jarroth
Sr Member
disney and not draining francise to a point where it becomes a joke? doubt that wil happen.
they buy fresh ideas, not invent them. my two cents worth.
If they reboot INDIANA JONES, who would you pick to play Indy?
- Thread starter Pookie
- Start date
disney and not draining francise to a point where it becomes a joke? doubt that wil happen.
they buy fresh ideas, not invent them. my two cents worth.
Solo4114
Master Member
I mean, yeah, I agree that Disney likely will make more Indy stuff. Maybe it'll be good, maybe not. But I think it's more just a matter of it being...unnecessary. I suppose continuing Indy, for me, is more representative of the overall problem I see than a problem in and of itself. Although I do think it'd be best left alone (even though I doubt tehy'll leave it alone). I dunno. I just think folks need to learn how to move on.
Well they could have stopped with Sean Connery right? Ended the Bond run right there. Move on.
Why is Indy different from Bond in this regard?
I think Indy is a Bond class character able to support the same exact long term handover from actor to actor.
No not every character is Bond class, so yeah some/most things sure I can agree to just let it be.
Anyone think Indy only had four adventures worthy of film? No way!
Why is Indy different from Bond in this regard?
I think Indy is a Bond class character able to support the same exact long term handover from actor to actor.
No not every character is Bond class, so yeah some/most things sure I can agree to just let it be.
Anyone think Indy only had four adventures worthy of film? No way!
Solo4114
Master Member
I'm sorry, but the two franchises are nothing alike, neither in their creation nor in how they've been handled over time.
Ford is Indy. Ford's been Indy in every screen appearance as an adult for the last 34 years. At this point, you're either rebooting the series entirely (pass) or you're trying to pass someone else off in the role who'll probably pale in comparison and will probably just be aping Ford.
Indy's done, or rather, should be done. Of course, that won't happen because BRANDING, but in my opinion, the original Indiana Jones trilogy was perfect. I neither needed nor wanted anything further.
Stories have an end. Indy's should have ended with Last Crusade.
Ford is Indy. Ford's been Indy in every screen appearance as an adult for the last 34 years. At this point, you're either rebooting the series entirely (pass) or you're trying to pass someone else off in the role who'll probably pale in comparison and will probably just be aping Ford.
Indy's done, or rather, should be done. Of course, that won't happen because BRANDING, but in my opinion, the original Indiana Jones trilogy was perfect. I neither needed nor wanted anything further.
Stories have an end. Indy's should have ended with Last Crusade.
Last edited:
VilleLeskinen
Sr Member
Although I agree that a film reboot is a silly concept altogether, I'd still love to see Indy as an animated series. I thought the two Dark Horse comics were great and if an animated series would be anything like those, that would be A-ok. :thumbsup
Westies14
Master Member
The other tremendous difference between Bond and Indy is that they fundamentally changed Bond's character and situation to keep him with the times and to allow audiences to more easily accept the shift. Does anyone want to see a modern-day Indiana Jones, or see him even tackle the 60s, 70s, and 80s (Indiana Jones and the Q-Bert Pyramid!) now that they've dipped their toe into the 50s? Indiana Jones is not a generic adventurer in the mold of James Bond. The character himself is an echo of a certain brand of movie, from a certain era in history. As we saw in Crystal Skull, the more you try to peel those elements apart by taking the character out of his time or bringing in clearly modern visual effects, the less it feels like an Indiana Jones movie.
I recall Lucas or Spielberg noting the Bond concept for Indy back during the Raiders era actually in some magazine interview or another.
That was what they were thinking during that golden era of creation.
That was what they were thinking during that golden era of creation.
#1 - I just didn't think KOTCS was that bad of an Indy movie.
The aliens issue has been beaten to death but here's my two cents: each of the other three Indy movies was centered around an item from one of the major world religions. About the biggest major religion remaining to cover is Islam, but that is arguably too controversial for them to wanna touch it right now. On the other hand the belief that aliens were people's "gods" in the past is pretty widely known these days, and has many facets of a religious belief. When you set the show in the late 1950s and you wanna reference crap fiction genres of the time, it seems like quite a logical choice.
When I heard Shia was cast I rolled my eyes and thought he needed to go away. But he was much less objectionable in the final movie than I expected. Spielberg & Lucas could have easily killed all my tolerance for Shia in KOTCS by implying that he might take up the hat & whip himself at the end . . . but they didn't.
#2 - They made Indy & Marion feel so real, and made Indy more personally likable than ever. It would have been so easy to crowd-please the movie with one reference after another to the old movies. I'm so glad they didn't. KOTCS's screenwriter said something like this in an interview: "In real life people don't go around making inside references to a random sentence they said 25 years ago." That's the kind of mindset the movie needed and I'm so glad it got it.
I think the adventure aspect of the movie was mediocre, which is a shortfall. But I think the characters were handled just right when there were a lot of ways to do it wrong. If there's going to be a trade-off here, I'm very glad the fourth Indy movie went stronger on the characters. These days Hollywood takes spectacles in adventure stuff so far that it would have been easy to overdo it trying to prove Ford is still a badass. A CGI version of 65yo Harrison Ford kicking ass like Brendan Frasier in "The Mummy" is not what we needed. KOTCS could have ended up that way.
I disagree. The bulk of the audience for Michael Bay's TF movies were too young to know the franchise walking in. IMO those movies succeeded because any decent movie with the TF premise was going to be a success based on the spectacle. I thought that before they even announced the first Michael Bay TF movie was greenlit. And as I've ranted before, Michael Bay can reliably "create" a hit as long as he's provided with a surefire hit that just needs assembling and $200 million bucks to do it.
Right now I suspect I'm probably sold on all of the "big 3" new SW movies. But if the first one sucks and they push the OT actors & elements totally into the background after the first one, then yeah, I suppose my feelings might change.
Yeah I think this feeling is common today.
Last edited:
Westies14
Master Member
Much like Lucas wanting to make Flash Gordon and ending up doing Star Wars, the story is that while he and Spielberg were vacationing away from the opening of their films (Star Wars and Jaws, respectively) Spielberg mentioned possibly wanting to do a James Bond film next. Lucas then told him he had something original in a similar serialized adventurer idea that they could tackle together. Man, to be involved with those two in the late 70s/early 80s must have been pure magic...
Yep.
They could do no wrong, lightning in a bottle. Then from a golden age to silver age, and somewhere between then and now at least for me.... please back away from the camera age. LOL
And even characters pre-dating Jones will be perceived as Indiana Jones ripoffs.
He is THE adventurer standard far and above anything before and after.
Might as well just get Jones back.
Though I think Lara Croft if done right could deliver some great modern adventurer tales.
Solo4114
Master Member
I mean, technically, Indiana Jones is just a Doc Sampson/Allan Quartermain rip-off.
At this point, a remake will itself be an "Indiana Jones ripoff," so I figure why not do your own thing and not be fettered by setting and pre-existing character details? Why not do your own thing?
The real trick to avoiding being called a "rip-off" is to take whatever you're ripping off and do it well in a way that resonates. Ultimately, that'll be what carries the day. My big gripes over remakes/reboots, branded properties, and crappy ripoffs are basically the same things: laziness and weak storytelling. The filmmakers trust the brand, or the name, or the resemblance to an existing property to sell the property, rather than focusing on telling a solid story. The end result is that the film is a total waste of the source material and is itself a weak film.
IF they made a GOOD Indy remake, I wouldn't care that it's a remake because...it's a good film. Likewise if they made a GOOD Indy "rip-off" film. The real issue isn't with originality vs. derivative (although sometimes I wish you could see more risks taken and new kinds of stories told), but rather that the reliance on old familiar brands tends to cut against the production of a GOOD story.
I just see it as the continuing adventures. I don't even consider it reboot or remake.
Just hey, this is more trouble Jones was getting into in the 1930's.
These really are based on serials after all, the Saturday matinee cliffhanger.
Just hey, this is more trouble Jones was getting into in the 1930's.
These really are based on serials after all, the Saturday matinee cliffhanger.
Considering Disneys excellent track record with Marvel and what has come from a Disney owned LucasFilm, I hope we are closer to the day dumb comments like this become few and far between.
One last time, Disney purchased the Indiana Jones IP and have a fiduciary responsibility to monetize that IP to the best of their ability. That very well may mean making new films featuring a younger actor. Regardless of people's emotional attachment to Ford, that has no bearing as to whether or not those films will be effective. And it certainly makes sense to introduce the character to a new generation of fans.
Last edited:
Similar threads
