Indy 5 news 2018

Indy Jones

Active member
Z dweller said:
Touch a nerve, did I? :whip:

You couldn't have replied differently - or else your logic falls apart, and you know it.

You would be happy to watch an Indiana Jones movie with a 100 year old Harrison Ford - provided it were good.
Ok, sure, dude...

I rest my case.

You're being condescending, and you know it. Just responding in kind.

Am I saying they should? Of course they shouldn't (read that again). But you yourself are saying "if it was good." If it was good wouldn't everyone like it, by that logic?

This is all irrelevent to my point anyway. I was only making the point that with special effects, they can make Ford do anything. You didn't seem to grasp that part and instead latched onto a statement without understanding it just to pick an argument.

Ford's age technically (meaning on a technical level [ technical, meaning in terms of what can be created on screen]) doesn't dictate what can happen in the movie. (read that again). That was what I was saying.

I like the character so I would give it a watch no matter what. A movie with 100 year old Indy riding dinosaurs through space would become a crap classic for me. I don't know, I guess I just don't get my panties in a twist about movies. Movies are entertainment at worst and art at best.

Now we can get back to a real discussion or you can make the topic about how a differing viewpoint is worth mocking again. Choose wisely.
 
Last edited:

Z dweller

Well-known member
Indy Jones said:
I was only making the point that with special effects, they can make Ford do anything. You didn't seem to grasp that part and instead latched onto a statement without unerstanding it just to pick an argument.
Wrong again.
I understand what you are saying, I just disagree that it would work.

Sure, they can CGI the hell out of anything these days.
Technically (a word you seem to be particularly fond of), they don't even need Ford anymore.
Just give Indy the Rachael treatment in BR 2049 and they could still be making movies even after Ford is long gone.

But that's not what Indiana Jones movies are about - certainly not what Lucas had in mind when he pitched the idea to Spielberg.
"Quick and dirty", remember?
Indy Jones said:
Now we can get back to a real discussion or you can make the topic about how a differing viewpoint is worth mocking again.
Get off your (CGI) high horse, pal.

I'm not mocking you, just pointing pointing out why I disagree with your view. Don't try to play the victim, just deal with it.

Night night now.
 

Indy Jones

Active member
Z dweller said:
Wrong again.
I understand what you are saying, I just disagree that it would work.

Sure, they can CGI the hell out of anything these days.
Technically (a word you seem to be particularly fond of), they don't even need Ford anymore.
Just give Indy the Rachael treatment in BR 2049 and they could still be making movies even after Ford is long gone.

But that's not what Indiana Jones movies are about - certainly not what Lucas had in mind when he pitched the idea to Spielberg.
"Quick and dirty", remember?

Get off your (CGI) high horse, pal.

I'm not mocking you, just pointing pointing out why I disagree with your view. Don't try to play the victim, just deal with it.

Night night now.

...and if you had actually read my whole post you'd understand that I'm not advocating for CGI Harrison flip-kicking around (although that would be damn hilarious). Just because I mention something CAN be done doesn't mean I approve or that it would be good.

I'm just tired of people's arguments amounting to "Ford is so old that Indy should only sit on a couch for the whole movie." It's a cheap argument.

In spite of what you want to think, nobody's playing victim here, I'm just baffled. I just have to keep clarifying my (already quite clear) point because you seem to actually have a reading comprehension problem. I ain't trying to throw shade. You just didn't understand what I was saying at all. I made my point quite clear, you only half-read what I said, started trying to condescend to me over it, and ignored all of the other things I had to say in my post.

I made a passing observation and it turned into this. :hat: This is why I hardly post, haha
 
Last edited:

Z dweller

Well-known member
Indy Jones said:
I'm just tired of people's arguments amounting to "Ford is so old that Indy should only sit on a couch for the whole movie." It's a cheap argument.
I never said that.
I just want a new, younger actor to take over the role, period.
Indy Jones said:
I just have to keep clarifying my (already quite clear) point because you seem to actually have a reading comprehension problem.
You only half-read what I said, started trying to condescend to me over it, and ignored all of the other things I had to say in my post.
LOL, you are just projecting now.
Indy Jones said:
This is why I hardly post, haha
At this stage I'm inclined to say: keep it that way.
 

TheFirebird1

Active member
Z dweller said:
stop-reality-check.jpg


Jackman was 48 years old when that movie was shot.
Forty-eight.

Only one year older than Ford in Crusade.

tenor.gif

Like I've repeated countless times before, that's not a factor in what we're discussing here. Your original statement dealt with the film's tone. That's what we should be discussing here. And if a film as dark and grounded as Logan could attract a very wide audience, then there's no saying that same formula couldn't work for another film. Granted, it doesn't have to be as depressing as Logan was, but that same sort of character study would fit Indy, in my humble opinion.
Z dweller said:
You jest, but he hasn't been around in a while...
Are you still with us, dude? :eek:
walt-whitman-o-captain-my-captain-white-georgia-fowler.jpg

Will our brave windmill-tilter ever return to us again? ;)
I hope so, for I believe he may have much to discuss. :)
 
Last edited:

Z dweller

Well-known member
R
TheFirebird1 said:
Like I've repeated countless times before, that's not a factor in what we're discussing here. Your original statement dealt with the film's tone. That's what we should be discussing here. And if a film as dark and grounded as Logan could attract a very wide audience, then there's no saying that same formula couldn't work for another film.
Denying that Ford's age is a factor and stating that it shouldn't be considered when discussing the film's tone is a logical fallacy, IMO.

But fine, let's drop the subject for now.
Irreconciliable differences and all that.

I submit that none in the current crew is remotely interested in making a movie along the lines of Logan, and Disney would never go for it anyway.

We could pour rivers of ink discussing whether or not such a movie would be commercially successful, but it doesn't seem to make much point in view of the above.
 
Last edited:

Finn

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator note

The next one who decides to communicate mainly through meme pictures and animated GIFs instead of plain text gets a week-long "vacation" from the boards.

Whether I'm being serious or not depends on how quickly my head stops hurting after enduring through that farkin' clip show.
 

TheFirebird1

Active member
Z dweller said:
Denying that Ford's age is a factor and stating that it shouldn't be considered when discussing the film's tone is a logical fallacy, IMO.
I'm not saying that time management and age don't play factors in this. But it was completely immaterial to what we were discussing (a potential story direction for Indy 5). We can talk about his age, but that'll just lead into another never-ending merry-go-round where both sides make fairly sensible points.

Z dweller said:
But fine, let's drop the subject for now.
Irreconciliable differences and all that.
(y) Sounds good to me.
Z dweller said:
I submit that none in the current crew is remotely interested in making a movie along the lines of Logan, and Disney would never go for it anyway.

We could pour rivers of ink discussing whether or not such a movie would be commercially successful, but it doesn't seem to make much point in view of the above.
I get what you're saying. But with a new screenwriter (Jon Kasdan), the movie seems to have a bit of a wildcard to me. What I enjoyed about Logan was that it adequately captured the spirit of a character who was going through the sunset of his life, and I think that formula it used would probably be one of the most feasible ways to capture Indy's character, even with alternating storylines.
But until we get any solid update, it's to each his own. I respect what you're saying, but I think that an Indy 5 with Harrison could still work quite adequately at this point.
Finn said:
The next one who decides to communicate mainly through meme pictures and animated GIFs instead of plain text gets a week-long "vacation" from the boards.

Whether I'm being serious or not depends on how quickly my head stops hurting after enduring through that farkin' clip show.
*Strenuously resists urge to post humorous GIFs*
In all honesty, though, mea maxima culpa. Sensory overload isn't the nicest thing to experience, and I'm sorry about that.
 
Indy Jones said:
...honestly, I'm so sick of seeing this mentality. Ford's age is (technically) irrelevant to what can (or can't) be featured in the fifth film. In this modern world of CGI, they can technically make Ford look like he's doing anything. Body double with his face on it/full CGI character/puppet him with strings and just CG erase the strings/whatever.

Now should they? Oh God, no. But people claiming "he's too old so Indy can only sit around in the movie" is such a lazy argument.

And also, as I've been elaborating on before... just because it's an Indiana Jones film doesn't mean that they can't construct a satisfying movie that works within the limitations set by Ford's age. Let Indy have a limp, if Ford really does have one. Who cares?

If someone is so particular in the sacredness of their memories that seeing Indy as a old man ruins things for them... just don't see the movie. I love Star Wars, but I have no interest in a show about some random Mandalorian.... so I won't see it. Its existence does not harm me.

I'm all-for discussing an idea's merits, but when absolutely no idea seems good enough for someone (not talking about anyone in particular here, just in general), then why bother joining in the discussion?

Now back to the tone--I would hope that without George involved, they'd be willing to branch out again in terms of style/content. I think it should still feel like an Indiana Jones film. I wouldn't want it to suddenly feel like Inception or anything. But I think you can bend and stretch the conventions of the character/style to get a different feel. Clearly, Ford won't be in another one after 5 (assuming it actually happens), so I think it's necessary to give the film a little bit of a somber feeling, lend it an edge of finality.

The tone of ROTLA is so necessary on this one not only because it would bookend the series in terms of tonality, but also because it's the right canvas to mix-in some melancholy. ROTLA was mostly moody with serious characters and a palpable sense of threat. TOD had vast portions that retained this, but by then we added comedy sidekicks. This is different than ROTLA (and KOTCS too, technically), because comedy with sidekicks is different than "comedy sidekicks." Short Round and Willie generally were used expressly for comedy. Willie's entire character was predicated on it. LC had turned Sallah and Marcus into comedy sidekicks, and Henry Sr. was both A source of humor and used to make Indy sometimes bumbling. The tone of the second and third films are drastically changed by these facts.

KOTCS goes back to having sidekicks that have quirks, but are generally played straight. Where KOTCS veers off from matching the tone from ROTLA is in the situations--because of CG they were usually much broader and thereby more outlandish--whether these were good or bad is up for debate, but it still prevents the original tone from shining through. Don't forget that ROTLA was nominated for Best Picture. Despite the comic book nature of the ideas on screen, it played ominous and moody with a dash of intrigue and suspense without losing a sense of fun.

Lightning in a bottle, boy yes--but I don't get the feeling that they ever actually tried to recapture that exact spirit. For Indy 5 to fly, I think it's time they zeroed in on that target one last time.

One of the best posts on this area in the last decade. You've got a real flair for this kind of writing. Explore it outside if these forums is all I would say. But back to the Indyverse, I totally agree with your points. And don't let the trolls get you down!
 

Z dweller

Well-known member
StwongBwidge said:
don't let the trolls get you down!
So, anyone who disagrees with your views is a troll?

Congrats! You just won the Raven's Ford Fetishist of the Day Award!
Great effort, dude... :sick:
 

Pale Horse

Moderator
Staff member
Z dweller said:
True, but you get my meaning.

Unless you just morphed into The Eternally Hopeful Horsie™ , which would surprise me no end. :p

Ironsides would have been my go to! :p

Indy Jones said:
If they could return to something in-line with Raiders then we'd be pitch perfect.

Indiana Jones and the Return of the Lost Ark. New scholarly evidence reveals that the Ark was to remain in Tanis and as the world exponentially spirals toward Armageddon in the 60s, Indy has to find the warehouse, steal the Ark and bury it without anyone knowing. It's a last job heist thriller set against the tumultuous 60s.

Z dweller said:
I understand, but it's still impossibly difficult to do, and unlikely that the existing crew would go for it.

Now, if they gave it to Nolan*...



*Yes, I'm looking at you Raiders112390. :p

Boom...did it

That said

Everbody take a Fonzy attitude and be cool....

Code:
Finn said:
Whether I'm being serious or not depends on how quickly my head stops hurting after enduring through that farkin' clip show.

Me too?
 
Last edited:

No Ticket

New member
I?ve been reading through this thread with people fighting over whether or not Ford?s age matters and I just felt like throwing in my two cents... even though they?re not even worth, we?ll, two cents.

I believe that his age doesn?t matter if the script serves the reality that Ford is not only older in number, but it?s a lot harder to hide just how old he is. Sure you can do CGI trickery, but it would be a lot harder to hide his age that way and more costly too.

The best way to approach this is to show us an Indy who can?t keep up anymore. Barely hanging on. He still has his witts about him and luck on his side but the body is failing him. He must confront it on some adventure. This isn?t really that hard to believe because the young in shape and fit Ford of Temple of Doom was beaten and battered to hell by the time he is climbing up that rope bridge.

It would be exactly in tone to see him approach things as though he can still do them and then things go wrong and he still has to figure it out. He can pick a fight with a young guy and he realizes he can?t win... but how is that any different from the mechanic in Raiders?

A well written script will work around his age and humanize the character. Indy has to eventually realize its time to hang up the hat and this would be the adventure to do it.

I haven?t been following the movie too closely, who is working on the script?
 

IndyForever

Active member
https://www.comingsoon.net/movies/n...ll-return-to-global-scope-says-frank-marshall
Some more new quotes from Frank Marshal dated 1st October. Global scope, no Lucas & the dreaded writers room (hope its not LFL Story Group but it probably is!).


ComingSoon.net: ?Crystal Skull? shot almost entirely in the U.S., so is the idea to broaden the scope of filming this time?
Frank Marshall: Yes.

CS: How is doing an Indiana Jones movie without George Lucas change the equation?
Marshall: I love being with George and having his input, but life changes and we?re moving on. He moved on. We?re very respectful of the original intentions of the movie, certainly Harrison?s character. The serialization of what the original intention was. I?d love to have George there. I love being around George and working with him, obviously. It?ll be a little different, because the ideas are coming from a different place now.

CS: There?s an actual writers room for Indy?
Marshall: Well, I dunno if you?d call it a writers room, but a lot of people that we trust pitch ideas and things. Gathering info.

CS: But it?s Jonathan Kasdan in the lead, right?
Marshall: Yeah.
 

Pale Horse

Moderator
Staff member
IndyForever said:
CS: How is doing an Indiana Jones movie without George Lucas change the equation?
Marshall: I love being with George and having his input, but life changes and we’re moving on. He moved on...

 

No Ticket

New member
hismasterplan said:
They threw out David Koepp's script and brought in Jonathan Kasdan.

I thought Solo was fantastic actually, so I would rather he work on the script than Koepp anyway. Wish George was involved even if a little, like the stuff he helped with on Solo.
 

IndyForever

Active member
Pale Horse said:
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/fE0UrDWZGAk" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Indiana Jones 5 is a source of unspeakable box office & it has to be released :whip:

Well, I mean, for nearly three thousand years, Spielberg has been searching for the lost script :sleep:

They have top men working on this right now I tell you....top men :confused:
 

Udvarnoky

Well-known member
The trades are saying that WEST SIDE STORY will film late next summer. This probably means INDY 5 would have to shoot Spring 2020, or get cancelled for good.

Maybe Johnny could start coming up with some themes on spec...
 
Top