Disney acquires rights to Indiana Jones

[rodneyfaile]

I would just hate to see Indiana Jones with an iPhone.

 

[CessnaDriver]

Who said anything about moving forward?

The movies were set in 35, 36, 38 and 57. Undoubtedly he did stuff before 35 and in 37 and between 39 and 57. Lots of stuff for them to work with without rebooting. Nazi's existed up to 1945, and you could do Nazi gold/treasure stories up to today quite frankly.

Agreed.
There are a TON of adventures the character can have. Recast, sure, reboot not needed.
My delusional fantasy is they get back to the spirit of Raiders, Indy was a bad ass and as Belloq said,
a nudge could push him out of the light. Every movie after got farther and farther away from that.

 

[Cookiee Monsta]

Yeah, but good luck telling the MOUSE HOUSE that :lol
Any chance to make more money off a franchise, they will be all over it!

Its called milking it for all its worth.

 

[Probe Droid]

Either Disney has Ford by the balls or vice versa. Ford has stated that he's not too keen on more SW but would love to do another Indy, so I'm guessing one side or the other is dangling Indy as a carrot for doing SW. It'll be interesting to see how this pans out.

 

[Laspector]

Agreed.
There are a TON of adventures the character can have. Recast, sure, reboot not needed.
My delusional fantasy is they get back to the spirit of Raiders, Indy was a bad ass and as Belloq said,
a nudge could push him out of the light. Every movie after got farther and farther away from that.

I agree with this completely! Hard drinker, bad ass. I mean let's face it, it's pretty obvious the guy had sex with an under age Marion. His female students adored him, who knows how many of them he banged. I'm not saying that is what makes him a bad ass, but in Raiders I always get the idea that Indy cares about archaeology and that's pretty much it. Even in TOD he is referenced as a grave robber.

 

[Monkey67]

- - - Updated - - -

God help us. Disney's out to milk everything. Pretty soon they'll buy the rights to all the games Square-Enix makes instead of just making the kingdom hearts games for them.

No kidding, I'm still pissed that they have taken this long to make a real new full blown one. None of those we're jumping to DS crap ones. Also the 2nd one was to take place in the Final Fantasy world. So it would be darker and not cartoony. But disney showed them more money and said cartoon style yo!

 

[Vivek]

Don't Expect a New Indiana Jones Movie for at Least Two to Three Years | Variety

I think we will likely see Star Wars Episode VIII before the next Indiana Jones movie rolls out.

 

[Probe Droid]

That most likely leaves Ford out of it.

 

[rodneyfaile]

What I would REALLY like is more live action Young Indiana Jones Adventures TV series.

 

[Captain Dunsel]

I think they'll do a transition flick to hand the reigns over to a new actor with Ford in "book end scenes" that ties a prior adventure in the 1930's to one in the 1950's. If it's successful, the following movies will star just the new guy.

Think of "old grizzled Spock" showing up in 2009's "Star Trek" to lend the new project some legitimacy.

As much as Ford IS Indians a Jones, they wasted too much time in the 1990's when he could have had at least two more adventures. The guy is just too old to be believable performing the stunt work necessary. Indiana Jones in his 80's jumping onto moving autos, etc is just not believable.

The poor guy seems to be relegated to "grumpy old man" character roles of late.

 

[Joosh]

Think of "old grizzled Spock" showing up in 2009's "Star Trek" to lend the new project some legitimacy.

I'd really rather not. I'd like to think they'd manage to do something halfway decent if they decide to do something with Indiana Jones, but for the most part Hollywoods recent stuff has made me more and more pessimistic that can happen.

 

[MFP 2020]

I've been seeing disdainful posts about Disney/Indy, but I'm not seeing where they "Disney-fied" and therefore ruined a property. On the Nerdist podcast, Avengers producer Kevin Feige said that Disney has been great about letting productions do their thing. Being owned by Disney certainly hasn't hurt Marvel's output.

And to further support that claim: Disney CFO: ?Star Wars? Will Follow Marvel Strategy

 

[Solo4114]

I'd really rather not. I'd like to think they'd manage to do something halfway decent if they decide to do something with Indiana Jones, but for the most part Hollywoods recent stuff has made me more and more pessimistic that can happen.

Seconded. Indy is a figure who needs to reside in a given time period -- the 1930s-1940s. Sticking him into the 50s or 60s, or having his kid or protege or whatever continue the story...it seems like a mistake to me.

I wouldn't be surprised if there was an attempt to simply step out of the past entirely and have the new Indy be a kid who learned from his unusually long-lived grandpa about all his adventures, and who decides to go into that line of work. But I honestly question how well those films would translate into the modern era.


To be perfectly honest...I just don't see any purpose in trying to continue the Indy franchise AS Indiana Jones and the [something something]. I think the general archetype of Indy (sort of a scruffy, American hybrid of Doc Samson, Alan Quartermain, and James Bond) is more adaptable than the brand itself.

 

[Riceball]

I have to agree about Indy needing to set in a fixed period, well, not really need but works best. I think that there is just some sort of nostalgia and romanticism about the 20s and 30s that just works as a setting for Indy, the world seems just so much larger back then and there are still a lot of places of mystery that abound and are prime settings for adventures. Now a days, thanks to modern technology, the world has gotten so much smaller and there seem to be far fewer isolated places where one could have a grand Indy style adventure, and fewer mysteries left to be solved. I think that for a more modern Indy to work, esp. if it's present day, the writers would have to come up with too many lame reasons and excuses for why Indy wouldn't be using all of the high tech gadgets available to him because I think that the use of present day high tech gadgets would ruin the Indy feel.

 

[Solo4114]

I have to agree about Indy needing to set in a fixed period, well, not really need but works best. I think that there is just some sort of nostalgia and romanticism about the 20s and 30s that just works as a setting for Indy, the world seems just so much larger back then and there are still a lot of places of mystery that abound and are prime settings for adventures. Now a days, thanks to modern technology, the world has gotten so much smaller and there seem to be far fewer isolated places where one could have a grand Indy style adventure, and fewer mysteries left to be solved. I think that for a more modern Indy to work, esp. if it's present day, the writers would have to come up with too many lame reasons and excuses for why Indy wouldn't be using all of the high tech gadgets available to him because I think that the use of present day high tech gadgets would ruin the Indy feel.

I agree. Hell, they'd have to explain why he wears the hat and carries a whip.

But just as I think they can't really set it in the modern age, I don't think they can set it in the past, either. There's a finite amount of time to work with. Even if you ignore the Young Indiana Jones Chronicles (which ends, I think, in 1922 or 1925 or something), you still only have about a 10-20 year window within which to tell stories. We have three stories set within three years of each other: Temple in 1935, Raiders in 1936, and Crusade in 1938. So, that leaves you with the early 30s, and the 1940s, basically.

Now, I've long thought that Indy working for the OSS would be super cool....but I dunno that anyone else can play the part. So, you're right back where you started, with Harrison BEING Indy, nobody else working in the role, the canonicity of Crystal Skull unlikely to be challenged (and thus it not making sense to put another actor in a film set in the 1940s), and a "modern" Indy not working really, nor a "semi-modern" one set in the 1960s or 1970s.


Honestly, Disney may have bought the franchise, but story-wise, I think it's a closed loop at this point. You either reboot it (boooooooo!) or you do cartoons and such.

 

[Riceball]

I agree. Hell, they'd have to explain why he wears the hat and carries a whip.

But just as I think they can't really set it in the modern age, I don't think they can set it in the past, either. There's a finite amount of time to work with. Even if you ignore the Young Indiana Jones Chronicles (which ends, I think, in 1922 or 1925 or something), you still only have about a 10-20 year window within which to tell stories. We have three stories set within three years of each other: Temple in 1935, Raiders in 1936, and Crusade in 1938. So, that leaves you with the early 30s, and the 1940s, basically.

Now, I've long thought that Indy working for the OSS would be super cool....but I dunno that anyone else can play the part. So, you're right back where you started, with Harrison BEING Indy, nobody else working in the role, the canonicity of Crystal Skull unlikely to be challenged (and thus it not making sense to put another actor in a film set in the 1940s), and a "modern" Indy not working really, nor a "semi-modern" one set in the 1960s or 1970s.


Honestly, Disney may have bought the franchise, but story-wise, I think it's a closed loop at this point. You either reboot it (boooooooo!) or you do cartoons and such.

You do have something of a point but 2 - 3 decades is a pretty good amount of time when you think about it, even if you set the various movies 1 year apart from each other that's 20 - 30 movies spread out between about 2 - 3 years apart in terms of release.

As far as animated Indy series goes, as much as I like animation I don't see it working simply because US studios still can't seem to get the heads around the idea of animation for adults that's not about low brow humor like the Simpsons & Modern Family. The best that they would could hope for is something like the Avatar series & The Clone Wars which are pitched as kids' shows and sort of start out that way but get slowly more mature as they go but never quite get to the same maturity level as a lot of anime. That or they'll try something like Tron but will be stuck on a channel like Disney XD which not everybody gets, will air at a bad time, and the powers that be will continually try to dumb down which will ultimately result in its premature cancellation after only 1 or 2 seasons. Let's face it, the sad truth is that the majority of Americans view animation as cartoons and they also believe that cartoons are for kids; I'm not sure that Americans will every truly embrace animation for adults like the Japanese do although will the abundance and popularity of anime the kids growing up today might eventually change that attitude but it won't be for a long time though.

 

[HellBoy]

I'll go ahead and put in my opinion, as if it really matters!

But before anyone comes after me with torches and pitchforks, let me say that I love Indiana Jones and believe that Harrison Ford IS Indy!:thumbsup It would have been great if Harrison, George and Steven would have made a bunch of these films following Raiders, like the serials that they were imitating and intended to be.

That didn't happen. Instead, we got three great movies, with the perfect ending in Last Crusade. That was totally meant to be the end of the series; this was no secret, just look at the title!!! And then, riding off into the sunset...perfect.

Then, "real life" enters in and people change their minds and their stories and we get Crystal Skull. I really tried to love this film; saw it many times at the theaters (in full gear) and several times at home. Even tried the Fanedit, which took out much of the "bad." But without being able to inject some "good" the FanEdit was still bad, just less bad.

Though I don't doubt Ford's ability to reprise the role one more time, I do have a few doubts lingering about the rest of the production as a result of Crystal skull. Since Ford, Lucas and Spielberg couldn't see how bad it was during production, I have little faith in them that they will be able to see the 5th film any clearer if they were to attempt it.

Even if Lucas and Spielberg step aside, the main problem in using Harrison, is the time period in which it would place him. I love films set in the 30s and 40s because of the look of everything; the architecture, vehicles, clothing, appliances, just everything!

Seems as if everything after World War II was designed in mass quantities and cheaper so that "everyone could have one" and all could live the American dream. Unfortunately quality and design suffered as a result.

Indiana Jones didn't translate well into the 50's. That was a major flaw in the film. He certainly isn't going to translate any better in another 50's film or God forbid, the 60's or 70's!

This is one big reason why I loved "Captain America, the First Avenger" so much. Joe Johnston did an outstanding job with re-creating that time period on screen. Joe also used CGI and other special effects as useful tools, not as a driving force for the film's story.

For me, the Indiana Jones adventures flourish in the 30s and 40s. They just don't translate well into more modern times.

Here's my recipe for a successful new Indy film:

Joe Johnston directs, Lawrence Kasdan writes, Lucas and Spielberg stay out of it, it's set in the 30s, and they cast a young actor who is a physical actor, yet at the same time a bit awkward and silly like Ford.

Then using this same recipe make five or six films in 10 years like the serials that they were intended to be!

Just my two cents…

Michael

 

[Probe Droid]

Disney didn't shell out bucks to acquire the distribution rights to Indy because they don't plan on having anything to distribute. It's going to happen and Ford is getting too old to be believable as the adventurer.

Here's what you do. You mimic the model of the original Young Indy broadcasts and have Ford play geezer Indy in his 70s. He's now the curator of a museum populated by exhibits he personally "acquired" during his younger adventures, so every item has a story behind it. At the beginning he interacts with someone, a grandchild, a security guard, a young museum staffer (preferably a chick with a huge rack--just kidding [no I'm not.]) who asks about the piece.

Indy tells them some completely unknown factoid, which springboards us into the action. "It was the summer of 1937, the Germans were spereading across the globe like flies...." and then it is the summer of '37 and we get a young guy playing the thirtysomething, whip cracking, buttkicking Indy we know and love who Ford is too old to pull off. This new guy does the younger Indy part and after the triumphant climax we go back into the present and Ford wraps up the story (and the girl takes her boobs out!). This way we get Ford and a younger Indy fighting the Nazis, etc. That formula could carry through a few films until Ford is a relic himself and the new guy is established in the character and can take over fully.

 

[Captain Dunsel]

On the topic of continuing the character, ala James Bond (Which, after all, is supposed to be the inspiration for Indiana Jones)….

Don't get your torches out on this suggestion, but I think Bradley Cooper would be a good Indiana Jones…he seems to have the right combination of swagger and goofy charm that Ford originally brought to the character along with proven acting and action chops.



I can't think of any other actors out there that resembles a younger Harrison Ford that have that right combination.

 

[Probe Droid]

No torches. I've also though he'd be a good guy for the job for the very reasons you offered.