being said the idea of an Indy pushing 80 years old in another adventure fills me with dread. Maybe some people will hope this will exorcise their distate for the last film but I think they will be sorely disappointed. They need to cash out now before they lose all their credibility in a futile attempt to recapture the glory days of the 80s.

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...