Indiana Jones 5 officially announced

[Tommy]

The thing is, we might think some of this stuff is CGI when it really isn't. Since this stuff is filmed digitally, they have gotten really good at blending everything together. Unfortunately, that means the real stuff that is probablty slightly digitally enhanced, matches really well with the actual CGI stuff, making us overestimate the ratio. Remember how much of the Star Wars Prequels is models, but it all blends together as "too much CGI".

Could be; it's an interesting behind-the-scenes observation. But then, I wonder if that distinction ultimately matters to the film's success?

When people say "too much CGI," they're essentially saying they don't believe what they're seeing. Nobody said there was too much CGI in Gollum in LOTR, because we bought it. If someone said a Prequels model looked too CG... well, then one way or another, it wasn't a convincing shot.

In the IndyDD trailer, I don't buy that the characters are standing on the roof of a moving train. [To be fair, I rarely do.] Yet I did buy that precise situation in Last Crusade. Did I buy the scene in LC because it was filmed practically, and do I not buy the trailer shots because they're CG, or even just slightly digitally enhanced? Maybe, and if so, that's worth discussing from a filmmaking process standpoint. But even if what we're seeing in the trailer is "the real stuff" and our eyes are tricking us... regardless, our eyes are being tricked by something in one and not the other.

Hopefully HMSwolfe is right that these are compression issues or unfinished effects, and it'll look more believable in the theater. As it stands, I agree with blewis17 that a worrying amount of action in the trailer comes across as superhero-ish.

 

[batguy]

Pleasing fans -

There is no pleasing them because their standards become amalgamations. The first Indy movie was a pure old serial. The 2nd one was more of a hybrid adventure & horror movie. The 3rd one was a comedy & character drama. So of course the fanbase's unspoken standards for any further Indy sequels are "deliver all of that, and make it the same, but add something original too." That would be completely unrealistic even if Harrison was still 38yo, never mind when he's 68 or 78.

As franchises progress, the list of fan requirements goes up while what is achievable goes down. It becomes a recipe for disappointment.


'The Last Jedi' -

I think the disagreements come from the fact that it's a pretty well-done movie if you view it as a stand alone (or at least you aren't too invested in the series). But it accomplishes some of that by damaging the larger picture. I don't think there is any denying that it damaged Luke's character. And it wrecked the storyline of the trilogy. 'Rise of Skywalker' was the first SW movie that I didn't see on opening day because I knew it would be crap before they made it. Trying to reconcile all the problems TLJ jeft, plus trying to deliver a final trilogy movie, and expecting a good fix from the same management that created the mess . . . no way. Sometimes you get halfway through a season of a new TV series and you can tell it's not gonna get better.

This is why there are such varying reactions to TLJ - it was a pretty good movie if you went in with no expectations and you ignore the trail of wreckage that it leaves in its wake. But if you were viewing it as an episode in a series, it's a disaster.

Look at how the last 'Terminator' did John Connor dirty. Same principle. Betray the larger series & characters in exchange for allowing a more interesting/better movie today. The filmmakers & critics end up liking it and the fanbase hates it.

 

[PoopaPapaPalps]

Not to diverge this thread further, but...

Spoiler: Here's the truth of TLJ

TLJ isn't the problem. It's Force Awakens. TLJ is actually pretty good technically. It has great ideas and executes them well enough to almost call it competent. Its biggest problem is still its story and pacing (it's essentially a clumsy ESB in reverse), but all of TLJ's most popularly perceived faults come as a direct line from Force Awakens. That movie set the bar so low, as it's both a remake of ANH and a "best-of" reel of the OT, by putting all its efforts on recreating the superficial elements of Star Wars, it left nothing for the follow-up to go from. TLJ's great ideas are there to supplement and justify the nothingness of Force Awakens. Luke feels "out of character?" That's not TLJ, FA did that. Luke's reasons for turning into a hermit (beyond playing the "Yoda" role) are sound for TLJ's sake. What makes him feel out of character, to those who cared, is that he already went through this arc in the OT. We already saw what kind of man he was to become: unshakeable and strong. TLJ just puts a logical and justified reason for him not being that character in that movie, but it was FA that already set him up to be that way.

FA had set everything up for failure. It was an immediate creative dead-end and TLJ was trying to undo everything that FA did---and rightly so--- to open up the possibility for the series to go somewhere else. Especially since there wasn't a clear direction in the slightest for the new series to follow. At the end of TLJ, the next thing was free to go literally anywhere it wanted instead of slavishly following Snoke/Ren, Vader/Palpatine; Empire/First Order, Resistance/Rebellion nonsense. However, the corporate masters saw otherwise. TLJ tried to dig itself out of the hole it was already in but it ultimately made it larger.

I'm in an odd position defending TLJ because I was one of those that left the theater completely depressed after seeing it, despite the crowd I saw it with clapping and cheering once the credits rolled. I held great resentment after seeing FA but my feelings were misguided and unjustified until I saw TLJ in theaters. It crystalized it for me: These movies aren't for the people that care. I know this because my cousin and her family loved the Disney movies. She doesn't give a rat's ass for Star Wars, never have. She knows the imagery and a basic overview through my fascination with it, but it's just one of those things that she couldn't care about. The story, the series, and the characters in them, hold no interest for her. These were for her, inoffensive and has the trappings even she's familiar with, and they're ultimately as disposable to her as the rest of the series. The new series was for those type of people. That, and those that think any and all Star Wars is good because of the lightsabers and the pew-pews.

And here we go back to the corporate problem. These characters are not owned by artists anymore, they've been reduced to logos. And it's pretty difficult to justify any realistic reason to feel hopeful about future entries in their movie series because they just don't have a reason to be... Once again, there's much emphasis on empty remembrance, and close to no focus on any story whatsoever... [they] just shouldn't be making the movie and the movie itself likely shouldn't exist in the first place... Brand executives and large multinationals is where all these stories go die, eventually, every time.

 

[Captain Dunsel]

Pleasing fans -
As franchises progress, the list of fan requirements goes up while what is achievable goes down. It becomes a recipe for disappointment.

Look at how the last 'Terminator' did John Connor dirty. Same principle. Betray the larger series & characters in exchange for allowing a more interesting/better movie today. The filmmakers & critics end up liking it and the fanbase hates it.

 

[VonMagnum]

I dunno about that title....

Indiana Jones and The Dangerous Dial of Soap.... (don't drop it in the prison shower!)

Or was it The Diabolical Dial of Dumb?

The Spear of Destiny would have worked. They could have brought in Constantine played by Keanu and he could have said, "Whoa" at just the right moment....

 

[joberg]

If the Fandom was at the table with the Director, screen writers and all; their demands/ideas would be voiced as this: "It'll be right when we see it" That's the kind of "feedback" they have in mind. Of course, this is not the way to put ideas forward

 

[Solo4114]

It looks like we pretty much agree on the broad strokes. The Last Jedi is an interesting one though, I actually consider that movie as pandering to the fandom as it gets, and pretty much as derivative and unoriginal as the other two in the sequel trilogy. It seems to come from a place of genuine honesty—which may be what some people respond to—possibly because it was made by a fan with some clout and obvious talent as a filmmaker. At the end of the day however, I think it's just a soft remake of The Empire Strikes Back with some seriously poorly plotted elements, and obsessed with bringing back this fan-favorite idea that anybody can be a Jedi, at the expense of the larger narrative in the series.

I could elaborate on my views here and explain why I think it's as good as I do, but that'd be a serious derailment. Happy to chat via PM if you want to go further into this, though. But overall, I think the film handles its themes really well, and at least with the Rey storyline, roots its narrative in the characters' choices, rather than feeling like their choices are mandated to serve the plot. I love a story that's well plotted, and I hate stories that meander around and then defend themselves with "But that's what the characters would have done," but in this case I think the characters' decisions serve the narrative well, and also tie back into the underlying themes. The Finn/Rose side of the film isn't as bad as everyone says, but it's a bit more uneven and looks WAY more uneven by comparison. And I think the film has some pacing issues that don't "fit" with what else we see in the franchise. But like I said, happy to discuss further without derailing this thread any more (than it already has...).

That said, the problem with those movies is the same I fear with this upcoming Indy. They're just not made by the original creators. They are fan fiction, and they feel like fan fiction. To a good extent, I think they're pretty guilty of being precisely "another one, just like the other one, only different, but the same," with an added element of artificial weirdness because of the corporate factor. And this includes The Last Jedi to me. But anyways... I don't really want to digress.

Yeah, I think to tie this back to the main issue we've discussed, I think that's...just the nature of franchises. You're either reiterating, or you're innovating but still based on what came before. The Matrix 4 is a good example. The whole series is about iterative processes that eventually evolve, and the 4th movie was a greater evolution than what we saw...but it still just...lacked the oomph of the first film. The newness wore off, the freshness of concept, etc. Even if it's made by the actual original creators, they, too, are just riffing on what they've done.

That said, I don't think that the "fan fiction" label is entirely fair. I think one of the best things that Star Wars has done -- something that won't work so well with Indy -- is embrace the notion that Star Wars is a setting and is best explored as such, rather than as a blueprint for telling the same story over and over. Once you get the setting elements down, you can pretty much tell any story you want and it'll stand or fall on its own merits as a story.

Yeah, pretty much. And here we go back to the corporate problem. These characters are not owned by artists anymore, they've been reduced to logos. And it's pretty difficult to justify any realistic reason to feel hopeful about future entries in their movie series because they just don't have a reason to be. The Indy 5 trailer came out and every single frame of it feels off. You can just tell it isn't a Steven Spielberg movie anymore, and that alone makes it feel at odds with everything that came before. Once again, there's much emphasis on empty remembrance, and close to no focus on any story whatsoever. It's not gonna be James Mangold's problem, the man is a great director, he just shouldn't be making the movie and the movie itself likely shouldn't exist in the first place. You could resurrect David Lean himself and hand him the project, and it would be just as wrong. Brand executives and large multinationals is where all these stories go die, eventually, every time.

Yeah, gotta milk the cow til it's dry, I guess.

I felt similarly about the most recent Bond film. It was just...ponderous. Spectre wasn't much better. Just felt like it dragged on and I didn't really care what was going on. I mean, it wasn't bad, but it just felt...unnecessary? Something like that. A lot of these films that have come out feel just sort of...there. Not bad, usually, just nothing that's really gonna stay with me. Matrix 4, the recent Bond films, Rise of Skywalker, Ghostbusters Afterlife, they're anywhere from enjoyable to "meh" in the moment, and then...poof. Gone.

I think this is why horror films are doing so well, especially indie horror.

 

[Solo4114]

'The Last Jedi' -

I think the disagreements come from the fact that it's a pretty well-done movie if you view it as a stand alone (or at least you aren't too invested in the series). But it accomplishes some of that by damaging the larger picture. I don't think there is any denying that it damaged Luke's character.

It didn't, though. It just made sense of the situation, as described below.

TFA put Luke in a box. He peaced out of the bigger fight. There's your problem. Any reason for "WTF?! Why?!?!" is going to come across as either (a) weak and unbelievable (e.g., "Oh, he went looking for the ancient texts to answer the big riddle."), or (b) would be believable, but disappointing (e.g., exactly what we got). Abrams had no idea why Luke sidelined himself. He just knew he needed Luke in the films, but he also needed him not in the films so as not to steal the kids' thunder. He left it to other people to figure out why because that's what he does. It's just more of the same kind of mystery box BS: create an interesting premise with no explanation whatsoever for it.

More on this in a second.

And it wrecked the storyline of the trilogy. 'Rise of Skywalker' was the first SW movie that I didn't see on opening day because I knew it would be crap before they made it. Trying to reconcile all the problems TLJ jeft, plus trying to deliver a final trilogy movie, and expecting a good fix from the same management that created the mess . . . no way. Sometimes you get halfway through a season of a new TV series and you can tell it's not gonna get better.

This is why there are such varying reactions to TLJ - it was a pretty good movie if you went in with no expectations and you ignore the trail of wreckage that it leaves in its wake. But if you were viewing it as an episode in a series, it's a disaster.

Look at how the last 'Terminator' did John Connor dirty. Same principle. Betray the larger series & characters in exchange for allowing a more interesting/better movie today. The filmmakers & critics end up liking it and the fanbase hates it.

I don't remember anything about the last Terminator film, actually, other than Danaerys Targaeryan and that guy who was really good in Spartacus: Blood and Sand were in it.

But personally, I friggin' LOVED that TLJ took a wrecking ball to the franchise. That, in my opinion, was a feature, not a bug.

But really, the "wrecking ball" came not from TLJ, but from TFA and the initial decision to bring back the OT heroes. You can't bring them back without killing their "happily ever after." Period. There is no way to do that, and ultimately, I think that's what really pissed off the old school fans. Like, Leia's hard-fought victory against the Empire? The struggles of the Rebellion? Meaningless. They crapped it all up, it went nowhere, the Empire ****ed off to the Unknown Regions only to come back as Empire 2.0 and destroy everything again.

Not to diverge this thread further, but...

Spoiler: Here's the truth of TLJ

TLJ isn't the problem. It's Force Awakens. TLJ is actually pretty good technically. It has great ideas and executes them well enough to almost call it competent. Its biggest problem is still its story and pacing (it's essentially a clumsy ESB in reverse), but all of TLJ's most popularly perceived faults come as a direct line from Force Awakens. That movie set the bar so low, as it's both a remake of ANH and a "best-of" reel of the OT, by putting all its efforts on recreating the superficial elements of Star Wars, it left nothing for the follow-up to go from. TLJ's great ideas are there to supplement and justify the nothingness of Force Awakens. Luke feels "out of character?" That's not TLJ, FA did that. Luke's reasons for turning into a hermit (beyond playing the "Yoda" role) are sound for TLJ's sake. What makes him feel out of character, to those who cared, is that he already went through this arc in the OT. We already saw what kind of man he was to become: unshakeable and strong. TLJ just puts a logical and justified reason for him not being that character in that movie, but it was FA that already set him up to be that way.

FA had set everything up for failure. It was an immediate creative dead-end and TLJ was trying to undo everything that FA did---and rightly so--- to open up the possibility for the series to go somewhere else. Especially since there wasn't a clear direction in the slightest for the new series to follow. At the end of TLJ, the next thing was free to go literally anywhere it wanted instead of slavishly following Snoke/Ren, Vader/Palpatine; Empire/First Order, Resistance/Rebellion nonsense. However, the corporate masters saw otherwise. TLJ tried to dig itself out of the hole it was already in but it ultimately made it larger.

I'm in an odd position defending TLJ because I was one of those that left the theater completely depressed after seeing it, despite the crowd I saw it with clapping and cheering once the credits rolled. I held great resentment after seeing FA but my feelings were misguided and unjustified until I saw TLJ in theaters. It crystalized it for me: These movies aren't for the people that care. I know this because my cousin and her family loved the Disney movies. She doesn't give a rat's ass for Star Wars, never have. She knows the imagery and a basic overview through my fascination with it, but it's just one of those things that she couldn't care about. The story, the series, and the characters in them, hold no interest for her. These were for her, inoffensive and has the trappings even she's familiar with, and they're ultimately as disposable to her as the rest of the series. The new series was for those type of people. That, and those that think any and all Star Wars is good because of the lightsabers and the pew-pews.

Big "YUP" on this one. Although I left the theater feeling incredibly enthusiastic for several reasons. One of them was "Man, this thing can go anywhere now! Think of the possibilities!"

And then I left the theater from ROS thinking "Wow, what a great ride! That was so much fun! I hated it!" No joke. Everything that made ROS a fun movie in and of itself was, ultimately, a bad thing in my opinion.

I've rewatched TLJ several times. I rewatched TFA once or twice. I've never rewatched ROS and I kinda wonder if I ever will. Maybe my views of it will soften in time, but...I kinda think not. I think it all goes back to TFA and the decisions to design it the way it was designed.

I get why the decisions to design TFA the way it was designed happened. And they make sense, from one perspective. But they were the wrong decisions.

 

[PoopaPapaPalps]

Big "YUP" on this one. Although I left the theater feeling incredibly enthusiastic for several reasons. One of them was "Man, this thing can go anywhere now! Think of the possibilities!"

...I get why the decisions to design TFA the way it was designed happened. And they make sense, from one perspective. But they were the wrong decisions.

Spoiler: One final word, I promise...

I left sad because I saw genuine good and genuine bad and realized that it was both too little of the former and already too much of the latter for the this film to make the impact in the series that it needed. I saw and recognized, and agreed with everything TLJ was doing, but couldn't get over the cynical nature that it also rightly exists in. TLJ was an adverse reaction to TFA and everything it stood for while also trying to fit into the same framework that the prior movie constructed. It's so obvious that "Porgs" were a corporate mandate and that Johnson was having fun with them (having them killed and treated poorly throughout). It get it; it just takes me out of the experience. There are moments of that movie that are almost winks into the camera saying, "This is Star Wars. Isn't it stupid?" And I say, "Yes!" It just wasn't the right way to go about addressing the issues by explicitly mocking and deriding them. It ultimately suffers from the same problem KotoR 2: The Sith Lords did, where it got caught up in trying to challenge the status quo that it just became that completely, rather than being a story that actually did it. However, that's all TLJ could've done to get its point across. To be explicit; bold-face telling the audience what needs to be said: "Let it go; kill it if you have to." In the big Disney monster, a middle finger was raised to it (even if it was hidden under the desk).

I don't like TLJ, but I respect much of it. I will continue to argue that had the driving thesis of TLJ been the foundation of the introductory film of the new series and continued on in a straight line on from it, we'd be in a much better spot than we are now. Like you said, it makes sense from one perspective why it went the way it did, it just wasn't right. That's the killer. We see it, we get it, and we realize it's wrong; and it happens anyway.

 

[batguy]

didn't, though. It just made sense of the situation, as described below.

TFA put Luke in a box. He peaced out of the bigger fight. There's your problem. Any reason for "WTF?! Why?!?!" is going to come across as either (a) weak and unbelievable (e.g., "Oh, he went looking for the ancient texts to answer the big riddle."), or (b) would be believable, but disappointing (e.g., exactly what we got). Abrams had no idea why Luke sidelined himself. He just knew he needed Luke in the films, but he also needed him not in the films so as not to steal the kids' thunder. He left it to other people to figure out why because that's what he does. It's just more of the same kind of mystery box BS: create an interesting premise with no explanation whatsoever for it.

Yeah, it's fair to say that TLJ partially gets the blame for messes that TFA sets up. But I don't think that fully covers it.

Luke didn't have to dismissively chuck the lightsaber over his shoulder. He could have had a reason for becoming a hermit without almost killing his innocent teenage nephew first. Etc. There were much better ways of handling this stuff. TLJ was definitely tearing some things down just for the sake of it, and I think that's what caused a lot of the blowback.

Obi-Wan & Yoda both became a hermits after Anakin's fall without coming off like older Luke did.

But really, the "wrecking ball" came not from TLJ, but from TFA and the initial decision to bring back the OT heroes. You can't bring them back without killing their "happily ever after." Period. There is no way to do that, and ultimately, I think that's what really pissed off the old school fans. Like, Leia's hard-fought victory against the Empire? The struggles of the Rebellion? Meaningless. They crapped it all up, it went nowhere, the Empire ****ed off to the Unknown Regions only to come back as Empire 2.0 and destroy everything again.

I agree that the OT happy ending was tossed in order for the ST to exist and that is frustrating right from the ground floor. But again, I think it could have been handled better.

Look at the 'Hunger Games' franchise - it does a great job of showing how you can lead a rebellion against an evil govt, but your new rebellion govt can end up stabbing you in the back and becoming what it was railing against. When Disney did the SW sequels the situation was prime for a storyline like that. IMO it would have been much better. Maybe the OT rebellion was taken over by politicians & the inertia of big govt after the Empire fell, and now Han/Luke/Leia are now on the wrong side of the law again because they outlived their usefulness.

George Lucas's prequels arguably put too much screen-time into the politics side of the story. But the Disney sequels swung too far in the other direction and didn't even try to explain how the story got to where it was in TFA. The missing explanations, handled right, could have gone a long way towards making the audience understand & accept the OT characters' unhappy endings. They could have devoted 10 more minutes of screen time to this stuff, spread over the course of 2-3 movies, and really fleshed-out the situation.

 

[Too Much Garlic]

The Spear of Destiny would have worked. They could have brought in Constantine played by Keanu and he could have said, "Whoa" at just the right moment....

Could have been so much fun hearing Indy say he doesn't believe in magic when Constantine has just exorcised a demon to hell.

 

[KramStaar]

The Spear of Destiny was always my pick. After I was asked to work on a teaser poster for Kingdom of the Crystal Skull for Lucasfilm I was so angry with the movie when it came out that I decided to create another artwork celebrating the old Indy - but with the Spear as the Mcguffin. I also created a diary (I figured Indy would be like his dad in the respect) about finding the spear which has 250 pages of entries.

The year is 1959 and Indiana Jones still carries with him the guilt that at the Säuberung book burning ritual in the Opernplatz (Berlin), he had not killed Adolph Hitler. Undoubtedly, Jones knew he would have lost his life had he done so but, the knowledge that the Führer had gone on to commit indescribable crimes against humanity, was a heavy burden Jones had carried with him since that night in 1938…

Jones like the leaders in the West, believed that Hitler had perished in his bunker on 30 April 1945, but they were wrong. Not only had the Führer escaped but he had taken with him the Spear of Longinus - leaving behind a perfect replica that deceived the Allied soldiers when they discovered the spear at the end of the war.

Now, on a trip to Italy, Indiana Jones discovered that the holy lance - residing in the Hofsburg museum in Vienna, Austria - was actually a brilliant fake created under duress by the Italian master craftsman Antonius Magnoli for Hitler in 1942. At the same time he also learned that the Führer had not perished but had in fact escaped and thus was set the ultimate confrontation between Indiana Jones and his bête noire - Adolph Hitler

 

[bigkidbiggertoys]

I’m constantly blown away by the talent displayed on this board. Do you sell copies of your Indy diary or is this just a one off project for yourself?

 

[Tommy]

The Spear of Destiny was always my pick. After I was asked to work on a teaser poster for Kingdom of the Crystal Skull for Lucasfilm I was so angry with the movie when it came out that I decided to create another artwork celebrating the old Indy - but with the Spear as the Mcguffin. I also created a diary (I figured Indy would be like his dad in the respect) about finding the spear which has 250 pages of entries.

I thought your poster was impressive... but that diary looks amazing! I see you posted about it years ago, except the images no longer load. No pressure, but if you feel up to sharing any close-up examples at some point, I'm sure we'd be very curious.

Indiana Jones Spear of Destiny Diary

A while ago, I obtained a fantastic blank Grail Diary from Serenity, a member here on RPF and I figured I would probably use it for my Lucasfilm work but when it arrived, I figured it HAD to be used somehow as an 'Indy' item. As some of you already know, I am the proud owner of one of Indy...

www.therpf.com

I must admit I'm not terribly familiar with the Spear of Destiny. In the context of a hypothetical Indy film, what powers would you envision it having, and how might it (as is tradition) come back to bite the villain?

 

[Indy Magnoli]

The legend of the Spear basically says whoever has the spear in his possession controls the destiny of the world. But (possibly inspiring Tolkien's One Ring) if the custodian of the Spear loses it (drops it, has it taken away, etc), they lose power and often their lives in the process (as happened to Barbarossa and Hitler).

 

[Tommy]

The legend of the Spear basically says whoever has the spear in his possession controls the destiny of the world. But (possibly inspiring Tolkien's One Ring) if the custodian of the Spear loses it (drops it, has it taken away, etc), they lose power and often their lives in the process (as happened to Barbarossa and Hitler).

Thanks!

Indiana Jones and Barbarossa's Bane? ... Indiana Jones and the Emperor's Precious? ... Raiders of Hitler's Nasty Pocketses?

 

[Captain Dunsel]

Thanks!

Indiana Jones and Barbarossa's Bane?
Indiana Jones and the Emperor's Precious?
Raiders of Hitler's Nasty Pocketses?

As long as Indy still gets to ride a nuclear blast inside of a refrigerator…in all of those possible titles…I’m good with any of them.

 

[Captain Dunsel]

I thought your poster was impressive... but that diary looks amazing! I see you posted about it years ago, except the images no longer load. No pressure, but if you feel up to sharing any close-up examples at some point, I'm sure we'd be very curious.

Indiana Jones Spear of Destiny Diary

A while ago, I obtained a fantastic blank Grail Diary from Serenity, a member here on RPF and I figured I would probably use it for my Lucasfilm work but when it arrived, I figured it HAD to be used somehow as an 'Indy' item. As some of you already know, I am the proud owner of one of Indy...

www.therpf.com

I must admit I'm not terribly familiar with the Spear of Destiny. In the context of a hypothetical Indy film, what powers would you envision it having, and how might it (as is tradition) come back to bite the villain?

Surprisingly, not everything onThe History Channel has to do with either Bigfoot or Ancient Aliens.

This documentary covers most of the story of the Spear of Destiny.

 

[KramStaar]

I’m constantly blown away by the talent displayed on this board. Do you sell copies of your Indy diary or is this just a one off project for yourself?

Thank you very much mate. The diary was never intended to be offered as a replica, it was - as you suspected - done as a personal project.

I was told at the Skywalker Ranch archive building that they should add it to the archives to go along-side the hero diary from Last Crusade but while flattered, it would not be something I would consider. Harrison signed the front page for me a couple of years back and so it will always be one of my favorite possessions from my time working for Lucasfilm - even though it wasn't done as a Lucasfilm project.

 

[KramStaar]

I thought your poster was impressive... but that diary looks amazing! I see you posted about it years ago, except the images no longer load. No pressure, but if you feel up to sharing any close-up examples at some point, I'm sure we'd be very curious.

Indiana Jones Spear of Destiny Diary

A while ago, I obtained a fantastic blank Grail Diary from Serenity, a member here on RPF and I figured I would probably use it for my Lucasfilm work but when it arrived, I figured it HAD to be used somehow as an 'Indy' item. As some of you already know, I am the proud owner of one of Indy...

www.therpf.com

I must admit I'm not terribly familiar with the Spear of Destiny. In the context of a hypothetical Indy film, what powers would you envision it having, and how might it (as is tradition) come back to bite the villain?

Many thanks Tommy

As Indy Magnoli said (and by the way his ancient, Italian relative is mentioned in my backstory) the spear is supposed to have some spiritual qualities that could cause I guess, havoc for some bad guy like Hitler. In my idea for the story the Spear's possible power might only be revealed as a fleeting event at the climax of the movie (a bit like the power of the Ark) because for me a more intriguing part of the story is re; the immensely powerful psychological force it holds over the many people in power who have striven to own it (Hitler - true story - being one of them) throughout history.

For me my story is more about Indy getting payback than it is about the Spear actually frying someone's brain.

I have updated the pictures in my original thread for those interested:

Indiana Jones Spear of Destiny Diary

A while ago, I obtained a fantastic blank Grail Diary from Serenity, a member here on RPF and I figured I would probably use it for my Lucasfilm work but when it arrived, I figured it HAD to be used somehow as an 'Indy' item. As some of you already know, I am the proud owner of one of Indy...

www.therpf.com

M