One flaw - did anyone wish there was more action?

U

Udvarnoky

Well-known member
Z dweller said:
Ok, so that's your view on KOTCS.

But how about Indy 5?
Do you believe that a 60+ Indy, played by Ford in his mid 70s, would still be credible in action scenes in general, and fights in particular?
Click to expand...

If Indy5 contains scenes where a 70 year old Indy is holding his own in a fistfight with a guy half his age, that's bad screenwriting.

The writing should reflect the character's age. In the case of Indy4, they addressed this more with jokes because Ford turned out to physically still be up for everything they threw at him. The results were less than impressive not because of age, but because the action was poorly designed, with little sense of stakes or momentum. If that happens again I expect the action to suck, and if they improve that I expect it won't.

You don't need Indy in one-to-one fistfights to have good action scenes. In fact, most of the action across all the movies involve things other than fisticuffs. The most memorable sequences are rooted more in Indy's luck, wits and audacious gambits. A 70 year old Indy could still cut the rope bridge or browbeat Willie into pulling the lever or shoot the swordsman. He's often forced to come up with an alternative to throwing punches.

Indy's extreme physical fallibility has been fundamental even when he was in his prime. Old Indy is an opportunity, not a limitation. They can lean on the in-over-his-head element more than ever before, in ways that could potentially be very fun. I hope the people involved seize those opportunities.
 
Last edited:
R

Raiders90

Well-known member
Udvarnoky said:
If Indy5 contains scenes where a 70 year old Indy is holding his own in a fistfight with a guy half his age, that's bad screenwriting.

The writing should reflect the character's age. In the case of Indy4, they addressed this more with jokes because Ford turned out to physically still be up for everything they threw at him. The results were less than impressive not because of age, but because the action was poorly designed, with little sense of stakes or momentum. If that happens again I expect the action to suck, and if they improve that I expect it won't.

You don't need Indy in one-to-one fistfights to have good action scenes. In fact, most of the action across all the movies involve things other than fisticuffs. The most memorable sequences are rooted more in Indy's luck, wits and audacious gambits. A 70 year old Indy could still cut the rope bridge or browbeat Willie into pulling the lever or shoot the swordsman. He's often forced to come up with an alternative to throwing punches.

Indy's extreme physical fallibility has been fundamental even when he was in his prime. Old Indy is an opportunity, not a limitation. They can lean on the in-over-his-head element more than ever before, in ways that could potentially be very fun. I hope the people involved seize those opportunities.
Click to expand...

Almost every actual fistfight we saw Indy in in his prime, he got his ass beat, and it was only by pure luck that he won. KOTCS did away with that, you had an older Indy winning fair and square a younger, trained soldier. I wouldn't mind a lack of fistfights if they made up for it with Raiders bar-style gunplay - which Indy could do at any age.
 
Z dweller

Z dweller

Well-known member
Raiders112390 said:
There's plenty of action stars of a similar age who are still doing action films with lots of energy - IE The Expendables.
Click to expand...
Doesn't mean Indy 5 should conform to the same standards.
I personally find the Expendables movies godawful.

By the way, none of the main actors in that film series is in their mid 70s.
Stallone is 69 now, but frankly he's had so much plastic surgery he's repulsive to look at.
Raiders112390 said:
The problem is, the series was in the hands of a director who was an old man himself who had tired of violence. I would trust an Indy V with Harrison in the lead in a film helmed by a younger director, with George contributing only a story outline or acting as Executive Producer. Indy V can work with Harrison in the head, it just needs a fresher, younger director - one who is willing to make Indy dark, gritty, and dirty again. Who is at least willing to show Indy in a gunfight.
Click to expand...
I agree that Spielberg's work in KOTCS was sub-par, and that a talented new director might be able to make a better Indy 5.
The reverse could equally be true, of course, and things could go horribly wrong - but as a fan I am willing to take the chance.

I strongly suspect that with Spielberg on board we'd end up with another lame effort like KOTCS, or worse.
 
Z dweller

Z dweller

Well-known member
Udvarnoky said:
Indy's extreme physical fallibility has been fundamental even when he was in his prime. Old Indy is an opportunity, not a limitation. They can lean on the in-over-his-head element more than ever before, in ways that could potentially be very fun. I hope the people involved seize those opportunities.
Click to expand...
You make a good point, but IMO the limitations imposed by an old character/actor are simply too big to overcome with a smart script.

Most of the stunts in the first three movies stretched the limits of credibility, but still worked because Indy was in his prime, your remark on his physical fallibility notwithstanding.

But the same wouldn't apply to a 60+ character played by an actor in his mid 70s.

Sure, with a clever script you could put Indy on a weelchair, and still have him use his wits to get out of tight spots - but that's not the type of movie I want to see.

And I'd wager most of Disney's target audience feel the same way too.
 
R

Raiders90

Well-known member
Z dweller said:
You make a good point, but IMO the limitations imposed by an old character/actor are simply too big to overcome with a smart script.

Most of the stunts in the first three movies stretched the limits of credibility, but still worked because Indy was in his prime, your remark on his physical fallibility notwithstanding.

But the same wouldn't apply to a 60+ character played by an actor in his mid 70s.

Sure, with a clever script you could put Indy on a weelchair, and still have him use his wits to get out of tight spots - but that's not the type of movie I want to see.

And I'd wager most of Disney's target audience feel the same way too.
Click to expand...

What would be so wrong with Harrison as Indy in a film set in 1959 (with the character at 60 on the head) engaging in a fist fight or two, that is believable (IE, where he gets his ass kicked and wins by pure luck - like in the first three films - Indy NEVER won a fist fight fair and square in the originals), or, outsmarters the enemy in a clever way, or just gets in a gunfight. Even an old man can get in a fierce gun battle - look at John Wayne's later films or Robin & Marian. The idea that once a man hits a certain age he shouldn't play certain roles is just stupid ageism. If the actor himself is capable and looks young enough, why not? Harrison doesn't look like a man in his 70s. Slap a little make up on him and he can pass for a 60 year old.

An Indy V doesn't need death defying stunts like the trunk whip ride or the raft scene. Just one or two well done fist fights and a gunfight or two and a car chase. All of which can be easily done by Harrison.
 
Last edited:
Z dweller

Z dweller

Well-known member
Raiders112390 said:
The idea that once a man hits a certain age he shouldn't play certain roles is just stupid ageism.
Click to expand...
Steady on: we are here to express opinions, and I expressed mine quite clearly: that's not the type of movie I want to see.

You are free to disagree of course, but there's no need to be offensive.
Raiders112390 said:
Harrison doesn't look like a man in his 70s. Slap a little make up on him and he can pass for a 60 year old.
Click to expand...
images
 
Stoo

Stoo

Well-known member
Raiders112390 said:
Okay, let me phrase it clearer:
Click to expand...
Too bad you didn't make yourself clear when starting this thread. It should've been titled: "Did anyone wish there was more action WITH INDY FRONT & CENTRE?". That way, people wouldn't have disagreed about an absence of action scenes.
Raiders112390 said:
None of those scenes were ones with Indy front and center. I don't go to an Indy film to watch Mutt kick ass....In one of the car chases, Indy is being passed back and forth between cars and being driven on a bike by Mutt, and it's played kind of for laughs. In another (the first chase), you get the stupid "You don't know him, you don't know him" bit which ruins it. In the Jungle chase, Mutt is driving the action.

When I'm talking car chases, I'm talking ones which have high energy and where Indy is front and center...
Click to expand...
None?:confused: In the warehouse, Indy was alone against a whole bunch of people (and the fight involved a car chase). How was he NOT front & centre during that sequence?
Raiders112390 said:
There is no scene in Indy 4, in terms of action, in which Harrison is front and center. Even the Dovchenko fight, while it's the first one Indy wins fair and square, lacks the energy level of a scene like this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q720Fe7IDMk
Click to expand...
Harrison/Indy was front & centre in the 1st fight with Dovchenko and he was losing. A very energetic scene where Indy was saved only by the Russian thug passing out from the G-forces of the rocket sled. You can't say, "no scene" because it isn't true.;)
 
U

Udvarnoky

Well-known member
Z dweller said:
You make a good point, but IMO the limitations imposed by an old character/actor are simply too big to overcome with a smart script.
Click to expand...

And what I'm telling you is, you're wrong. :gun:
 
Z dweller

Z dweller

Well-known member
Udvarnoky said:
And what I'm telling you is, you're wrong. :gun:
Click to expand...
Nope, I already conceded that purely from a screenwriting perspective, you are correct.

However, my point is: who wants to see that type of movie, apart from a few hard core Ford fetishists who post here?

So my bet is, Disney will recast the character with a younger actor.

I also believe that, if offered a bookend role in Indy 5, Ford would accept (as long as it's a meaningful role and not just a cameo).
 
U

Udvarnoky

Well-known member
Much has been written about the GODFATHER PART II approach, and I think it'd work really well. But I certainly would not relegate Harrison to book-ends, and if anything would have the ratio heavily favor the "Michael Corleone" plot, as it were.
 
Z dweller

Z dweller

Well-known member
Udvarnoky said:
Much has been written about the GODFATHER PART II approach, and I think it'd work really well. But I certainly would not relegate Harrison to book-ends, and if anything would have the ratio heavily favor the "Michael Corleone" plot, as it were.
Click to expand...
Sure: part prequel/part sequel could definitely work for Indy 5.

It would also be the best way for Ford to hand over the main role to a younger actor for subsequent prequels.

The only aspect we disagree on is the ratio. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top