Scott Eastwood?
If they reboot INDIANA JONES, who would you pick to play Indy?
- Thread starter Pookie
- Start date
I generally agree with the "nooooooooooooo don't reboot it!" sentiment! The originals (minus that awful 4th movie) are just too good to tarnish with a reboot.
If I had to pick, though, I think a relatively unknown would be best. (Isn't that basically how the Star Trek reboots did it? Aside from Quinto on Heroes and Urban with a bit of sci-fi recognition, everyone else was pretty new)
I vote Rob Kazinsky (Pacific Rim, and he was almost in the Hobbit, but left due to personal/family reasons)
Or Karl Urban
Tyler Hoechlin? (I know he's on some silly MTV show right now, but he's got a lot of buzz around him as an upcoming actor)
Poor guy must be regretting his life choices. No one hates his resume more than Robert Pattinson himself. IMO, it's the same reason Charlie Hunnam bowed out of a 50 Shades of Grey movie. :facepalm
That started already? I keep seeing stuff from Chris Kane's FB (Or am I just dumb and this show they're talking about is a reboot still involving Noah?)
If I had to pick, though, I think a relatively unknown would be best. (Isn't that basically how the Star Trek reboots did it? Aside from Quinto on Heroes and Urban with a bit of sci-fi recognition, everyone else was pretty new)
I vote Rob Kazinsky (Pacific Rim, and he was almost in the Hobbit, but left due to personal/family reasons)
Or Karl Urban
Tyler Hoechlin? (I know he's on some silly MTV show right now, but he's got a lot of buzz around him as an upcoming actor)
The problem is by the time these people decide they didn't like the movie, they already paid and watched it! In order to find out if you liked it, you have to watch it, and if you go to the theatre because you hoped it was good, you put numbers in their stats. Lose-lose.
Poor guy must be regretting his life choices. No one hates his resume more than Robert Pattinson himself. IMO, it's the same reason Charlie Hunnam bowed out of a 50 Shades of Grey movie. :facepalm
That started already? I keep seeing stuff from Chris Kane's FB (Or am I just dumb and this show they're talking about is a reboot still involving Noah?)
Solo4114
Master Member
IF they do a reboot -- and I pray they don't -- I expect they'll reboot the series with an actor in their late 20s or early 30s, signed to a multi-picture deal, so as to get the most bang for their buck.
But realistically, I just don't see this happening and wouldn't want it happening.
Indy, the character, is firmly rooted in Republic adventure serials and such, usually set in and around the 1930s. You could extend that into the 1940s and have him involved in World War II, but you can't really go past that (as the 4th film showed). Indy in the 1950s, or god forbid the 1960s or 1970s just...wouldn't make sense. He'd be a complete fish out of water, and not in an entertaining way.
I just don't see Indy as being all that adaptable to other timeframes. For that matter, I think Indy adapted to other timeframes would feel VERY formulaic in a bad way. I think Indy is basically a trilogy, and beyond that, there just ain't much story to tell. Tell other stories in a somewhat similar vein with different characters.
But realistically, I just don't see this happening and wouldn't want it happening.
Indy, the character, is firmly rooted in Republic adventure serials and such, usually set in and around the 1930s. You could extend that into the 1940s and have him involved in World War II, but you can't really go past that (as the 4th film showed). Indy in the 1950s, or god forbid the 1960s or 1970s just...wouldn't make sense. He'd be a complete fish out of water, and not in an entertaining way.
I just don't see Indy as being all that adaptable to other timeframes. For that matter, I think Indy adapted to other timeframes would feel VERY formulaic in a bad way. I think Indy is basically a trilogy, and beyond that, there just ain't much story to tell. Tell other stories in a somewhat similar vein with different characters.
Jon Kelley
Active Member
Karl Urban?
Young enough to play the role, old enough to make it believable, tries to do a number of his own stunts, and is a decent actor in his own right.
I think the more pertinent question would be "Who should play Dr. Jones, Sr."? Or, will this be Henry III with Harry Ford as Henry II?
He...would actually fit the look pretty well I think.
Hell if I know about his acting,I've just caught bits of him in the Twilight thing which my friend's wife and daughters love.
Probe Droid
Master Member
He looks like a chick.
Riceball
Master Member
I like the idea of Carl Urban but the problem with him is that, one: he's already tied into NuTrek and some audiences might associate him too much with McCoy to see him as Indy and not to mention that I'm not sure you could have an actor tied so closely to two big franchises simultaneously; two: you'd have to film at least 3 Indy films in fairly short order in order to get the most out of him otherwise you'll run into the same situation as with Harrison Ford where he'll get too old to play the character if you space the films out too far.
glunark
Sr Member
You mean like having the same guy plan Indiana Jones and Han Solo for example?
Riceball
Master Member
I stand corrected, Harrison did do both simultaneously although Temple of Doom didn't come out until after Jedi.
Well why couldn't it still be a period piece? The assumption here is that Indy is going to get "updated" to the present just because of a reboot. But it doesn't have to be.
Also, Sherlock Holmes was supposed to be set in Victorian times, but the BBC managed to update it incredibly well in Sherlock.
Last edited:
Similar threads
